Clare Short is secretly working for the Prime Minister

[windansea]

Although it is now orthodox to claim that Tony Blair wants George W Bush to win a second presidential term, the Prime Minister has also, I gather, been offering discreet advice to the Democratic contender, John Edwards. The telegenic North Carolina senator, who is the last challenger to John Kerry for his party's nomination, is highly regarded in Number 10.

For his part, Mr Edwards has turned to Mr Blair specifically for advice on foreign affairs. It remains intriguing that this should be the area of policy for which the Prime Minister has become globally renowned, his special subject in the world's political forum. When he was swept to office in 1997, Mr Blair was meant to make his mark on the domestic front. But it has proved otherwise: he has become, in the eyes of his admirers and detractors alike, a foreign policy Prime Minister.

Last week, yet again, the Iraq conflict drowned out all other political traffic. On Wednesday, the case against Katharine Gun, the GCHQ "whistleblower", collapsed, following the advice of Lord Goldsmith, the Attorney General, that the trial could not proceed. Mrs Gun faced jail after she leaked an e-mail which had been sent by the US National Security Agency, asking GCHQ to gather information on United Nations Security Council delegates in the run-up to the second Iraq vote.

What made the Government change its mind over the prosecution? The Crown's barrister, Mark Ellison, said there was "no longer sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction". On Thursday, Lord Goldsmith told the House of Lords a little more, though not much. "The evidential deficiency," he explained in a dizzying outburst of gobbledygook, "related to the prosecution's inability within the current statutory framework to disprove the defence raised on the particular facts of the case."

more...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/02/29/do2904.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2004/02/29/ixop.html

[Nlighten1]

1. John Edwards and Blair have ties?

Interesting to say the least...

[JoFerret]

2. looks like it

they deserve each other.
The bit about Edwards and Blair in cahoots is interesting but the rest of the article seems like typical Telegraph tripe.

[Zhade]

3. Hollinger right-wing source.

I spit on the Telegraph. It's as honest a news source as Newsmax.

[windansea]

4. guess you didn't read the article

the writer wants to nail Blair

"Once more, ministers hope that the Iraq controversy will ebb away, that they can, in that most bland of Blairite phrases, "move on". They hope in vain. For the same reason that Senator Edwards has sought the Prime Minister's counsel, so the war and its aftermath will continue to infect all that this Government does or tries to do.

It has become the defining event of the Blair years. But if the row is to continue, as it will, better for the Prime Minister that that row focus on intelligence officers doing their job, rather than the much more fundamental issue of the case for war and its supposed dishonesty. On the latter issue, Mr Blair is desperate for a breather. For that reason, and for the first time in a long while, he has reason to be grateful to Ms Short."

[Zhade]

5. No. I don't read right-wing bullshit sources.

The same company owns the Jerusalem Post; the board of directors of same boasts Richard Perle.

Enough said.

[windansea]

6. whatever

:puke:

[Zhade]

7. It's a bad thing that I don't trust sources known for lies and rw spin?

Hey, I hate Blair too - I want the British people to string the fucker up - but I'm not going to waste my time on rightwing sources that are misleading and full of lies.

Sorry if that sensible approach offends you. I can't imagine why it does, but to each their own.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

8. Doesn't sound like much of a response to me...

Don't you have anything at all to counter the fact that Perle is on the board of Hollinger, or are you just irritated that your point-of-view took some holes below the waterline?

[windansea]

10. jebus

just an article i posted..not my point of view...it seems the writer thinks the UN bugging case is just a distraction from the real case against Blair and Bush for going to war...but whatever floats your boat...nowhere did I post my point of view and thus I see no "holes" other than the ones people occasionally stick their heads in.

:)

[supernova]

9. Don't understand the point of this article

I mean is Blair give advice to John Edwards? If he is, is that bad?

Is Claire Short still secretly working for Blair in the same way that Karen Hughes works for shrub?

Is it Claire Short who is advising Edwards?

this story is clear as mud to me.

[windansea]

11. writer being facetious

and saying the UN bugging deal is distraction from more important issue

[legin]

12. It's a bit of info on blair supporting Edwards

which is to go with the stories recently posted here about the Gordon Brown - Kerry connection.

Followed by a hatchet job on Clare Short.

It's two unconnected stories basically.

[legin]

13. The Telegraph are playing a very squalid double game

They are pro-war but they are trying to get rid of blair, who is also pro-war, to replace him with the Tories.

So when the situation arises where supporting the legitamacy of the war outweighs any advantage gained to their other priority of sticking it to blair, they will ride to blair's defence like the greatest of allies. So in this case they support blair against the anti-war Clare Short.

However when the situation arises when they can put the boot into blair without affecting the issue of the legitamacy of the war too much, then they really put the knife in, e.g over the Hutton report.

[windansea]

14. I have no idea why they included JE in this

serious disconnect