![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mrphSo there he goes again. The cordite is carried off by the breeze. The dust settles and out of the crater creeps the Prime Minister, beaming his chipmunk grin. He acknowledges the cheers of his back benches, flicks an invisible speck from his irreproachable Paul Smith sleeve and saunters off back to Downing Street.That's the intro to Boris Johnson's column in today's Telegraph. Not my usual choice of paper, but Boris is always worth a look...It is just flipping unbelievable. He is a mixture of Harry Houdini and a greased piglet. He is barely human in his elusiveness. Nailing Blair is like trying to pin jelly to a wall.
For weeks we have been told that his extermination at the hands of Hutton has been as predetermined as the convergence of the Titanic and the iceberg. And now what? The judge has decided that the Prime Minister behaved with complete honour and candour throughout.
Blair, Hoon, Scarlett, the whole lot of them, have been sprayed with more whitewash than a Costa Brava timeshare. Hutton has succumbed to blindness of Nelsonian proportions. As snow-jobs go, this beats the Himalayas.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
Date: 2004-01-29 06:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-29 06:33 am (UTC)Boris is a fun bloke though.... something like a down-market Alan Clarke.
Re:
Date: 2004-01-30 01:35 am (UTC)Hutton's conclusions simply do not stand up to scrutiny - they are quite astonishing. His report will go down in history as one of the worst whitewashes we have ever seen.
I generally hate tories, but Boris is an absolute star.
Re:
Date: 2004-01-30 03:07 am (UTC)As for Boris, he really makes me laugh. His sense of humour is priceless, as when he once voiced fears that "gay law reform may lead to men marrying dogs". What a wit.
Re:
Date: 2004-01-30 03:19 am (UTC)The problem here is that, as is increasingly being acknowledged by expert after expert, the findings simply do not reflect all of the evidence which we all heard a few months back. On some occasions he inexplicably gives the govt the benefit of the doubt in the face of fairly clear evidence of dodgy behaviour, while on others, he simply fails to mention fairly blatant contradictions, problems etc...
Just one example of many - he specifically chastises the BBC for reporting the story based on a single source, but has nothing whatever to say about whether the government was unwise to insert - and to emphasise - the 45 minute claim on the basis of a single source...
No one (I don't think) is suggesting the BBC was not in some ways at fault - but the level of criticism it takes - and the utter lack of criticism of govt - is, as I said, astonishing.
Re:
Date: 2004-01-30 05:09 am (UTC)Paxman memorably summed it up as "Bertie Wooster runs for parliament".
no subject
Date: 2004-01-29 04:37 pm (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-01-30 07:33 am (UTC)49% of the country think it was a whitewash