The alliance between Arab nationalism and Islamist terrorism Washington and London posited as a reason for invading is in danger of becoming a reality after the fact. Instead of the democratic exemplar we were promised, Iraq looks set to be a source of regional instability for years to come. There is no meaningful sense in which this can be claimed as a victory in the war on terror. The prime minister urges us to see it as an issue of judgment rather than trust. Either way, he has been found wanting.The curious thing is that the article appeared on 8th March 2004. So why is it in today's section. Is the Guardian really running out of current stuff to condemn the PM over? Or are his lies and errors all so similar that the Guardianistas can't tell them apart?
September 22, 2005
Blair's self-fulfilling prophecy
Here's a strange thing from the Guardian. I read this rather worrying report about a guy who was arrested, DNA tested, held and searched for "suspicious behaviour." Well, down the left hand side of the article, under the heading "In this section" was a link to a report titled "Blair's vision is critically tainted." I hate reports like that. You know, the ones that question his judgment or his "belief" or his, er, vision. But I still read them and I read this one. Here's a chunk: