One of the incentives he had to lie was 2,500 pounds per month he was receiving from the BND, but I don't think this is the primary reason.  What are the chances that he was complete oblivious to his own actions?  Could he not see how maybe his lies would be used to justify a war? An interesting thing to consider though, he knew that the BND thought he was a liar, so why not keep feeding them lies if they continue to pay you? 

I thought this was funny:

'Powell has previously expressed regret about the role he unwittingly played in passing on false information to the UN, saying it had put a blot on his career."

Like he's going to walk into a job interview for regional director of a department store or something and they're going to look across a desk and say "well I see from your resume here, you mistakenly caused the deaths of tens of thousands of people, the destruction of billions worth of property, and the ongoing theft of billions from hard working people in many countries",  "I am sorry you are not going to be suitable for the position you've applied for, we may however be able to fit you into an entry level position in our customer complaint department at a slightly reduced salary, when could you start?"

Tony Blair has said that whether or not Saddam had WMDs he'd of ordered the troops into Iraq

Wow, Sophia.

And Weed, I loved your comment about the resume! Hilarious! I've been revisiting Spooner's "No Authority" thanks to Mises Audio, and it strikes me how Spooner had these frauds so pegged back in the mid 19th Century. Bogus to the core!

I’ll add that for the Bush administration Iraq was about oil & serving the interests of the military industrial complex, however for Blair it was truly about spreading freedom, democracy & all that bullshit.

In the late 90s it was Blair who pressurized Clinton to get NATO to take more offensive action against Serbia, in fact if Blair had had his way they’d of been NATO troops marching into Belgrade & not just the air strikes there were which in the process accidently bombed a red cross centre & the Chinese embassy.

Blair likes to believe that the military action against Serbia brought down the regime of Slobodan Milosevic, when in fact Slobodan Milosevic was ousted by the Serbian when he was caught fixing an election sometime after the NATO air strikes.

Neocons love to tell you that they believe in spreading freedom & toppling despicable regimes, when in fact it’s really about imperialism & thieving resources. Thing about Blair is that he truly believes that the use of military force to topple repugnant regimes cn bring about good & what’s more he propagates this as if he’s on some damn mission from God.

More then NATO bombing Serbia, it should have been Sierra Leone which should of set alarm bells off as to what was going to come in Iraq.

In 2000, in the wake of a coup in Sierra Leone, British troops were sent in to evacuate British nationals, but commanding officer decided to emceed his orders & involved British troops & a mercenary force in reinstalling the democratically elected government (which the coup had ousted). The commanding officer should of faced a court marshal but Blair liked his inactive.

I remember at the time Blair was asked about the military intervention in Sierra Leone & his response was he wasn’t sure what all the fuss was about as military invention had successfully re-installed democracy. I’ve reached the conclusion that if Sierra Leone hadn’t been a success in Blair’s mind then he’d might of taken a different approach when it came to Iraq.

Thanks Gard.  Yeah I used to buy into all this business about spreading freedom and justice via the state.  One thing I find a little disconcerting is the common assertions that military action is needed in the middle east to prevent this or that economic calamity.  The "we have to" statements.  We actually had a serious congressional candidate come to speak at a tea party meeting and when asked about issues on the middle east he stated that "we'll tell them if they ever threaten to cut off our oil supply we'll just come and take it".

This person, just a step away from control over our lives and property.  If only a little slicker and a slightly friendlier face and right through to lawmaker status.  Even the staunchest conservative types became very reflective after hearing that.  Now if we can only explain that a system is possible where you could withdraw your support from such a person free of any binding resulting from how your neighbors vote.