I'll be AMAZED if he doesn't when he becomes aware of the lying
nonsense there about Bush from Garnier:

"President Bush told the American people why he was leading his
country to war, and whether you agree with him or not, no one can
accuse him of saying one thing in 2002, something different in early
2003 and something else in 2004. Examine our Prime Minister's record
over the same period and ask yourself if he can claim to have been as
consistent or as candid with Parliament, the Parliamentary Labour
party and the public as the President was in the United States."

Or his supporters/colleagues do. This gives them the kind of
ammunition I spoke of by giving the 3 original 100% pro-war Tories
there equal prominence multiplied a thousand times.

I strongly suspect that Paul Marsden may also withdraw and may be
Jenny Tonge. That would leave the effort a 100% Party political, as
the only major party supporters there would then be all Tory.

I don't think Kilfoyle has an E-Mail, but I'm thinking of winging
something off to the others.

Is this a joke?

I'll tell you what I think might be happening now within the Labour
Party:

A bunch of Labour MPs, led, I believe by Martin Salter, are running
an initiative (at least they talked about it) to help the Democrats
to get Bush dumped. It's hard to believe (contrary to a lot of
evidence you might say) that Blair isn't wavering, at least a bit. I
posit the possibility that he has done a deal with the crowd aiming
to help dump Bush: He announces the withdrawal of British Forces
(possibly & hopefully combined with his resignation - then the War
Criminal goes off and lives an undeserved quiet life) shortly before
the US election: and the Labour Party Conference times well with this.

This would also help patch up things with the UN, after Blair/Bush
spied on them. Blair must be aware of the icy reception Bush got the
other day at the UN; I swear when the a member of the audience
yawned, a little light came on.

Of any occurrence, that would be the one most damaging to Bush's
election prospects, even against the dismally ineffective John Kerry.
(Cynically it's at the price of the lives of British Armed personnel
who will die between now and the time of withdrawal, and Iraqis who
die as a direct consequence of that). Better than nothing: if there's
anything to it, but it would still be yet another nauseating example
of Government done in secret. The especially (murderous) cynicism in
this would be that by delaying until closer to the US election,
perhaps at the Conference, then some of those Services personnel who
refuse to go AWOL or will serve under any circumstances (and that's
how the military tries to condition them - pretty effectively too)
are going to get killed or maimed. Then ... poof! ... British
involvement finished; and they end up with the bum's rush of being
the last few victims of Blair's folly. Like the unluckiest guy to die
in combat in WW II - the last one.