the great unmentionable of the general election
 

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:50:10 +0100 someone who may be David
Boothroyd wrote this:-

Starting wars? Hmm, in years to come they'll still be telling tales of the
government that took us on an illegal war

You've just had the proof it was not illegal.

Not quite.

There's a difference between evidence which turns out to be inaccurate
and evidence which has been fabricated. This was the former.

No, this was the latter. The fabrication was partly/largely done by
various groups of opposition groups who wanted an invasion, but it
was still fabricated.

The British intelligence services correctly reported that the
evidence was at best patchy. Mr Liar and his cronies had this sexed
up by adding in material cut and pasted from Internet, removing the
caveats and claiming it was all "extensive, detailed and
authoritative". Either Mr Liar knew he was lying, or he is utterly
incompetent, there is no third way.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

the great unmentionable of the general election
 

In article , (Chris
Game) wrote:

*Subject:* the great unmentionable of the general election
*From:* Chris Game
*Date:* Thu, 28 Apr 2005 10:04:10 GMT

Mike wrote:

So if for a moment you thought that what the electorate wants
really matters to politicians, think again. Since when did they
ever listen to the voters?


I'm sure there was some opinion poll that put transport something
like fourth in the list of voter concerns, but I guess this is
mostly to do with traffic congestion and fuel tax, not the
railways!

That's right. Focus groups have told them that rail transport isn't
an issue.

http://www.libdems.org.uk/transport/.../strategy.html says otherwise
somewhat.

--
Cllr. Colin Rosenstiel
Cambridge http://www.rosenstiel.co.uk/
Cambridge Liberal Democrats: http://www.cambridgelibdems.org.uk/