Bianca Jagger, among some other low-tier British celebrities, are against the war.

I’ll give you a minute to let the shock subside.

One is left to wonder why Bianca feels she needs to make her voice heard on this particular issue . Perhaps it’s because it has become so fashionable of late. Or maybe she couldn’t find any more Latin American Marxist scum to lend her credibility to.


War without UN backing would set a “terrible precedent” because it would ignore the international rule of law and the United Nations charter, she said .


Just to make sure everyone is clear what Bianca’s argumentative stance is here: abiding by the specific, mandatory tenets of the Security Council’s resolution 1441 regarding disarmament would ignore international law and the United Nations charter. In other words, we have to violate the UN charter in order to save it!

Too bad she missed Vietnam. She would’ve had a grand old time .

She went on:


It was all very well to say the war was for the benefit of Iraq but “what will be the human toll that the Iraqis have to pay”.


It’s also just splendid and never wearying to moan about oil and imperialism until the cows leave home and don’t come back just to get a moment’s peace from your unceasing chants, but the question I venture Jagger has yet to ask herself is what will be the human toll that the Iraqis and the rest of the world will have to pay if we leave Saddam in power?


Mr Loach also argued that a war would be about oil rather than anything to do with combating terror. 

He pointed to the Cheney report which he said clearly showed that oil imports to the US had to rise 60% by 2020 because of increased consumption .

“Where’s that oil to come from? The reserves in Iraq are central to their strategy and that’s why suddenly they’ve discovered they have to deal with Saddam Hussein – they want his oil.”


Considering that Saddam has been just begging to sell the West as much oil as he can pump out of the ground, America sure is going about this GETALLTHEOIL! plan of theirs in a queerish sort of way, aren’t they? Granted, I’m no econ student, but it sees to me that if you want something like, real bad, and there’s someone who wants to sell it to you like, real badder, then one of the things you’re most likely to not do is make the rule that they’re not allowed to sell it to anyone.

Or, at the very least, you’d make that rule anyway (cuz it makes you feel like a big man) and immediately proceed to try to secretly work around it in every way possible like, say, France . But then, we’ve never been very sophisticated, and I guess our endemic simplisme keeps us from self-righteously declaring one thing and then so blatantly doing the opposite whenever we feel like it.


Mr Redgrave said it was not so much a case of whether the war was going to happen, it was more a case of when and how. 

Both men were already war criminals because sanctions against Iraq had claimed the life of “half a million” children.

“If they proceed they will be more odious than the generals and politicians who led people into the slaughterhouse of the first world war. They’ll be damned forever.”


Well, at least his sense of proportion remains safely within the standard limits for actors discussing politics- that is to say, about 17 orders of magnitude beyond what any sane person would have. One might at least applaud him for refraining from saying Bush would go down in history as “a gazillion times worse than Hitler.”

Hey, you have to take what you can get when dealing with celebs.

last update : 23-5-2018

Comments are closed.