It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bremer: You're wrong Tony!

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2003 @ 12:53 AM
link   
Tripping over their own lies.

In an interview on the U.K's Jonathan Dimbleby programme Paul Bremer was presented with quotes from Tony Blair's recent statement on "massive evidence" of clandestine labs and without knowing who the quotes were from proceeded to pretty much make them out to be a load of bollocks.

"I don't know where those words come from but that is not what (ISG chief) David Kay has said," he said.

"I have read his reports so I don't know who said that.

"It sounds like a bit of a red herring to me. It sounds like someone who doesn't agree with the policy sets up a red herring then knocks it down."

news.bbc.co.uk...


Of course when it was pointed out that it was from the mouth of Blair he started the immediate (though rather clumsy) backtrack dance.


Lack of awareness or communication, or are the lies getting too hard to keep track of?


[Edited on 28-12-2003 by kegs]




posted on Dec, 28 2003 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Kegs.......
Despite the supposed "contradicting" of Mr. Blair, the article, after-all, is entitled:
"Bremer 'rejects' Blair WMD claims"

Mr. Blix was also "contradicted".




regards
seekerof

[Edited on 28-12-2003 by Seekerof]



posted on Dec, 28 2003 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Thatís beside the point. Blix has obviously been contradicted since he first opened his mouth and gave the wrong answer (i.e. the answer that the U.S didnít want to hear)

This is the Presidential Envoy to Iraq contradicting the British Prime Minister over his claims of the discovery of ďmassiveĒ evidence of clandestine labs in Iraq. Last time I checked the U.S and Britain were supposed to be on the same page concerning Iraqi WMDís.
Blix on the other hand has been saying they were destroyed in the early Ď90s for some time now, so of course heís being contradicted every day the U.S & U.Kís stance stays the same.

"You might conclude that Dr Blix is out of touch," said Bremer. Of course; Out of touch with U.S policy that is.

Thatís all par for the course. This is not.

The thing I find strangest about it is Bremer contradicting any claims on the existence of weapons. Youíd think heíd welcome it. His rejection seems to be based on that it was someone trying to make them look stupid, making a case and then blowing it out of the water. Seems they really donít need anyone else involved to make them look stupid.



posted on Dec, 28 2003 @ 07:11 PM
link   
"The thing I find strangest about it is Bremer contradicting any claims on the existence of weapons"

Really?....key word you used is "any"? Or is Bremer refering to "massive evidence of laboratories"? And you are claiming that Bremer says there aren't "any" WMD?
You might want to change your wording a bit or re-read the article.
Perhaps searching on what Mr. Kay, the head of the Iraq Survey Group, had to say in his reports will clearly show what Mr. Bremer meant when he made this comment: "I don't know where those words come from but that is not what (Iraq Survey Group chief) David Kay has said."


If your point is to say that Bremer and the US contradicted Mr. Blair...then so be it, but to construct anything else of or out of this, is speculative on your part.


regards
seekerof



posted on Dec, 28 2003 @ 09:13 PM
link   
That was a tongue in cheek remark Seekerof, you know, refering to desperation? I suppose I should have used a smiley, oh wait here's one:



I'm not construing anything really, I think the article speaks for itself. I know what Mr Kay has said, and I know what Mr Bremer has said... and I know what Mr Blair has said. My point was only to point out that they don't seem to know what each other have said.

It was Bremer not me who made out what Blair said to be:

"[It sounds like] a bit of a red herring to me. It sounds like someone who doesn't agree with the policy sets up a red herring then knocks it down"

And why would someone set up a red herring to knock it down? To make the coalition look bad of course. Bad is probably the operative word, but I prefer stupid. Sue me.


By the way was this reported in the States? It was all over our papers this morning. Just wondering.



posted on Dec, 28 2003 @ 09:18 PM
link   
"By the way was this reported in the States? It was all over our papers this morning. Just wondering."

Yes kegs, it was.



regards
seekerof



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join