Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

if you're lucky, any revelation will be from what she doesn't say

All the MPs are unhappy that Chilcot is delayed. However, it is not up to the government when it is published. There has to be a period of reply to allegations and comments, which is where we are now. It is Chilcot himself who is holding up the process. If Labour had not tried to delay the start for several years, we would be reading it now.

Is Cruella deliberately holding up the paedophile inquiry?

If so, for what reasons?

Who has the dossier now?

If so which pages are being redacted?

Come on Haze, you say you have friends in high places, you should know.

I think the Chilcot report is a complete waste of time, firstly its already been censored as to the detail of information that's going to be publicised anyway. Second is the cost of this report, money well spent I think not. And finally your never going to get a report that states war was the wrong action, the report will just justify why we entered into war with a watered down version of the known facts at the time.

Shortie,

Not so sure.

I think there will be a justified condemnation of "justification" of the Iraqi war.

I think some will be placed on the "Security Forces" for their "opinions" and find Blair's decision making "questionable".

Also, may condemn the post conflict planning by UK and USA which appears minimal and atrocious.

I was against the war, but think Blair like the present government has to much belief in his own ability and judgements (MAD or Deluded).

===============

I would like to see the Falklands war and Belgrano sinking re-examined.

I wonder what the bill has been for the continuing defence of that rocky base has been over the last 35 years

====

Perhaps, it may prevent wars decided by the Whim of the Governing "bodies"!

I will have to watch it, there are 5 "I" in that post.

The report is surely going to heavily criticise the 'intelligence' which Blair used to 'con' everyone into believing that Saddam Hussein had 'weapons of mass destruction' and was also 'imminently about to launch an attack on the west' and so needed 'taking out' asap.

'IYSWIM'

Shortie, agreed. These reports generally take far too long to become public and are a waste of money. However if one of my loved ones had been killed as a result of the war, I would be hoping for some explanations and some closure.

During the last gulf war I was a PCO working for Alenia Marconi, the amount of order book for PMG's as well as Radar systems went sky-high... In some respect wars create jobs and stimulate the economy, bet you can't stick that in the Chilcot report...

Also lets face facts, for a while Saddam was an ally of the UK and USA, where do you think he got his weapons systems from? The Chilcot report won't even scratch the surface to look into the real reasons for war going back decades or why Saddam went from being a friend to a foe...

Page 3 is back in the Sun. It looks like it was a publicity stunt to drop it for a few days.

As we now look back to see the validity of the intelligence and realise we must have been conned rotten, well, it's this, IMHO, which causes us to imagine how there must have been some kind of Blair/Bush Jnr conspiracy.

In other words, it was all Bush Jnr's idea to finish off Saddam for his old man's sake and, to make it look credible, pulled in Blair and the British forces for credibility.

Proving stuff like that must be damn near impossible.

And so the Chilcot Inquiry is a complete waste of time and money. But I guess it has to be done.

The aftermath of the Iraq war has made the British people totally lose its appetite for war altogether. We cannot now believe the evidence for it from any of our politicians.

I think this situation will stay with us for years or maybe even decades and I also wonder if this is what Putin and his advisers have concluded about us too. Thank goodness the oil producers seem to have quitened him down by slashing the price of oil by 50%. The Russian Ruble has crashed and Russia has been quietened down in the Ukraine with 'economic measures'.

Mind you, we haven't heard much about what is happening out there of late - so is that inference correct?

Anyhow, IMHO, the Chilcot Inquiry is a complete waste of time and money.

If the Chilcot report confirms that our troops were sent to war without adequate combat gear who carries the can for that part of the debacle?

Phew! It was a close call for us, guys, with Page 3, eh?

PS. Did I say the Chilcot Inquiry was a waste of time and money?

Miliband blocked Iraq war inquiry again and again, says Cameron... and Labour leader dismisses the delay in two sentences

Labour MPs prevented report being published 'years ago', claims PM

Party's leader Ed Miliband personally voted against inquiry four times 

Issue erupts after it's revealed Chilcot will not report until after election

Former top Labour figures will come under scrutiny when it's published

Ed Miliband delayed the start of the Iraq war inquiry by voting ‘again and again and again’ against it being set up, David Cameron said yesterday.

The Prime Minister said the report’s conclusions would have been published ‘years ago’ had it not been for Labour MPs blocking the plans.

Mr Miliband personally voted against an inquiry on four occasions. The issue erupted in the House of Commons after it emerged that Sir John Chilcot will not report until after the election.

Despite the row dominating news bulletins all day, Mr Miliband skated over the issue at Prime Minister’s Questions – dismissing it in two sentences.

The Labour leader did not even ask Mr Cameron about the issue, saying only that he agreed the report should be ‘published as soon as possible’.

Labour MPs opposed a series of proposals for an inquiry in the Commons until one was ordered by Gordon Brown.

Mr Miliband personally voted against starting an inquiry on four occasions as an MP, first in October 2006, then in June 2007, once more in March 2008 and again in March 2009.

Several former senior Labour figures, including Mr Miliband’s brother David, will come under scrutiny when the report is finally published.

At the start of Prime Minister’s Questions, Mr Miliband said: ‘Let me start by saying, on the Iraq inquiry, that it was set up six years ago and I agree with the Prime Minister that it should be published as soon as possible.’


He then moved swiftly on to the economy. The PM countered, saying the report would have been published ‘years ago’ had Labour MPs voted in favour of setting up the inquiry earlier.

‘So perhaps he could start by recognising his own regret at voting against the establishment of the inquiry,’ he said.

Perhaps he could start by recognising his own regret at voting against the establishment of the inquiry
Prime Minister David Cameron 
Mr Miliband replied: ‘The inquiry was established six years ago, after our combat operations had ended, and frankly, my views on the Iraq war are well known and I want this inquiry to be published.’

Unlike his brother, Ed Miliband was not an MP in 2003 in the run-up to the war. At the time he was at Harvard University in the US.

During his campaign for the Labour leadership he said the invasion was a ‘profound mistake’ and claimed to have opposed it in private.

But according to reports, his brother dismissed this claim, saying that the only candidate for the leadership who could say they were against the war at the time was Diane Abbott.

Hays youve been in power 5 YEARS............use your LOAF.

The Page 3 Girls:

The government does no run the Chilcot enquiry. The only power it had was whether to have the enquiry and when it started. Those choices were solely those of the last Labour government. Since that point, neither the last or present government have had any influence or control over Chilcot. It is later than expected because it was not allowed to start by the previous government.

Haze,

But the Tory Elite, some of your friends have been in power nearly 5 years, for crew who thought they could walk on water they are drowning.

Who is holding up the Paedophile inquiry!

What was the responsibility of Maggie for the files being "buried"?

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Is Ed Miliband an unlucky general?


A slew of positive economic data gives Ed Miliband an upwards struggle

Napoleon, it is said, wanted lucky generals.

Now Ed Miliband’s troops wonder whether their commander breaks too many mirrors.

For four and a half years, the Labour leader has set out the case to rewire the British economy to make average earners better off.

Oppositions pray for bad news, and a run of positive economic data, the Tories say, has holed their case for radical change below the waterline.

David Cameron at Prime Minister’s Question time yesterday:

"The fact of the matter is that he told us there would be no growth, and we have had growth; he told us there would be no jobs, and we have had jobs; he told us there would be a cost of living crisis, and we have got inflation at 0.5%."
He added:
"He is wrong about everything."
Mr Miliband replied:
"The Prime Minister thinks everything is hunky-dory. Did he even notice this week the report that came out that said that half of all families where one person is in full-time work cannot make ends meet at the end of the month?"
"You can work hard and play by the rules, but in Cameron’s Britain you still cannot pay the bills—that is the reality."
It has seemed that as the economic tide turns, in the Commons at least Ed Miliband has been forced to fight on an ever-shrinking battlefield.
Return of the dole queue
Back in October 2010, weeks after being elected as leader and as Osborne set out the cuts to come, Ed Miliband warned of mass unemployment due to a “too far, too fast” programme of cuts. He told the CBI:
“I do fear that the path the government is pursuing is a gamble with growth and jobs.
They have a programme which will lead to the disappearance of a million private and public sector jobs but no credible plan to replace them.
And their refusal to accept that a deficit reduction plan has to be sensitive to changing economic circumstances needlessly makes the British economy a hostage to fortune.
Time will tell whether they turn out to be right.”
Alas, Miliband – along with many eminent economists - was not.
Job numbers are up 1.75 million since the election. The surprise of the downturn was how employers chose to cut pay over job numbers, and then how quickly employment rose as the economy picked up. The unemployment rate stands at 5.8 per cent, down from 8 per cent in 2010.
Ed Balls dismissed as “complete fantasty” the idea that the 400,000 job losses planned could be absorbed by the private sector. He was not alone.
Since then, new private sector jobs have outweighed state losses by five to one.
No growth
From 2010 until mid 013, Labour’s line of attack was obvious: month after month of anaemic expansion. The Tories, Labour told a diminished Osborne, had “choked off growth and risk causing permanent damage to our economy.”
The IMF agreed. Downgrading forecasts, its chief economist said the Chancellor was “playing with fire” with a course of cuts.
Then, in spring 2013, the economy roared back to life. Latest annualised figures put growth at 2.4 per cent.
Last week, the IMF’s head said the British recover was “exactly the sort of result” she would like to see with the UK “leading in a very eloquent and convincing way in the European Union”.
A cost of living crisis
As growth kicked in, Labour defly pivoted onto the so-called “cost of living crisis”.
For six years, from mid 2008, inflation outstripped wages almost every month. Pay packets got smaller compared to bills every week. The post-war world of ever-increasing living standards had slipped horribly into reverse.
Some argued it was the inevitable consequence of a major recession. Miliband argued it was the product of the disappearance of high-quality jobs and a system stacked against the middle classes.
Is it all over?
In September 2011 the consumer price index stood at 5.2 per cent. Now, off tumbling oil prices and a supermarket price war, it is at 0.5 per cent – troubling for economists, but a major boost to family finances. Pay has now outstripped prices for two months running for the first time since 2010.
An energy market rampant
Ed Miliband pulled the rug from under the Tories with a pledge to freeze energy prices for two years if he won the General Election. The policy was presented as a bill in an ice cub.
Cameron denounced the price fix as “Marxist” – and then scrambled to match it. The polling was through the roof – as was the reaction from focus groups.
Oil prices have since collapsed, and British Gas has cut prices by five per cent. Others are expected to follow suit. But they warn that the risk of future interventions is discouraging steeper cuts.
Team Miliband are not surprised: the most cuts are pre-election “gaming”; the warnings of black-outs and high prices self-interested sabre rattling.
But the Tories claim Labour’s “freeze” would have locked prices at record highs – a claim Labour deny, pointing to the small print of the policy.
Where to fight now?
As the recovery steams ahead, and the Tories stick doggedly to the mantra of the “long term economic plan”, Ed Miliband has shifted his pitch onto the “1930s-style” cuts to come and the impact this will have on the NHS.
Despite Tory pledges to ringfence funding, the treasured health service cannot exist in its current form unless Miliband wins in May, the argument goes. A slew of bad health data helps.
Does the flow of good news kill the case for Ed?
Labour would tell you no, for two reasons.
One, because after the best part of a decade of job losses and squeeze, cynical voters simply do not feel better off, and do not know about, believe in or recognise the charts of the Office for National Statistics. The debates goes on whether the new jobs are "real", or low-paid, casual labour.
And even if they did, it would not matter, because a month or year of data does not invalidate a project on a far grander scale: to give the state a far greater role in “ordering” the economy, to change the way industry behaves and the job prospects of workers for thirty or forty decades.
The price freeze was, they argue, essentially a device to jolt voters in realising that the rules of the market could be redrawn to their benefit. £30 off a bill is not - to use a Miliband refrain - the "big change we need in our country".
And yet: a general election is little over a hundred days away. Oppositions who form governments need momentum, a dominance over the field of debate - and luck.

Soddem and G'Daffy both made fatal errors in trying to dump the $ as the oil price standard.....Putin is heading along the same road to dumping the dolla.

See any connections?