Man invades the Leveson Hearing with Blair - shouting he is a War Criminal

[arista]

Was just Live

Great Man he grabbed the desk near the judge,


Blair is a Fecking War Criminal

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/28/article-2150885-13556D59000005DC-872_634x440.jpg

[lostalex]

i like Tony Blair. Nice to see a politician with conviction, a man that's not only concerned with the next election.

The man has character, unlike the gummy worms that came after him Brown and Miliband.

[Me. I Am Salman]

IGI7LJjIADU
:shocked:

[MTVN]

Haha legend :laugh:

[lostalex]

A shame the British public wasn't so passionate about Saddam Hussein while he was in power, perhaps this gentleman should have done the same thing to Saddam Hussein while he was in power, then maybe he'd understand the difference between real war criminals and democratically elected politicians.

this man will be back out on the streets in freedom tomorrow i assume. if he did this to saddam hussein he'd be killed.

[Jack_]

IGI7LJjIADU
:shocked:

:joker: :joker: :joker: :joker: :joker: :joker: :joker: :joker: :joker: :joker: :joker:

[MTVN]

A shame the British public wasn't so passionate about Saddam Hussein while he was in power, perhaps this gentleman should have done the same thing to Saddam Hussein while he was in power, then maybe he'd understand the difference between real war criminals and democratically elected politicians.

this man will be back out on the streets in freedom tomorrow i assume. if he did this to saddam hussein he'd be killed.

So what, we should never criticise leaders and politicians because in some countries you'd get killed for doing so?

[lostalex]

So what, we should never criticise leaders and politicians because in some countries you'd get killed for doing so?

There should be some perspective and relativism. Screaming about Tony Blair when the likes of Assad, and Castro, and Kim-Jong Un, and Amadinajad etc are out there just looks silly.

[MTVN]

there should be some perspective. And screaming about Tony Blair when the likes of Assad, and Castro, and fat-jong Ill, and Amadinajad etc are out there just looks silly.

Well Blair is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths

[lostalex]

Well Blair is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths

no he's not. Al Queda, the Taliban, and Militant Islam are responsible for those deaths. They struct first on 9/11. Our retaliation is defensive.

[MTVN]

no he's not. Al Queda, the Taliban, and Militant Islam are responsible for those deaths. They struct first on 9/11. Our retaliation is defensive.

It was our invasion of Iraq that gave Al Qaeda a strong foothold in the country. And look where they are now, nearly 10 years since the start of war and hundreds of thousands of deaths, Iraq has just got another corrupt dictator in charge

[Jesus.]

Saddam Hussein was never our prime minister. We either get involved in every example of a dictatorship in the world, or we get involved in none. Picking and choosing our moral stands doesn't actually make them moral at all.

[Jesus.]

no he's not. Al Queda, the Taliban, and Militant Islam are responsible for those deaths. They struct first on 9/11. Our retaliation is defensive.

Do you think America over reacted at all?

[lostalex]

It was our invasion of Iraq that gave Al Qaeda a strong foothold in the country. And look where the country is now, nearly 10 years since the start of war and hundreds of thousands of deaths, Iraq has just got another corrupt dictator in charge

oh plz, the problem is not bush or blair or the wars, the problem is their culture. they have the education level of the average American 8 year old, 80% illeteracy. These are not people we are dealing with, these are brainwashed zombies. brainwashed by Islam.

That's why so much of our (NATO) mission has been about education and building schools and hospitals and democratic institutions. the only way to fight them is to try to educate the people. That's why they target schools!

Tony Blair didn't make these people ignorant and brainwashed, Militant Islam and arab culture did.
the vast majority of deaths in these wars are from suicide bombers, roadsidebombs(IEDS) and the taliban using civilian positions to attack.

They literally position themselves among women and children so that they can use civilian deaths as propaganda afterwards. Don't be dumb enuf to fall for it. Every woman and child killed in this war is by their own design.

you cannot blame Blair for brainwashed islamic militants.

[lostalex]

Do you think America over reacted at all?

over reacted? no. i think we(America) were incredibly restrained. remember that 9/11 was not the first attack, thhey first attacked the World Trade Center in 1993, and we tried a measured response.

And what did we get for our restrained response in 1993 attack on the wtc?? we got 9/11 8 years later.

You cannot say America over-reacted.

We tried diplomacy and small response after the 1993 attack on the WTC, and what we got in response to our restraint was 9/11.

IMO our response to 9/11 was still very restrained. Most Americans would have been happy to see the entire middle east nuked.

[lostalex]

Saddam Hussein was never our prime minister. We either get involved in every example of a dictatorship in the world, or we get involved in none. Picking and choosing our moral stands doesn't actually make them moral at all.

wrong, there is nothing wrong with taking them on 1 at a time. Where do you get this all or nothing mentality?

[MTVN]

oh plz, the problem is not bush or blair or the wars, the problem is their culture. they have the education level of the average American 8 year old, 80% illeteracy. These are not people we are dealing with, these are brainwashed zombies. brainwashed by Islam.

That's why so much of our (NATO) mission has been about education and building schools and hospitals and democratic institutions. the only way to fight them is to try to educate the people. That's why they target schools!

Tony Blair didn't make these people ignorant and brainwashed, Militant Islam and arab culture did.
the vast majority of deaths in these wars are from suicide bombers, roadsidebombs(IEDS) and the taliban using civilian positions to attack.

They literally position themselves among women and children so that they can use civilian deaths as propaganda afterwards. Don't be dumb enuf to fall for it. Every woman and child killed in this war is by their own design.

you cannot blame Blair for brainwashed islamic militants.

Taleban? Which war are you talking about here?

And your language is just pretty much that of Imperialists 100/200 years ago; these non-whites are too dumb to manage their own affairs, they need us to come and show them what to do, because really we've set such a good example haven't we? It's not like we funded the Taleban when it was the Soviets they were fighting, it's not like we've replaced their rule in Afghanistan, and Saddam's rule in Iraq, with a corrupt government, it's not like we've brought war and devastation to their countries is it? How about you don't be dumb enough to fall for the West = good, Middle east = bad, binary view of the world and think everything we're doing there is out of the goodness of our hearts and strictly for their benefit

And if you think Arabs are too dumb to govern themselves or decide what they want then where have you been the last 2 years? Have you been completely oblivious to people in Tunisia, in Egypt, in Yemen etc. etc. who have been able to rise up against their corrupt governments, some of whom had the backing of the West - remember Mubarak, Hilary Clinton's "family friend"?

[Jesus.]

wrong, there is nothing wrong with taking them on 1 at a time. Where do you get this all or nothing mentality?

That's not what America/UK does though. We've left numerous long standing dictators in place, and unworried.

[lostalex]

Taleban? Which war are you talking about here?

And your language is just pretty much that of Imperialists 100/200 years ago; these non-whites are too dumb to manage their own affairs, they need us to come and show them what to do, because really we've set such a good example haven't we? It's not like we funded the Taleban when it was the Soviets they were fighting, it's not like we've replaced their rule in Afghanistan, and Saddam's rule in Iraq, with a corrupt government, it's not like we've brought war and devastation to their countries is it? How about you don't be dumb enough to fall for the West = good, Middle east = bad, binary view of the world and think everything we're doing there is out of the goodness of our hearts and strictly for their benefit

And if you think Arabs are too dumb to govern themselves or decide what they want then where have you been the last 2 years? Have you been completely oblivious to people in Tunisia, in Egypt, in Yemen etc. etc. who have been able to rise up against their corrupt governments, some of whom had the backing of the West - remember Mubarak, Hilary Clinton's "family friend"?


the educational levels in the arab world are indisputable, has nothing to do with racism (especially considering our troops are of all races, and lead by a black man who is commander in cheif!) The facts are the facts, these are ignorant and uneducated people. You can try to make it a racism issue all you like, that doesn't change the facts that the people in afghanistan have an 8 y/o's educational level.

[King Gizzard]

Second time something like this has happened isn't it? Foam pie-gate and now this..

It's almost like they want it to happen

[MTVN]

That's not what America/UK does though. We've left numerous long standing dictators in place, and unworried.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_of9ue2vob2g/TEGtCHZzI8I/AAAAAAAAMrA/uCntilr1fOw/s1600/BLAIR+GADDAFI.jpg

[lostalex]

That's not what America/UK does though. We've left numerous long standing dictators in place, and unworried.

all dictators are not equal. You have a very black or white mentality. Each country and culture and dictator is unique.

[Jesus.]

over reacted? no. i think we(America) were incredibly restrained. remember that 9/11 was not the first attack, thhey first attacked the World Trade Center in 1993, and we tried a measured response.

And what did we get for our restrained response in 1993 attack on the wtc?? we got 9/11 8 years later.

You cannot say America over-reacted.

We tried diplomacy and small response after the 1993 attack on the WTC, and what we got in response to our restraint was 9/11.

IMO our response to 9/11 was still very restrained. Most Americans would have been happy to see the entire middle east nuked.

I think you massively over-reacted (as did we). 3000 dead on 9/11 haven't been brought back to life because of our invasions, you've lost more people.

The correct approach would have been Obama's policy of planning raids on specific targets, not just full on invasion. It just doesn't make any sense at all.

The fact you say most Americans would be happy to nuke the middle east, just confirms what we already knew about most Americans. If you have a couple of mice in your house, you don't blow your whole house up.......just to be sure.

[MTVN]

the educational levels in the arab world are indisputable, has nothing to do with racism (especially considering our troops are of all races, and lead by a black man who is commander in cheif!) The facts are the facts, these are ignorant and uneducated people. You can try to make it a racism issue all you like, that doesn't change the facts that the people in afghanistan have an 8 y/o's educational level.

And we've improved things for them, by forcing Afghans to choose between the Taleban and the corrupt Karzai government?

[lostalex]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_of9ue2vob2g/TEGtCHZzI8I/AAAAAAAAMrA/uCntilr1fOw/s1600/BLAIR+GADDAFI.jpg

you do realize how hypocritical you seem right? one minute you are complaining about the coalition/NATO invading countries controlled by dictators, and the next minute you are talking about how we should invade all of the other countries controlled by dictators? Ridiculing leaders for posing with dictators when they are trying to make diplomatic peaceful changes??

So which is it? If Hillary Clinton goes to Cuba and hugs a Castro, will you praise her for trying to be diplomatic? or condemn her for supporting a fascist dictatorship?

You seem to pick and choose who you praise and condemn based only on yur own political agenda against the Western leaders.

Aka, anything a western leader does = bad.

[Jesus.]

Another major problem, is that it's obviously a religious issue for fundamentalist Muslims. That needs to change from within, and when we go round bombing the **** out of them, we force them to become more insular, and even less likely to be open to change.

The Islamic world needs to go through an enlightenment period, but we've made it almost impossible in these countries.

[lostalex]

Another major problem, is that it's obviously a religious issue for fundamentalist Muslims. That needs to change from within, and when we go round bombing the **** out of them, we force them to become more insular, and even less likely to be open to change.

The Islamic world needs to go through an enlightenment period, but we've made it almost impossible in these countries.

it's not religious, it's idealogical, just as nazism was idealogical.

[Marc]

Handled well

[MTVN]

you do realize how hypocritical you seem right? one minute you are complaining about the coalition/NATO invading countries controlled by dictators, and the next minute you are talking about how we should invade all of the other countries controlled by dictators? Ridiculing leaders for posing with dictators when they are trying to make diplomatic peaceful changes??

So which is it? If Hillary Clinton goes to Cuba and hugs a Castro, will you praise her for trying to be diplomatic? or condemn her for supporting a fascist dictatorship?

You seem to pick and choose who you praise and condemn based only on yur own political agenda against the Western leaders.

Aka, anything a western leader does = bad.

No I don't want us to invade any countries, just pointing out Western hypocrisy ;)

In fact if you read any of my posts from the Libya conflict I was against NATO intervention

[Jesus.]

it's not religious, it's idealogical, just as nazism was idealogical.

The parallels between Nazism and a religion are there for all to see.

[lostalex]

No I don't want us to invade any countries, just pointing out Western hypocrisy ;)

In fact if you read any of my posts from the Libya conflict I was against NATO intervention

you can be for or against anything you like, it doesn't matter, because you arn't responsible for anyone's wellbeing.

[lostalex]

The parallels between Nazism and a religion are there for all to see.
all religions are just idealogy.

America has already proven successful against other ideologies.... we defeated Nazism and Marxism(communism), we can defeat militant islam as well. The cold war lasted 40 years.

didn't britain once fight a 100 year war? patience is a virtue.

Before:

http://www.startrek.com/legacy_media/images/200303/voy-170-janeway-helps-the-new/320x240.jpg


and After:

http://socket79.webs.com/j7.jpg

[Jesus.]

all religions are just idealogy.

America has already proven successful against other ideologies.... we defeated Nazism and Marxism(communism), we can defeat militant islam as well. The cold war lasted 40 years.

Communism ran out of money (the people from within were a major component for change), and Nazism was was defeated with force. It's impossible to wait out religious fundamentalism. The whole premise is flawed. Every victory for them, becomes a sign from god, every defeat for them becomes a warning from god. You don't change someones mind like that.

The Islamic faith is at the equivalent point in it's history, to 14th century Christians. What changed Christianity, was a changing of ideas, and that's how you change Islam into a relatively harmless religion like Christianity. There are no Christians that are anything like Christ, but it's been watered down. The flow of ideas, is what changes peoples views, not attacks.

[Livia]

all religions are just idealogy.

America has already proven successful against other ideologies.... we defeated Nazism and Marxism(communism), we can defeat militant islam as well. The cold war lasted 40 years.

didn't britain once fight a 100 year war? patience is a virtue.




America wasn't alone in defeating Nazism, despite what Hollywood may try to portray. And when America finally decided to join in the fight in Europe to defeat the nazis, Europe was helping the US defeat the Japanese in the Far East. Just sayin'...

And I fail to see how American can claim any credit for defeating communism.

[joeysteele]

I personally believe that no matter who was the UK Prime Minister at the time,they would have supported the USA in the invasion of Iraq, I do think Tony Blair may have things to answer for, however I don't think the outcome would have been any different no matter who was in power.

Saddam Hussein was a dictator,he did cause the deaths of vast sections of his people however I agree with Jesus H Christ on this issue in the main.
He has said most of what I would have on the subject and I totally agree with his satement as to the moral standard of Western leaders where they are very selective as to where they allow us to get involved in as to Nations with dictatorships who cause misery to their citizens.

As Jesus H Christ commented, either get involved in all those situations or none at all.Stop the double standards.

[Niamh.]

America wasn't alone in defeating Nazism, despite what Hollywood may try to portray. And when America finally decided to join in the fight in Europe to defeat the nazis, Europe was helping the US defeat the Japanese in the Far East. Just sayin'...

And I fail to see how American can claim any credit for defeating communism.

That's not true :nono: Have you ever seen that documentary, Inglorious Bastards? :pipe:

[lostalex]

America wasn't alone in defeating Nazism, despite what Hollywood may try to portray. And when America finally decided to join in the fight in Europe to defeat the nazis, Europe was helping the US defeat the Japanese in the Far East. Just sayin'...

And I fail to see how American can claim any credit for defeating communism.

LMAO @ europe helping America defeat the Japanese., you must be joking right?

and an equal hardy laugh at you not seeing how America defeated communism. If it wasn't for America you'd be speaking Russian right now.

The only reason russia stopped where they did is because of America. We could have scrapped the whole Marshall plan and just allowed you to become another Soviet Republic, you don't know that??? SERIOUSLY?

What are they teaching in british schools these days?

Unlike Russia, America was not planting flags the whole way. every place the russians liberated from the nazi's in ww2, they also planted a giant russian flag and assimilated them into the collective of soviet states. If it wasn't for America you would have suffered the same fate,. you would also have been assimilated into the collective of soviet states. You would be borg.

[MTVN]

If it wasn't for America you'd be speaking Russian right now.


Well I've heard the "you'd be speaking German if it wasn't for us" one, but that we'd be speaking Russian now is news to me

[lostalex]

Well I've heard the "you'd be speaking German if it wasn't for us" one, but that we'd be speaking Russian now is news to me

well, if America had not gotten involved, and we'd left it to the Russian to liberate you and we only focused on the pacific war, yes, you'd be a soviet republic. go ask the polish or the ukranians. I'm sure they would have prefered to have been liberated from the Nazi's by America rather than Russia. Or just ask the east germans about the difference.

[MTVN]

Oh dear.

[lostalex]

Oh dear.

lol, you think england could have defeated not only the NAzi's by yourself, but also the Russians? lol

keep dreaming.

the Russians in the 40's were never interested in LIBERATING anyone, they were only interested in acquiring new states.

[Kizzy]

Alex has a point if it was not for NATO we would have been in troube I feel.

[MTVN]

lol, you think england could have defeated not only the NAzi's by yourself, but also the Russians? lol


Where'd I say anything remotely close to that?

[arista]

Back On Topic:


The man that invaded the court
would have had a press pass.

He has been on Ch4News, before.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/28/article-2151016-1356AF07000005DC-162_634x381.jpg
David Lawley-Wakelin was taken to a central London police station for questioning

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2151016/Youre-war-criminal-Security-probe-protester-bursts-courtroom-Tony-Blair-gives-evidence-Leveson-inquiry.html#ixzz1wAcsZojA

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/28/article-2151016-1355A3B9000005DC-662_634x422.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/28/article-2151016-1355863E000005DC-384_306x423.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/28/article-2151016-1355E53E000005DC-867_306x423.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/28/article-2151016-1354E740000005DC-159_306x459.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/28/article-2151016-13565451000005DC-320_634x356.jpg
He could have had a weapon and killed War Criminal Blair

[Jesus.]

I always wondered why I had this really strong urge to start writing my "R's" backwards.

[BBfanUSA]

I always wondered why I had this really strong urge to start writing my "R's" backwards.

:joker:

actually the real war criminal here is the press imo. If I recall America never went into Iraq until 2003. Surely there had to be something building up rage inside of americans and 9/11 helped it.

It's the press because they used 9/11 to get ratings. That's what all the press cares about The three big stations (CBS, NBC, ABC) and The 24/7 Channels (FOX news, MSNBC, and CNN). They wanted war so they could get ratings and they used 9/11 to start it.

So the press should be on trial over here in America as well, but we don't see it happening anytime soon do we? If there was anyone that would be charged with a war crime it should be Bush and the US congress (At least those who said yes to an declaration of war, which only congress can do, The President can send people into a war zone, but he cannot officially declare war. An example of this is Vietnam I believe)

[Jesus.]

http://i.imgur.com/bFeeb.png

[arista]

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/28/article-2151016-1356AEFF000005DC-613_306x423.jpg
Arrested: David Lawley-Wakelin


What a great man

[arista]

David Lawley-Wakelin has not been charged
he told LBC Radio no one stopped him walking in the rear entrance
he then went into a
Empty Court to get to the Court
Blair was in.

[arista]

David is live on LBC radio now
taking questions on War Criminal Blair.

http://www.lbc.co.uk/

Live Link above

[waterhog]

do you feel sorry for Tony Blair 29.5.12

i am not going to pity,
nor was i going to stare,
because i have the up-most respect,
i feel so sorry for Tony Blair.
it wont get easier,
to many do-gooders have to prove,
when ever Tony is in public,
a Iraqi war protester will lime light remove.
we can continue to debate,
infarct i might set up a camp,
because i realise people will listen,
never will closure stamp.
this is your life "Tony",
Micheal Aspel i am not but i present this plaque,
because no matter how hard you try,
you will always be remembered for the war in Iraqi.


(i am going against the grain - i feel very sorry for tony and i think he was brill - but i am sure millions will disagree with me.)

[InOne]

I can't wait for arista to get hold of this thread

[Kate!]

I can't wait for arista to get hold of this thread

:laugh3:

Oh Joe, you made me nearly choke on my polo mint! lol indeed.

[arista]

http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/showthread.php?t=201949

We have a thread on Blair

Do we need another one?

[Jack_]

Fecking War Criminal Blair
One Eyed Scottish Brown
Feel
sorry For Them
Does Not Compute

[Omah]

As ye sow, so shall ye reap ..... :pipe:

[joeysteele]

No I don't feel sorry for him, I have said a few times though,I believe no matter which party was the UK Govt at that time, that PM, Labour or Conservative would have still fully supported the USA in the plans to invade Iraq and the outcome would have been no different.

Tony Blair was a bit 'inventive' as to the way he won such major support for the invasion though.
He will be hounded for Iraq all his life now, for me though,he will and should be remembered for being a Labour PM who failed badly to deliver the hopes of his supporters and also he in my view,squandered 2 overwhelming overall majorities in his time as PM as to what he could have done. Iraq though will always come up whenever he is mentioned or appears anywhere too.