52 former diplomats bash Blair in public letter.

[Kuciwalker]

Which is one reason to doubt the premise that 'Poly is any indication

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
They seek to be hired by Arab governments - not by US.

Another strawman. Who told you they sought this by writing the letter?

Everyone knows that expressing worries towards the situation in ME is unjustified and biased. Bush is handling the situation like a pro.

[Gibsie]

It's amusing that after decades of having to put up with childish, "The US gov't/ media is being controlled by the Jews", Sirotnikov seems to be eager to fight back with cries of, "The UK Establishment is being controlled by the Arabs!".

[Agathon]

Yeah I thought that was funny.

Then again there are the Israelis who who whine about how badly the Jews were treated (progroms, thefts, violence, lack of civil rights etc.) and yet are quite happy to do the same to a bunch of powerless Arabs.

That's not so funny..

Anyway, the same people blamed Galloway for being in Saddam's pocket and that turned out to be rubbish.

[Sandman]

But documents were unearthed! Documents!

[The Mad Viking]

Yes, they are going to find 52 FORMER diplomats who are EXPERTS in the MIDDLE EAST who, despite not being professional diplomats any more, have NO TIES TO THE MIDDLE EAST.



Talk about spin. Oh, they are just liars, paid by Arabs to undermine things.

What newspaper was that? The Telegraph. No ax to grind there, eh?

[Agathon]

How many people here actually know a diplomat? (not The Diplomat mind)

Anyway, now our American friends are getting in on the act. Those worthless commie traitors!!!

Dear Mr President:

We former US diplomats applaud our 52 British colleagues who recently sent a letter to Prime Minister Tony Blair criticising his Middle East policy and calling on Britain to exert more influence over the United States.

As retired foreign service officers we care deeply about our nation's foreign policy and US credibility in the world.

We also are deeply concerned by your April 14 endorsement of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's unilateral plan to reject the rights of three million Palestinians, to deny the right of refugees to return to their homeland, and to retain five large illegal settlement blocs in the occupied West Bank.

This plan defies UN Security Council resolutions calling for Israel's return of occupied territories.

It ignores international laws declaring Israeli settlements illegal.

It flouts UN Resolution 194, passed in 1948, which affirms the right of refugees to return to their homes or receive compensation for the loss of their property and assistance in resettling in a host country should they choose to do so.

And it undermines the Road Map for peace drawn up by the Quartet, including the US. Finally, it reverses longstanding American policy in the Middle East.

Your meeting with Sharon followed a series of intensive negotiating sessions between Israelis and Americans, but which left out Palestinians.

In fact, you and Prime Minister Sharon consistently have excluded Palestinians from peace negotiations.

Former Palestinian Information Minister Yasser Abed Rabbo voiced the overwhelming reaction of people around the world when he said: "I believe President Bush declared the death of the peace process today".

By closing the door to negotiations with Palestinians and the possibility of a Palestinian state, you have proved that the United States is not an even-handed peace partner.

You have placed US diplomats, civilians and military doing their jobs overseas in an untenable and even dangerous position.

Your unqualified support of Sharon's extra-judicial assassinations, Israel's Berlin Wall-like barrier, its harsh military measures in occupied territories, and now your endorsement of Sharon's unilateral plan are costing our country its credibility, prestige and friends.

It is not too late to reassert American principles of justice and fairness in our relations with all the peoples of the Middle East.

Support negotiations between Palestinians and Israelis, with the United States serving as a truly honest broker.

A return to the time-honored American tradition of fairness will reverse the present tide of ill will in Europe and the Middle East - even in Iraq.

Because the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is at the core of the problems in the Middle East, the entire region - and the world - will rejoice along with Israelis and Palestinians when the killing stops and peace is attained.

Signatories include

Andrew I Killgore, Ambassador to Qatar, 1977-1980
Richard H Curtiss, former chief inspector, US Information Agency
Colbert C Held, Retired FSO and author
John Gunther Dean, former Ambassador to India
Thomas J Carolan, Counsel General Istanbul, '88-'92
C Edward Bernier, Counselor of Embassy, Information and Culture, Islamabad, Pakistan
Donald A Kruse, American Consul in Jerusalem
Ambassador Edward L Peck, former Chief of Mission in Iraq and Mauritania
John Powell, Admin Counselor in Beirut, '75-'76
John Gunther Dean, last position held US Ambassador to India
Greg Thielmann, Director, Office for Strategic Proliferation and Military Affairs, Bureau of Intelligence and Research
James Akins, Ambassador to Saudi Arabia
Talcott Seeyle, Ambassador to Syria
Eugene Bird, Counselor of Embassy in Saudi Arabia
Richard H Nolte, Ambassador to Egypt
Ray Close, Chief of Station Jeddah, Saudi Arabia 1971-1979
Shirl McArthur, Commercial Attache, Bangkok
Thomas J Scotes, Ambassador to Yemen 1975-1978
Robert V Keeley, Ambassador to Greece
Edward RM Kane, CIA Deputy Chief of Station in Iraq

Again, a sensible letter from people who know what they are talking about.

[Gibsie]

Originally posted by Agathon
Anyway, the same people blamed Galloway for being in Saddam's pocket and that turned out to be rubbish.

Yes, I read a couple of months ago that the newspaper that originally reported this was taken to court and admitted that the documents upon which they based their claims were "almost certainly faked". Then last week or the week before that I read these exact same claims again (In The Sun, where else?) being made, with no reference at all to the fact they'd been rejected in court. They'll probably make them again in a couple of months. Gotta let the traitors know they could end up in The Tower at any time if they keep us this pacifism malarky.

[Agathon]

The right have no shame and are traitors to every democratically minded citizen.

[Sandman]

I'll be interested to see if the oil for food 'scandal' goes the same way. Unearthed documents again.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Gibsie


Yes, I read a couple of months ago that the newspaper that originally reported this was taken to court and admitted that the documents upon which they based their claims were "almost certainly faked". Then last week or the week before that I read these exact same claims again (In The Sun, where else?) being made, with no reference at all to the fact they'd been rejected in court. They'll probably make them again in a couple of months. Gotta let the traitors know they could end up in The Tower at any time if they keep us this pacifism malarky.

IIUC it was only the Christian Science Monitor that admitted that - if the Daily Telegraph has, I havent seen it. Cite?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Agathon
The right have no shame and are traitors to every democratically minded citizen.

You know who you sound like? Coulter.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Kucinich


You know who you sound like? Coulter.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


IIUC it was only the Christian Science Monitor that admitted that - if the Daily Telegraph has, I havent seen it. Cite?

Because the CSM did the investigation (refuting their own claims made earlier).

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0620/p01s03-woiq.html

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Agathon


Because the CSM did the investigation (refuting their own claims made earlier).

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0620/p01s03-woiq.html

from the linked article

"The name "George Galloway" figured prominently in one of the most explosive of these stories. On April 22, London's Daily Telegraph reported that papers retrieved by their correspondent David Blair from the ruins of Iraq's Foreign Ministry described alleged government payoffs to Mr. Galloway, a Labour Party MP and longtime critic of the West's hardline toward Mr. Hussein. The Daily Telegraph report received widespread attention in the European press and throughout the world.

On April 25, the Monitor ran its own piece about papers detailing Galloway's alleged ties to Baghdad. The documents were purported to have originated in the Special Security Section, run by Saddam's second son, Qusay.

However, the Monitor's documents were different in many details from those of the Daily Telegraph, and came from a different source. Monitor contract reporter Philip Smucker obtained them from an Iraqi general, who in turn said he had captured them after his men shot their way into a home once used by Qusay Hussein."


So, in fact the DT story ran first, was based on different documents, from a different source.