Clinton, Blair, Bush

During our Friday lunch Michael Sheen, who’s played British Prime Minister Tony Blair not only in The Queen but also in an ’03 British TV movie called The Deal, said that a “plan” is afoot between himself, Queen director Stephen Frears and screenwriter Peter Morgan to make a third Blair film.

This will be about Blair’s downfall due to his alliance with President Bush, his pitching the weapons-of- mass-destruction b.s. to the British people, and sending British troops to fight in the invasion of Iraq. It will begin with President Clinton‘s parting advice to Blair as the former leaves office to buddy up with Bush and find common ground. Out of this were sewn the seeds of Blair’s demise.

  • Walter Sobchak

    President Clinton knew there were no WMDs in Iraq. He just KNEW it. Of course he said there WERE, (along with the inteligence agencies of Russia, France and Germany), but he was just kidding. He knew there weren’t. It was just a big lie concocted by Bush/Cheney in order to make money for Haliburton. (requisite usage of the words “buddies”, “Daddy” and “Kenny-Boy” presumed).
    – the preceding was brought to you by the new “D.Z. (Daniel Zelter) Respond-O-Matic”. Simply press the F1 through F12 keys and save yourself the trouble of typing. Each key will deliver a pre-programmed response. It’s easy AND fun!

  • JoeGreenia

    Almost right. Bush didn’t care if there were WMD’s or not. It was all bout seizing resources. The Haliburton stuff was just icing. But keep trying.

  • D.Z.

    Walter: Um, as Bill Maher said, Clinton said he THOUGHT there might be WMDs. He didn’t start an invasion based on a hunch, though.
    As for Blair, just because he didn’t last as PM as long as Thatcher doesn’t mean he’s that bad off. The Brits still like Labor, just not him. Of course, they’ve been occupying countries for a lot longer than us, so I guess they’d find that kind of thing acceptable by now.

  • http://martiansattackingindianapolis.blogspot.com/ Josh Massey

    Seizing resources? What resources are you talking about exactly?

  • f.bush

    Why the Hell would anyone in the US or Britain want to pay money to watch that Movie????

  • Walter Sobchak

    Well……. if BILL MAHER said it….

  • jeffmcm

    There are people who still believe the official story on this one? The one parroted by the ‘liberal media’?
    Huh.

  • Mgmax, le Corbeau

    Making a movie about how Blair was duped into disrupting the peace of the Middle East may shortly turn out to be sort of like making a movie in 1938 about what a raving warmonger old Churchill is and how lucky we are he’s not in power.

  • D.Z.

    Mgmax: At least Churchill actually knew how to fight a war.

  • D.Z.

    Anyway, the only thing Blair will be remembered for is kissing Dubya’s ass, instead of standing up against his lies.

  • jeffmcm

    Mgmax, what are we ‘shortly’ going to know about the Middle East that confirms everything that Bush and Blair have stated? Those myths have all been debunked.

  • Mgmax, le Corbeau

    Jeff– I’m thinking more that events may change how many things about the present moment are viewed, as events in 1939-40 did.
    We are not only not at the end of the end; we are not even at the end of the beginning.

  • Larry

    Clinton, Gore and most of the major Democrats on down said Saddam had WMD. It’s easy enough to find the quotes if you’ve ever heard of Google.
    Blair has been a successful leader, before and after the Iraq war. He’s served longer than most British PMs and helped revitalize his party.
    He’ll be remembered as one of the few Europeans leaders in this era who was brave enough to stand up and do what’s right, even if it wasn’t popular. Needless to say, since he’s a rare independent thinker, and didn’t pander like Chirac and Schroeder, he got called a lapdog by his enemies. People claim they want independent leaders with integrity, but when they get one we see what they really want is someone who simply agrees with them.

  • bacio

    it´s not only pathetic to think of 02/03 as similarly important or relevant as 38/39, it´s just plain wrong.
    I am German and not a big fan of Schroeder, yet about the only thing he did right in his term of office was not to go to Iraq. Anyone can see that. I am not saying that we do not a strategy to face terrorism. Appeasement is certainly not the answer and I do think that war is sometimes necessary as last resort.
    However, the Iraq war was just plain stupid and did not change one bit for the better, world peace wise. And comparing Saddam to Hitler won´t change that either. I always thought that war was wrong but tried to be understanding, trying to fathom what Americans were thinking, after 9-11 and all, being fearful and in a state of shock. So, from a human perspective, I thought, maybe it is understandable they would wage a war against some other country they deem a potential danger.
    Yet, being fearful and in a state of shock in the post 9-11 world is more a case for a psychoanalyst to solve than for the President of the USA

  • Mgmax

    Making a movie about how Blair was duped into disrupting the peace of the Middle East may shortly turn out to be sort of like making a movie in 1938 about what a raving warmonger old Churchill is and how lucky we are he’s not in power.

  • D.Z.

    Larry: “Clinton, Gore and most of the major Democrats on down said Saddam had WMD.”
    Saying it and starting a war over it are still two different things.
    “He’ll be remembered as one of the few Europeans leaders in this era who was brave enough to stand up and do what’s right,”
    How is killing innocent people and occupying a country on the basis of a lie right?
    “Needless to say, since he’s a rare independent thinker, and didn’t pander like Chirac and Schroeder,”
    Um, in case you didn’t notice we’re the ones now pandering to Chirac and Schroeder for aid!
    “People claim they want independent leaders with integrity, but when they get one we see what they really want is someone who simply agrees with them.”
    By independent leaders, we mean people who don’t have ties to special interests, not people who ignore their constiuencies and think they’re above the law!
    bacio: “And comparing Saddam to Hitler won√É‚Äö√Ǭ¥t change that either.However, the Iraq war was just plain stupid and did not change one bit for the better, world peace wise.”
    Especially since Hitler wasn’t a puppet of the United States. (Just people like Bush’s granddad…)

  • Mgmax

    Jeff– I’m thinking more that events may change how many things about the present moment are viewed, as events in 1939-40 did.

    We are not only not at the end of the end; we are not even at the end of the beginning.

  • Mgmax, le Corbeau

    Hey, you could be right. (Well, not D.Z.)
    9/11 could be a fluke, not a warmup act for a nuke.
    Europe may not be mostly under sharia and torching gays and art museums in 20 years.
    The point is, those of you so sure history is finished settling those questions… need more history before you can be sure.

  • NYCBusybody

    Europe has been doomed for a long time to fall under Islamic sharia law (birth rates of secular liberal Westerners are the lowest birth rates of any identifiable group in the history of mankind). The people in the world who continue to procreate? American Christians, the Islamic world, and Third World’ers. This is why multiculturalists have such a hard time fighting Islamic fundamentalism, because their natural instinct is to identify Islamic people by their race, i.e, they MUST be victims, and only our socialism will save them from the mean, white Western-Capitalist world. The socialist mindset, which is deeply embedded in liberal thought EVEN WHEN THEY’RE NOT EDUCATED ENOUGH TO KNOW IT (typical American liberals – “hey, I’m not a communist!”, while they spout multicultural/identity politics/socialist newspeak formulated by the Soviet Union), will never allow for a fight against non-white peoples – they simply can’t bring themselves not to see them as victims that must be coddled, not fought.

  • NYCBusybody

    And, of course, the idea of “relativism” will follow, which will attempt to “relate” American Christian fundamentalists with Islamic fundamentalists. I’m sure that’s the thought brewing in all those Marxist little heads out there – it was actually a program designed by the Soviet Union to inculcate mass distrust of the United States in Third World Latin America, and other poor peoples, to make them pliable to Marxist-Leninist thought. If you can convince people through lies and distortion that America is the enemy (which is the message of the liberal-secular West), why then, anything they do must be just as evil as anyone else. This is of course the thinking that leads to comparing Bush to Hitler, or not wanting gays to marry to hanging gays from trees in Iran. No distinction can be made, because America (the one culture to resist socialism) must be demonized at all cost, including coddling Islamic Fundamentalist terror.

  • Mgmax

    Hey, you could be right. (Well, not D.Z.)

    9/11 could be a fluke, not a warmup act for a nuke.

    Europe may not be mostly under sharia and torching gays and art museums in 20 years.

    The point is, those of you so sure history is finished settling those questions… need more history before you can be sure.

  • D.Z.

    Mgmax: “Europe may not be mostly under sharia and torching gays and art museums in 20 years.”
    Couldn’t be any worse than what the Europeans have been doing for the last 800 years to minorities…
    NYC: “Europe has been doomed for a long time to fall under Islamic sharia law (birth rates of secular liberal Westerners are the lowest birth rates of any identifiable group in the history of mankind).”
    Isn’t that the excuse extremists in Israel use for kicking out Arab citizens? That they’ll overrun the Jews with their higher child-birth rate?
    “This is why multiculturalists have such a hard time fighting Islamic fundamentalism, because their natural instinct is to identify Islamic people by their race, i.e, they MUST be victims, and only our socialism will save them from the mean, white Western-Capitalist world. The socialist mindset, which is deeply embedded in liberal thought EVEN WHEN THEY’RE NOT EDUCATED ENOUGH TO KNOW IT (typical American liberals – “hey, I’m not a communist!”, while they spout multicultural/identity politics/socialist newspeak formulated by the Soviet Union), will never allow for a fight against non-white peoples – they simply can’t bring themselves not to see them as victims that must be coddled, not fought.”
    It’s not that they’re against fighting them. It’s that they’re against starting endless wars which lead nowhere, because of religion, and not defense.
    “And, of course, the idea of “relativism” will follow, which will attempt to “relate” American Christian fundamentalists with Islamic fundamentalists.”
    You mean there’s a difference?
    “I’m sure that’s the thought brewing in all those Marxist little heads out there – it was actually a program designed by the Soviet Union to inculcate mass distrust of the United States in Third World Latin America, and other poor peoples, to make them pliable to Marxist-Leninist thought.”
    I think the mass distrust comes from us killing their elected leaders and replacing them with puppets…
    “This is of course the thinking that leads to comparing Bush to Hitler, or not wanting gays to marry to hanging gays from trees in Iran.”
    So what happened to Matthew Shepard isn’t as bad as what gays are going through in other countries?
    Or are you saying one human right is of less value than another human right? If that’s the case, it’s like claiming that segregation in the U.S. was still better than apartheid in South Africa.

  • Jean

    NYCBusybody: First, I truly do appreciate reading your posts (so many posters can’t express their thoughts beyond saying something “sucks” or is the “coolest”. It’s nice to hear someone eloquently throwing their 2-cents in), but I gather you’ve got to know better than to equate U.S. liberals with communists as per the old Soviet Union! I know you know that political philosophies (capitalism, socialism, Marxism; pick your -isms) & theories are never purely practiced in the real world. Example: The Soviet Union failed because: it was never a true socialist state but in fact a totalitarian government that gave privileges to it own political party members (what little there were) & by excluding the rest caused class stratification (in turn social strife); spent massive amounts of its GPA on its military at the expense of national infrastructure; shot itself in the political head with a decade long conflict in Afganistan…
    Republicans like to credit the Reagan Adminstration with causing the fall of “Communism” & the Soviet Union – B.S.! The Soviet Empire was well on its way because of itself.
    I really don’t believe your argument that liberals (I’m not one, by the way) “will never allow for a fight against non-white people”. They seemed to just fine with the conflict against the Taliban in Afganistan…
    But it is a flawed belief that the Republicans led by the current Bush administration that we could go in to Iraq & create a democracy – our cultures simply won’t mix. Islamic society has hated the western / Christian culture since the Crusades – long before any “Communist” anti-west propaganda efforts.

  • bacio

    Muslims used to be at the forefront of civilisation, their culture way superior to Western European society up until the Renaissance. Under Moorish rule, Southern Spain was extremely tolerant towards Catholics and Jews alike. Actually, things only started to change with industrialization of the West, colonization and the end of the Ottoman empire.

  • Mgmax, le Corbeau

    “Actually, things only started to change with industrialization of the West, colonization and the end of the Ottoman empire.”
    So it was Bush’s fault!
    I learn so much about history here. Funny that it always comes down to everything being Bush’s fault, but nonetheless…

  • Mgmax, le Corbeau

    I suppose I should really point out that “I learn so much about history here” was sarcasm.

  • Mgmax

    “Actually, things only started to change with industrialization of the West, colonization and the end of the Ottoman empire.”

    So it was Bush’s fault!

    I learn so much about history here. Funny that it always comes down to everything being Bush’s fault, but nonetheless…

  • Mgmax

    I suppose I should really point out that “I learn so much about history here” was sarcasm.

  • Toot-Sweet

    “I suppose I should really point out that “I learn so much about history here” was sarcasm.”
    Thanks for the tip, Wingnut wit is subtle to the point of nonexistance.
    ;)