Sunday, August 10, 2003
Pondering Powell
Reporters have been flocking around Colin Powell ever since the rumor came out that he would retire if Bush were re-elected. “Is it true” they ask. The question they should really ask is: "How long has he wanted to get out of Bush's cabinet and which cabinet member undercut him the most?
During his tenure as the head of State, Colin Powell has endured several neo-conservative and cabinet member ambushes. He has survived conservative christian assault, and Newt Gingrich grenade attacks.
Since president Bush began his tirade about the "axis of evil” countries, the sun has not set on a region of the world, he has not insulted or aggravated, with the possible exception of the Artic shelf. It’s just what a Secretary of State needed, worldwide animosity towards America.
Besides Bush's blunt comments, Bush's cabinet has made Powell's job extremely contentious.
In an interview back in December 2000, with the British Broadcasting Corp., Powell had said that as a "first step" U.N. weapons inspectors must be allowed to return to Iraq. President Bush "has been clear that he believes weapons inspectors should return."
Those comments were soon contradicted in two speeches by Cheney, in which he said inspections should not be the primary goal of U.S. policy toward Iraq. Cheney said the key issue was Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's drive to acquire nuclear weapons, and the return of inspectors, who left Iraq in 1998, "would provide no assurance.
It must have dawned on Powell pretty quickly that he was one of maybe two voices within the administration's top echelon that urged caution toward a war with Iraq.
Time magazine, quoted an unnamed, close aide, back then, that Powell had plans to step down at the end of Bush's first term, but would not resign over policy differences on Iraq.
Wolfowitz had lobbied passionately for widening the mission to include an aggressive campaign to finally bring down the regime of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, despite opposition from allies and world powers such as France, Germany, Russia and China. He considered Iraq unfinished business, and saw the terrorist attack of the World Trade Center as an opportunity to finish it, even though there was no intelligence that connected Iraq to the Al-Queda. He and others in the Pentagon have long had a vendetta about getting rid of Saddam and they believed that irrespective of what happened on Sept. 11, he had to be removed,"
Powell had maintained that the United States should have waged a narrower campaign focused first and foremost on Al Qaeda, a cause for which he could have rallied and sustained strong international cooperation. Powell also cautioned about the dangers of a wider military engagement with Iraq and other nations on a U.S. list of states that sponsored terrorism.
Wolfowitz symbolizes a faction that advocates U.S. strength, supremacy and unilateralism, regardless of international sentiment. Wolfowitz reflects a fear that America will lose its position because it is not tough enough.
Powell advocates a strong America by working with allies and carrying the weight of world opinion with it rather than try to go it alone," according to Geoffrey Kemp, a National Security Council staffer in the Reagan administration.
Powell's approach is lower key, and it put Bin Laden first. "When we have dealt with Al Qaeda, the network and Osama bin Laden, we can then broaden our campaign to go after other terrorist organizations and forms of terrorism around the world,” Powell, is sensitive to U.S. coexistence and cooperation in a globalizing world.
At a press conference, three days after Sept. 11, Wolfowitz declared that American policy was "ending states who sponsor terrorism." Wolfowitz also lobbied strenuously in private for the United States to fight a broad war that would topple the Taliban and Saddam Hussein.
Wolfowitz's "ending states" comment earned him a public rebuke from Secretary of State Colin Powell, who told reporters that Wolfowitz could "speak for himself," but the American goal was only to "end terrorism." Wolfowitz's enthusiasm for nailing Saddam was quashed for a while, as Powell and others had made it clear that such a widespread war would destroy the coalition and infuriate Arab allies.
Bush soon ignored the UN, our longtime allies and Powell: he attacked Iraq.
After the war started, Newt Gingrich blasted the State Department for the diplomatic failures, which lead up to the war with Iraq. In a speech delivered at the American Enterprise Institute, a think tank in Washington, Gingrich said the State Department had failed in its efforts to apply diplomatic pressure to persuade Iraq to disarm and comply with U.N. resolutions, and that it was time for "bold, dramatic change" at the department
Gingrich, a well-known conservative, and a close friend of Cheney, had also faulted Secretary of State Colin Powell for saying he would visit Syria, which the Bush administration had accused of aiding Saddam Hussein.
Gingrich did not stop there, he went on to say, "The concept of the American secretary of state going to Damascus to meet with a terrorist-supporting, secret-police-wielding dictator is ludicrous," said Gingrich, who resigned the speaker ship under fire in 1999. He had represented Georgia as a Republican congressman, and now works as a consultant and political analyst. "The United States military has created an opportunity to apply genuine economic, diplomatic and political pressure on Syria."
Somehow Cheney and Gingrich must have missed the memo that explained that President Bush had sent Powell to Syria. White House Press Secretary, Ari Fleisher defended Powell in his statement to the press, the next day, "The actions of Secretary Powell and the Department of State are the president's actions," "They carry out the president's directions and they do so very ably and professionally. The nation and the president are fortunate to have a secretary of state as ... strong as Secretary Powell.
Wolfowitz is another member of the Bush team that often tangled with Powell.
Wolfowitz and Powell seem to be a study in opposite approaches to foreign policy. And even though Powell has the title, Wolfowitz obviously has the president’s ear most of the time.
Wolfowitz pushes for excessive unilateralism and war. Powell pushes for multilateralism and is likely to accommodate other nations.
Powell once stated, "When war comes, that's [casualties] the price that has to be paid," Powell said on NPR. (National Public Radio) "And it's paid not by intellectuals but by wonderful young Americans who serve their country and believe in the cause for which they are serving." Many, perceive this as a jab at Paul Wolfowitz, who did not serve in the military.
Powell also had several clashes with Rumsfield.
In a strongly worded letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on April 14, Secretary of State Colin Powell urged Pentagon officials to accelerate the process by which investigators decide when or whether prisoners at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba will be released.
Rumsfeld quickly countered Powell with an insinuation that Powell, as "America's chief diplomat," was speaking in behalf of foreign countries, not in the interest of our own nation.
In another conflict with Rumsfield, the White House had wanted ORHA, (Office for Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance) to be headed by an ex-defense contractor, retired Lt. Gen. Jay Garner, to run civil affairs in postwar Iraq, Congress had opposed the Pentagon-led effort. But the House-Senate conference eventually bowed to White House pressure and decided to allow Iraq relief and reconstruction funds to be channeled through the Pentagon, not the State Department. Powell lost out in controlling the funds to Rumsfield.
Powell then mounted something of a coup d'etat against the neo-conservative hawks around Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld, by having former diplomat L Paul Bremer named as Washington's new civilian leader in Baghdad. State Department officials said the move signaled a victory for Powell, who, had strong support from British Prime Minister Tony Blair and senior members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who had argued that the United Nations, independent relief and humanitarian groups and even allied nations would be far less inclined to help with peacekeeping and reconstruction, if they had to report to a general, even if he was retired from military service.
Rumsfeld was out-maneuvered, he handpicked retired general Jay Garner to oversee the occupation and report to Centcom commander, General Tommy Franks. But Powell helped readjust, the hierarchy and Garner then reported to Bremer. This clearly embarrassed Rumsfeld, whose press office emailed a rare statement by the secretary asserting, "Jay Garner was doing a truly outstanding job for the nation, and any suggestion to the contrary was flatly untrue and mischievous.
And so the battle still goes on today.
Conjecture about possible replacements for Powell; include Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. Ms Rice has recently taken a hit over Niger, but there is a good chance she may come out in tact, and she could be a good candidate for Secretary of State.
Bush should however, try very hard to keep Powell. Recent Gallup Poll data strongly suggest that a Powell departure would be a significant loss for the Bush administration.
According to those polls, Powell remains one of the most popular political figures in Gallup Poll history, and his current 83% favorable rating is some 18 points higher than the favorable rating of his boss, George W. Bush, despite his public and visible connection with the administration's assertions earlier this year, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.
What if Colin Powell's plans include a run for the White House on the Republican ticket in 2004? The news would undoubtedly cause sudden and massive loss of bowel control for Bush and his cabinet members. A campaign may not be started in time and the funding for it would require a massive infusion of money, but it would be a very interesting election.
Sources cited:
Gallup poll
Washington Post Mike Allen
Robin Wright and Doyle McMannus, Times Staff Writers
David Plotz
Jim Wolf
Ronald Martinez, Reuters file
Bill Nichols USA TODAY
Jim Lobe
During his tenure as the head of State, Colin Powell has endured several neo-conservative and cabinet member ambushes. He has survived conservative christian assault, and Newt Gingrich grenade attacks.
Since president Bush began his tirade about the "axis of evil” countries, the sun has not set on a region of the world, he has not insulted or aggravated, with the possible exception of the Artic shelf. It’s just what a Secretary of State needed, worldwide animosity towards America.
Besides Bush's blunt comments, Bush's cabinet has made Powell's job extremely contentious.
In an interview back in December 2000, with the British Broadcasting Corp., Powell had said that as a "first step" U.N. weapons inspectors must be allowed to return to Iraq. President Bush "has been clear that he believes weapons inspectors should return."
Those comments were soon contradicted in two speeches by Cheney, in which he said inspections should not be the primary goal of U.S. policy toward Iraq. Cheney said the key issue was Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's drive to acquire nuclear weapons, and the return of inspectors, who left Iraq in 1998, "would provide no assurance.
It must have dawned on Powell pretty quickly that he was one of maybe two voices within the administration's top echelon that urged caution toward a war with Iraq.
Time magazine, quoted an unnamed, close aide, back then, that Powell had plans to step down at the end of Bush's first term, but would not resign over policy differences on Iraq.
Wolfowitz had lobbied passionately for widening the mission to include an aggressive campaign to finally bring down the regime of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, despite opposition from allies and world powers such as France, Germany, Russia and China. He considered Iraq unfinished business, and saw the terrorist attack of the World Trade Center as an opportunity to finish it, even though there was no intelligence that connected Iraq to the Al-Queda. He and others in the Pentagon have long had a vendetta about getting rid of Saddam and they believed that irrespective of what happened on Sept. 11, he had to be removed,"
Powell had maintained that the United States should have waged a narrower campaign focused first and foremost on Al Qaeda, a cause for which he could have rallied and sustained strong international cooperation. Powell also cautioned about the dangers of a wider military engagement with Iraq and other nations on a U.S. list of states that sponsored terrorism.
Wolfowitz symbolizes a faction that advocates U.S. strength, supremacy and unilateralism, regardless of international sentiment. Wolfowitz reflects a fear that America will lose its position because it is not tough enough.
Powell advocates a strong America by working with allies and carrying the weight of world opinion with it rather than try to go it alone," according to Geoffrey Kemp, a National Security Council staffer in the Reagan administration.
Powell's approach is lower key, and it put Bin Laden first. "When we have dealt with Al Qaeda, the network and Osama bin Laden, we can then broaden our campaign to go after other terrorist organizations and forms of terrorism around the world,” Powell, is sensitive to U.S. coexistence and cooperation in a globalizing world.
At a press conference, three days after Sept. 11, Wolfowitz declared that American policy was "ending states who sponsor terrorism." Wolfowitz also lobbied strenuously in private for the United States to fight a broad war that would topple the Taliban and Saddam Hussein.
Wolfowitz's "ending states" comment earned him a public rebuke from Secretary of State Colin Powell, who told reporters that Wolfowitz could "speak for himself," but the American goal was only to "end terrorism." Wolfowitz's enthusiasm for nailing Saddam was quashed for a while, as Powell and others had made it clear that such a widespread war would destroy the coalition and infuriate Arab allies.
Bush soon ignored the UN, our longtime allies and Powell: he attacked Iraq.
After the war started, Newt Gingrich blasted the State Department for the diplomatic failures, which lead up to the war with Iraq. In a speech delivered at the American Enterprise Institute, a think tank in Washington, Gingrich said the State Department had failed in its efforts to apply diplomatic pressure to persuade Iraq to disarm and comply with U.N. resolutions, and that it was time for "bold, dramatic change" at the department
Gingrich, a well-known conservative, and a close friend of Cheney, had also faulted Secretary of State Colin Powell for saying he would visit Syria, which the Bush administration had accused of aiding Saddam Hussein.
Gingrich did not stop there, he went on to say, "The concept of the American secretary of state going to Damascus to meet with a terrorist-supporting, secret-police-wielding dictator is ludicrous," said Gingrich, who resigned the speaker ship under fire in 1999. He had represented Georgia as a Republican congressman, and now works as a consultant and political analyst. "The United States military has created an opportunity to apply genuine economic, diplomatic and political pressure on Syria."
Somehow Cheney and Gingrich must have missed the memo that explained that President Bush had sent Powell to Syria. White House Press Secretary, Ari Fleisher defended Powell in his statement to the press, the next day, "The actions of Secretary Powell and the Department of State are the president's actions," "They carry out the president's directions and they do so very ably and professionally. The nation and the president are fortunate to have a secretary of state as ... strong as Secretary Powell.
Wolfowitz is another member of the Bush team that often tangled with Powell.
Wolfowitz and Powell seem to be a study in opposite approaches to foreign policy. And even though Powell has the title, Wolfowitz obviously has the president’s ear most of the time.
Wolfowitz pushes for excessive unilateralism and war. Powell pushes for multilateralism and is likely to accommodate other nations.
Powell once stated, "When war comes, that's [casualties] the price that has to be paid," Powell said on NPR. (National Public Radio) "And it's paid not by intellectuals but by wonderful young Americans who serve their country and believe in the cause for which they are serving." Many, perceive this as a jab at Paul Wolfowitz, who did not serve in the military.
Powell also had several clashes with Rumsfield.
In a strongly worded letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on April 14, Secretary of State Colin Powell urged Pentagon officials to accelerate the process by which investigators decide when or whether prisoners at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba will be released.
Rumsfeld quickly countered Powell with an insinuation that Powell, as "America's chief diplomat," was speaking in behalf of foreign countries, not in the interest of our own nation.
In another conflict with Rumsfield, the White House had wanted ORHA, (Office for Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance) to be headed by an ex-defense contractor, retired Lt. Gen. Jay Garner, to run civil affairs in postwar Iraq, Congress had opposed the Pentagon-led effort. But the House-Senate conference eventually bowed to White House pressure and decided to allow Iraq relief and reconstruction funds to be channeled through the Pentagon, not the State Department. Powell lost out in controlling the funds to Rumsfield.
Powell then mounted something of a coup d'etat against the neo-conservative hawks around Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld, by having former diplomat L Paul Bremer named as Washington's new civilian leader in Baghdad. State Department officials said the move signaled a victory for Powell, who, had strong support from British Prime Minister Tony Blair and senior members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who had argued that the United Nations, independent relief and humanitarian groups and even allied nations would be far less inclined to help with peacekeeping and reconstruction, if they had to report to a general, even if he was retired from military service.
Rumsfeld was out-maneuvered, he handpicked retired general Jay Garner to oversee the occupation and report to Centcom commander, General Tommy Franks. But Powell helped readjust, the hierarchy and Garner then reported to Bremer. This clearly embarrassed Rumsfeld, whose press office emailed a rare statement by the secretary asserting, "Jay Garner was doing a truly outstanding job for the nation, and any suggestion to the contrary was flatly untrue and mischievous.
And so the battle still goes on today.
Conjecture about possible replacements for Powell; include Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. Ms Rice has recently taken a hit over Niger, but there is a good chance she may come out in tact, and she could be a good candidate for Secretary of State.
Bush should however, try very hard to keep Powell. Recent Gallup Poll data strongly suggest that a Powell departure would be a significant loss for the Bush administration.
According to those polls, Powell remains one of the most popular political figures in Gallup Poll history, and his current 83% favorable rating is some 18 points higher than the favorable rating of his boss, George W. Bush, despite his public and visible connection with the administration's assertions earlier this year, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.
What if Colin Powell's plans include a run for the White House on the Republican ticket in 2004? The news would undoubtedly cause sudden and massive loss of bowel control for Bush and his cabinet members. A campaign may not be started in time and the funding for it would require a massive infusion of money, but it would be a very interesting election.
Sources cited:
Gallup poll
Washington Post Mike Allen
Robin Wright and Doyle McMannus, Times Staff Writers
David Plotz
Jim Wolf
Ronald Martinez, Reuters file
Bill Nichols USA TODAY
Jim Lobe
# posted by Thomas @ 4:52 PM 
Friday, August 01, 2003
The Loss Of A Royal Friend
Another Bush Iraqi war victim is ready to fall. Prime Minister Tony Blair himself.
One of the saddest outcomes of Bush's war in Iraq, is that it may finish off one of America's staunches allies, the Prime Minister of Britain before Saddam Hussein.
Mr. Blair had tried very hard to rein in Bush's almost maniacal passion for invading Iraq. Tony tried to get Bush to work through the UN Security Counsel before the war. He lost that argument, After the war started, Tony Blair worked hard at getting Bush to involve the UN in rebuilding Iraq. Blair lost that argument too. It can be said that Bush has helped push Tony, towards the exit door at 10 Downing Street. Some would say Tony started his decent, after he chose to befriend George Bush.
Sorry Tony. we love you for sticking with us, but we can't protect you in your own back yard. We can give you standing ovations, a Congressional Gold Medal, money, equipment, anything, but its not going to help you at home.
Unlike the United States, the majority of the British press has been very suspicious of this war from the start and they have not been shy about saying so in their dailys.
Many liken, the Iraq war as the most important "defining moment" in British history since the Suez War of 1956. That may seem like an exaggeration, but the outcomes may prove this out.
Former foreign minister Robin Cook, who resigned from his cabinet position as leader of the House of Commons in protest at the war, has said the government clearly sent troops into battle on the basis "of a mistake" and that it had committed a "monumental blunder."
The failure to find weapons of mass destruction is of particular significance in Britain. The idea of going to war was very unpopular among the public as shown by the anti-war demonstrations by around 1.5 million people in London on February 15, the biggest demonstration in Britain's history.
There are daily cartoons in the papers, portraying him as being untrustworthy and as Bush's lap dog. This is extremely serious, if Blair continues to lose the trust of many in his own party, and among the public, no one will believe anything he and his government tells them.
Blair faces a growing chorus of attacks from Labour members of parliament and from former members of the government who resigned over Iraq. A number of junior ministers joined Robin Cook in resigning before the war, and on 12 May Clare Short, the former secretary of state for International Development, resigned. She has launched a series of allegations against Blair, including that he secretly agreed with Bush at their meeting at Camp David last September to go to war, something Blair has strongly denied.
His credibility has also been recently damaged by allegations, that the intelligence on the weapons of mass destruction were "sexed up" to reflect an exaggerated threat in order to get public support for the war. These allegations came from the BBC, who had quoted a high ranking government source.
The British government initiated a "witch hunt" to ferret out the source. Recently, a highly regarded British nuclear weapons scientist, David Kelly was accused of leaking the information to the BBC before a very public interrogation by the Foreign Affairs Select Committee.
An hour afterwards, this public humiliated scientist committed suicide.
After the Kelly death, the BBC subsequently revealed that Mr. Kelly was indeed the source mentioned in the BBC articles.
The news of Kelly's death reached Blair as he was flying to Tokyo.
At a press conference with Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, a visibly shattered Blair answered questions. One British reporter asked him if Kelly's death was on his conscience, Blair called on politicians and the media to await the outcome of a judicial inquiry he has ordered before drawing conclusions. He also said "I think in the meantime we should show respect and restraint, and let me express once again my deep sorrow for the tragedy that has come about." Finally, one British reporter shouted out: "Have you got blood on your hands, Prime Minister? Are you going to resign over this?" At which time, Blair reportedly froze. He was said to have stood silently at the lectern for what must have seemed like the longest few seconds of his political career. Koizumi called a merciful end to the press conference.
The death of Mr Kelly, who turns out to have been a quiet and very dedicated scientist, has shaken Prime Minister Tony Blair. He has pleaded for restraint while facing tough questions about "blood on his hands" .
Mr Kelly's death, may have been the most serious and final blow to Tony Blair.
Staggering under the biggest political crisis of his premiership, the pressure on Blair increased again, when a respected member of his own Labour party, former cabinet minister Glenda Jackson, recently called for his resignation.
The biggest blow of all may have come from the grieving family of David Kelly, They made clear that Blair and his government should consider the role they played in making his life "intolerable."
An independent investigation is being headed up by Lord Hutton, a very experienced, and a very well respected High Court judge.
Meanwhile, the controversy over the war on Iraq intensifies with the passing of each dead American and or British soldier, particularly with the failure so far of the coalition forces to find weapons of mass destruction.
David Kelly's death has indeed shaken the Prime Minister. His country derides his relationship with Bush, According to the latest polls, he has very little credibility, and his own party is asking for his resignation.
I feel sorry for Tony. He was just the guy who tried to intervene between Bush's fanaticism with Iraq and our European allies reluctance to agree with Bush's shaky evidence for war; and just like in a bar fight; its the poor bastard that tries to break the fight up that gets seriously hurt.
I do not believe the Prime Minister will not survive this latest incident. I may be wrong. I often am, but regardless. Its a sad day for Britain. The leader of this great country may have meant well, but he picked the wrong person to defend in this fight.
God bless the Queen and her people.
Sources Cited:
Sandro Contenta
Peter Beaumont,
Antony Barnett
Gaby Hinsliff
BBC
The Observer
One of the saddest outcomes of Bush's war in Iraq, is that it may finish off one of America's staunches allies, the Prime Minister of Britain before Saddam Hussein.
Mr. Blair had tried very hard to rein in Bush's almost maniacal passion for invading Iraq. Tony tried to get Bush to work through the UN Security Counsel before the war. He lost that argument, After the war started, Tony Blair worked hard at getting Bush to involve the UN in rebuilding Iraq. Blair lost that argument too. It can be said that Bush has helped push Tony, towards the exit door at 10 Downing Street. Some would say Tony started his decent, after he chose to befriend George Bush.
Sorry Tony. we love you for sticking with us, but we can't protect you in your own back yard. We can give you standing ovations, a Congressional Gold Medal, money, equipment, anything, but its not going to help you at home.
Unlike the United States, the majority of the British press has been very suspicious of this war from the start and they have not been shy about saying so in their dailys.
Many liken, the Iraq war as the most important "defining moment" in British history since the Suez War of 1956. That may seem like an exaggeration, but the outcomes may prove this out.
Former foreign minister Robin Cook, who resigned from his cabinet position as leader of the House of Commons in protest at the war, has said the government clearly sent troops into battle on the basis "of a mistake" and that it had committed a "monumental blunder."
The failure to find weapons of mass destruction is of particular significance in Britain. The idea of going to war was very unpopular among the public as shown by the anti-war demonstrations by around 1.5 million people in London on February 15, the biggest demonstration in Britain's history.
There are daily cartoons in the papers, portraying him as being untrustworthy and as Bush's lap dog. This is extremely serious, if Blair continues to lose the trust of many in his own party, and among the public, no one will believe anything he and his government tells them.
Blair faces a growing chorus of attacks from Labour members of parliament and from former members of the government who resigned over Iraq. A number of junior ministers joined Robin Cook in resigning before the war, and on 12 May Clare Short, the former secretary of state for International Development, resigned. She has launched a series of allegations against Blair, including that he secretly agreed with Bush at their meeting at Camp David last September to go to war, something Blair has strongly denied.
His credibility has also been recently damaged by allegations, that the intelligence on the weapons of mass destruction were "sexed up" to reflect an exaggerated threat in order to get public support for the war. These allegations came from the BBC, who had quoted a high ranking government source.
The British government initiated a "witch hunt" to ferret out the source. Recently, a highly regarded British nuclear weapons scientist, David Kelly was accused of leaking the information to the BBC before a very public interrogation by the Foreign Affairs Select Committee.
An hour afterwards, this public humiliated scientist committed suicide.
After the Kelly death, the BBC subsequently revealed that Mr. Kelly was indeed the source mentioned in the BBC articles.
The news of Kelly's death reached Blair as he was flying to Tokyo.
At a press conference with Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, a visibly shattered Blair answered questions. One British reporter asked him if Kelly's death was on his conscience, Blair called on politicians and the media to await the outcome of a judicial inquiry he has ordered before drawing conclusions. He also said "I think in the meantime we should show respect and restraint, and let me express once again my deep sorrow for the tragedy that has come about." Finally, one British reporter shouted out: "Have you got blood on your hands, Prime Minister? Are you going to resign over this?" At which time, Blair reportedly froze. He was said to have stood silently at the lectern for what must have seemed like the longest few seconds of his political career. Koizumi called a merciful end to the press conference.
The death of Mr Kelly, who turns out to have been a quiet and very dedicated scientist, has shaken Prime Minister Tony Blair. He has pleaded for restraint while facing tough questions about "blood on his hands" .
Mr Kelly's death, may have been the most serious and final blow to Tony Blair.
Staggering under the biggest political crisis of his premiership, the pressure on Blair increased again, when a respected member of his own Labour party, former cabinet minister Glenda Jackson, recently called for his resignation.
The biggest blow of all may have come from the grieving family of David Kelly, They made clear that Blair and his government should consider the role they played in making his life "intolerable."
An independent investigation is being headed up by Lord Hutton, a very experienced, and a very well respected High Court judge.
Meanwhile, the controversy over the war on Iraq intensifies with the passing of each dead American and or British soldier, particularly with the failure so far of the coalition forces to find weapons of mass destruction.
David Kelly's death has indeed shaken the Prime Minister. His country derides his relationship with Bush, According to the latest polls, he has very little credibility, and his own party is asking for his resignation.
I feel sorry for Tony. He was just the guy who tried to intervene between Bush's fanaticism with Iraq and our European allies reluctance to agree with Bush's shaky evidence for war; and just like in a bar fight; its the poor bastard that tries to break the fight up that gets seriously hurt.
I do not believe the Prime Minister will not survive this latest incident. I may be wrong. I often am, but regardless. Its a sad day for Britain. The leader of this great country may have meant well, but he picked the wrong person to defend in this fight.
God bless the Queen and her people.
Sources Cited:
Sandro Contenta
Peter Beaumont,
Antony Barnett
Gaby Hinsliff
BBC
The Observer
# posted by Thomas @ 11:38 PM
