Immoral calculus
Gordon Brown was in the House of Commons yesterday polishing the turd of New Labour’s Iraq campaign. It has to be said, what with his visit to the place this week, that he’s managing to buff that stool with some success. Judging by the reaction to his smudging of history this week from the media and his cunning idea of a placeholder garrison in Basra so a public inquiry can never be held, New Labour may yet escape a full examination of its crimes.
Still, some haven’t forgotten and never will. How about this exchange from the debate yesterday:
John Barrett (Edinburgh, West) (LD): The Prime Minister has never detailed what the Government believe to be the number of civilian deaths in Iraq. Much work has been done on that, and the lower estimates are around 100,000. If the Prime Minister cannot give details today of his estimate, will he confirm that the Government will do some work on it, so that we can know the answer to the question?
The Prime Minister: It is not a matter for the British Government: it is for the Iraqi Government to examine what has happened in their country. Only they will be in the position to obtain the full information. I cannot see how from here or from just Basra the British Government could conduct such a survey.
I think we can take from that the Prime Minister really doesn’t want to know. And why would he? Even if he’s a fifth as human as his ‘friends’ and ’sources’ tell us, the true enormity of what he wrote the cheques for would surely help to crush even the most hardened sociopath.
But Gordon’s answer is just insulting though isn’t it? Were you expecting anything else? You have to admire his management of the low expectations many have of him. ‘It is for the Iraqi Government to examine what has happened in their country.’ How very fucking generous of you, Gordon. You’ll be telling us next that Iraq is a sovereign nation.
In other words, it was New Labour’s job just to deliver the cluster bombs, depleted uranium, missiles and bombs. What happens after that? Well, you know. Like a postman, I suppose. You can’t expect to be able hold the postman to account if he delivers a parcel containing a toy that chokes your kid, can you?
And how about ‘I cannot see how from here or from just Basra the British Government could conduct such a survey’? He’s just spent a week telling us how fantastic things are in Iraq, hasn’t he? The surveys published by the Lancet were conducted under far more dangerous conditions. The government and its courtiers rubbished those surveys (despite what the Ministry of Defence’s chief scientific adviser said).
So why not take the opportunity of ‘improved’ conditions in Iraq to rub the Lancet’s nose in it? Gordon would be able to stand up and crow, ‘look everybody, we only killed x thousand men, women and children!’ Or, if he wanted to spin it more sympathetically, he could use a government-sponsored survey to demonstrate his fabled humanity and courage we’ve been told so much about.
Like I said, he really doesn’t want to know.
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 9:15am under Crime and punishment, Iraq, New Labour
| Related posts... • ReliefWeb: Iraq health update – Summer 2005 • Basra: testing to destruction • Iraqi employees: one down |
• Permalink • Trackback • Subscribe |
|
|
|
• 3 Comments |

The Prime Minister can’t tell us how many people have died in Iraq but he can tell us how many have died in Zimbabwe or the Sudan.
Remember to mention this the next time someone mentions “Iraq” and “humanitarian intervention” in the same sentence.
I guess we (US) are not the only ones with idiots it office. How does that happen? I found this post by searching for “Depleted Uranium” weapons. Does the British Military use them in Iraq too? How do the people of England feel about turning Iraq into a radioactive waste site? Has it has any ill effects on the health of the British Troops?Our Military and Government says no ill health effects. Hell they will probably turn it into an ice cream flavor!!
I am trying to get some media coverage on this.