22

BBC April 9 2003: "Tonight [Blair] stands a larger man"


Andrew Marr gave this piece to camera for BBC News outside 10 Downing Street April 9 2003, the day Baghdad was “liberated” by US troops. We all know now the hollowness of this triumphalists nonsense. We know about the atrocities committed by the “coalition of the willing” against Iraqi civilians, the indiscriminate usage of depleted uranium, the wanton and deliberate destruction of infrastructure. Above all we know about the web of lies that underpinned it all.
If the BBC and other outlets had been doing their job we might have found out more about the latter before it was too late. Lives would have been saved. The geopolitics of the Middle East might have been saved from chaos. But instead of objective reporting and investigation the BBC gave us Marr genuflecting and drooling and telling us Blair was “right” and revealed as a “larger man.”
Is it acceptable to see the same outlets – and even many of the same names – shilling just as brazenly today for the “humanitarian” invasion of Syria?


can you spare $1.00 a month to support independent media

Unlike the Guardian we are NOT funded by Bill & Melinda Gates, or any other NGO or government. So a few coins in our jar to help us keep going are always appreciated.

Our Bitcoin JTR code is: 1JR1whUa3G24wXpDyqMKpieckMGGW2u2VX

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
22 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
reinertorheit
reinertorheit
Jul 9, 2016 10:10 AM

This stinking neocon clown Marr has always been a warmongering turd. I’m glad he fell ill, and a it’s a pity he recovered.

Richard Le Sarcophage
Richard Le Sarcophage
Jul 11, 2016 5:55 AM
Reply to  reinertorheit

‘Only the good die young’.

BlueyBlogger
BlueyBlogger
Jul 9, 2016 1:33 AM

Make NO mistake about the war in Iraq that we just HAD to take part in, whether we agreed or not. The war, and all other wars, are set up way before there is mention of the same war, and to that end there can be prosecution for many things including Collusion, Perjury, Ailing, and many other charges.
There are quite a few groups finally talking of War Crimes charges for the Canadian Prime Minister, the Australian Prime Minister, the British Prime Minister, and George W Bush (including his father).
Problem is, those in charge of charging people are so corrupt, and paying dues to those who are to be charged, nothing will occur unless they can prove the Facts in a Federal Postal Court.
Considering that the entire world is kept at a Second Grade reading level, who else you gonna call? Ghostbusters?

Brian Harry, Australia
Brian Harry, Australia
Jul 9, 2016 6:31 AM
Reply to  BlueyBlogger

So true, and it’s only going to get worse if the “Hilderbeast” gets elected President. She’s already said she “wants to take America’s relationship with Israel to the next level” and given there’s only Lebanon and Iran left on the list of “7 countries in 5 years” you don’t have to work out what her Presidency will bring.

Seamus Padraig
Seamus Padraig
Jul 9, 2016 3:43 PM

So true. The Russians and the Iranians had better hurry up and finish the job in Syria before Hellary is sworn in, or else there’ll be hell to pay.

reinertorheit
reinertorheit
Jul 10, 2016 1:31 PM
Reply to  BlueyBlogger

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.
If Britain wasn’t run by a cabal of public-school scrotes and BBC numpty scum like Marr, it would have been entirely feasible not to have joined Bush’s war – and indeed, to have vehemently opposed it.
France, for example, opposed this shitty war. Let’s recall how leading yankee–doodle shitwipe Ronald Dumbsfeld opened his crappy, pig-ignorant American piehole on the subject:
https://youtu.be/E0GnRJEPXn4

David
David
Jul 8, 2016 10:02 PM

My satirical take on our communal Blair trauma – http://www.thewrongsheriff.com

Catte
Catte
Jul 9, 2016 12:57 AM
Reply to  David

Love it David – thanks!

binra
binra
Jul 8, 2016 3:08 PM

Assets act with the power that is supporting their act – but have to align with its narrative dictate or have that support disappear. The power that can make or break you is not always easy to question – as one operates from the sense of self that thinks and perceives as if its experience is self-evidently (but actually self necessarily) true. The more invested the harder to change – and the more attacked – the more justified it feels in defence. But true authority does not come from external power or protection while passing off as independently minded.It simply gives true witness.

mohandeer
mohandeer
Jul 8, 2016 2:49 PM

Reblogged this on Worldtruth and commented:
Yes Blair’s ego was much larger but the man himself in the eyes of the British people was diminished and it saw the beginning of the end of his reign.

Laix Khan
Laix Khan
Jul 8, 2016 11:39 AM

I doubt Marr or anyone else puppet mastering the BBC gives a toss.
We don’t indite our political criminals or media they barons they are a class above us all . Vasilating about Chilcot with make no difference. Iraq is a nightmare as are other ME countries! Job done by the rampant Neo- cons!

truthaholics
truthaholics
Jul 8, 2016 10:35 AM

Chilcot – like his four whitewashing predecessors fails to go far enough – by failing to address the 3 burning questions adequately: 1/ Did Tony Blair lie in order to make the case for war? 2/ Was the war legal? 3/ Did the war — as Tony Blair promised it would — make Britain a safer place? It speaks for itself when the pouting poodle who sexed up a dodgy intelligence dossier still claims he’d do the same all over again. For the benefit of those inhabiting a parallel universe: Prosecute and impeach the WAR CRIMINAL!
The Chilcot Report – an Illegal War? https://truthaholics.wordpress.com/2016/07/08/the-chilcot-report-an-illegal-war/ via @truthrazor

truthaholics
truthaholics
Jul 8, 2016 9:39 AM

Reblogged this on | truthaholics and commented:
“BBC April 9 2003: “Tonight [Blair] stands a larger man”
Andrew Marr gave this piece to camera for BBC News outside 10 Downing Street April 9 2003, the day Baghdad was “liberated” by US troops. We all know now the hollowness of this triumphalists nonsense. We know about the atrocities committed by the “coalition of the willing” against Iraqi civilians, the indiscriminate usage of depleted uranium, the wanton and deliberate destruction of infrastructure. Above all we know about the web of lies that underpinned it all.
If the BBC and other outlets had been doing their job we might have found out more about the latter before it was too late. Lives would have been saved. The geopolitics of the Middle East might have been saved from chaos. But instead of objective reporting and investigation the BBC gave us Marr genuflecting and drooling and telling us Blair was “right” and revealed as a “larger man.”
Is it acceptable to see the same outlets – and even many of the same names – shilling just as brazenly today for the “humanitarian” invasion of Syria?”

Willem
Willem
Jul 8, 2016 7:09 AM

Don’t know if you ever saw the interview of Chomsky by Andrew Marr in 1996? Here, Chomsky explains to Marr that Marr is a BBC journalist, not necessarily because he is self-censoring, but because if he would believe something different (than the party line of the BBC), he would not be a journalist for the BBC.
In the same interview, Chomsky explains to Marr that in the 1990-91 Gulf War, the American government was afraid that Saddam Hussein would come to senses and leave Kuwait through economic sanctions and not through war. Which Iraq wanted to do within a month after Kuwait’s invasion. This is a well-documented fact (Chomsky gives references in the interview). But that the media largely ignored this fact because the US was desperately seeking for a war.
So Marr could have known better in 2003 when he said that Blair was “right” and revealed him as a “larger man” after Blair started the killing of Iraqi civilians by bombs and guns. But then, Marr would not have been reporting for the BBC what he was reporting in 2003 if he would have taken Chomsky’s comments in 1996 to heart. Just wonder if that ever leads to a thought in Marr’s head that resembles regret?
Here is the video plus transcript:
http://scratchindog.blogspot.nl/2015/07/transcript-of-interview-between-noam.html?m=1

Willem
Willem
Jul 13, 2016 6:06 PM
Reply to  Willem

Here is the answer to the question if Marr regrets what he said in abovementioned video. The answer is No, as Marr tweeted recently (see here https://mobile.twitter.com/AndrewMarr9/status/751115849356959745).
According to Marr, he was only a bit stupid at the time. That’s all…

rtj1211
rtj1211
Jul 8, 2016 5:19 AM

The rules of being in the Establishment media are simple:
Do whatever the powerbrokers tell you.
Show how ‘independent’ and ‘principled’ you are by publicly pillory of anti-establishment actors who may tell far more truth than the Establishment does.
Be brutal in defending your own position in the media Establishment from anyone who might show you up to be a self-serving shill.
You won’t get independent media coverage so long as the only people who can afford to subsidise mainstream media operations are billionaires and governments, will you?

Brian Harry, Australia
Brian Harry, Australia
Jul 8, 2016 3:31 AM

Even at the time, this was just “grovelling drivel. There was plenty of evidence at the time that it was just bollox, but nothing was allowed to stop the ensuing carnage. The President of the USA was a confirmed idiot as well, and he was given far more credibility than he deserved. We need a new “Nuremburg” trial for Bush, Blair, and Australia’s snivelling P.M. at the time ‘little johnny howard’………….

rtj1211
rtj1211
Jul 8, 2016 5:17 AM

I think Dick Cheney was far more a prime mover than Bush. Why let the architect get away with things and string up his useful idiots??

Brian Harry, Australia
Brian Harry, Australia
Jul 8, 2016 5:32 AM
Reply to  rtj1211

Yes, of course. Cheney was the puppet master, while Bush was the puppet…….

Richard Le Sarcophage
Richard Le Sarcophage
Jul 12, 2016 2:20 AM

Continuity Of Government-the real US power centre, dominated by Cheney and Rumsfeld for years. Bush was a figure-head, that’s all.

Brian Harry, Australia
Brian Harry, Australia
Jul 12, 2016 3:11 AM

I can’t argue with that…………..So much for being “The most powerful man on Earth”. It’s all just a show…………..’Reality television’, live…….

joekano76
joekano76
Jul 8, 2016 3:06 AM

Reblogged this on TheFlippinTruth and commented:
I’ve read elsewhere that Marr is MI5/6. Who would argue the opposite after watching this.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/false-agent-fooled-mi6-reports-070743926.html