I see it business as usual…
Reid: Bombers never blamed Iraq
Home Secretary John Reid has rejected suggestions London bomber Sidique Khan blamed his actions on the Iraq war.
Mr Reid was asked if ministers wished to avoid a public inquiry because they feared it would fuel a debate about Iraq being a motive of the bombers.
He said Iraq had not been mentioned in the bombers’ wills or testaments.
In his testament Khan said: "Your democratically elected governments continuously perpetrate atrocities against my people all over the world."
Mr Reid told the BBC: "If there had been any mention of Iraq from any of the bombers any where in the last will and testament of Khan in the Al Jazeera video which he made – that wouldn’t have been hidden, couldn’t have been hidden.
"The truth is it wasn’t mentioned."
Oh for fuck’s sake John – do you really honestly think that we’re all such a bunch of half-wit knuckle-dragging Sun-reading cunts that we’re incapable of recognising, by simple and obvious inference, that the statement that:
"Your democratically elected governments continuously perpetrate atrocities against my people all over the world."
Is an implied reference to us having invaded Iraq, in addition to having ousted the Taleban from power in Afgahnistan and sitting idly by – in his opinion- and doing nothing about the situation in Palestine.
Just what fucking ‘atrocities’ do think he’s talking about here, if not those? Putting fucking gherkins on the McDonalds Halal Burger with Cheese?
UPDATE – Gah! Having posted this I realised immediately that I could have given this a much better title given the McDonald’s gag and the obvious blind spot that the Government have when it comes to the role of the Iraq war as a recruiting seargeant for extremists – should have gone the Nelson route and called this ‘I see no chips’.
One thought on “Oh for fuck’s sake”
I really don’t understand why they can’t admit what they must know to be true. The fact that doing something that makes you a target for reprisal attacks doesn’t make doing it wrong. If they argue that the Iraq war was the right thing to do, the fact that terrorists don’t agree doesn’t really weaken their case.
Of course, the Iraq war was illegal, immoral and dangerous. But if I thought I was morally obliged to help a country, the fact that doing so would make us a terrorist target wouldn’t necessarily dissuade me from acting. Of course, the Daily Mail probably wouldn’t agree, so perhaps I’ve just answered my initial question.