I WONDER if the readers of the Evening News have noticed the changes in Tony Blair's justification for supporting George Bush.

First, it was a war to rid Iraq of weapons of mass destruction in case they fell into the hands of terrorists.

This became untenable when Hans Blix could not find any of these weapons and criticised Colin Powell's so-called evidence to the UN.

The USA is adamant that he has weapons of mass destruction. They should know - the US sold them to him to be used against Iran. That is why they stole 8,000 pages

of Saddam's submission to the UN. The finger pointed at them.

Then Blair changed tack and tried to tell us that there was definitely a link between Saddam and al Qaida and the evidence would come out.

When no credible evidence was forthcoming, he again has to change his argument.

When nearly a million of his people took to the streets in protest against war he now tells us we are wrong and it is now a moral crusade and that Saddam has killed millions of his people so he must be toppled.

He disregards the fact that, after the Gulf War, the USA and the UK encouraged the Kurds in the North and the Shi'ites in the South to rise against Saddam and then walked out on them leaving them to the mercies of a brutal

dictator.

No one doubts that the ruler of Iraq is an evil man, but he must be replaced by the people of Iraq themselves, not by the USA with UK backing.

T A JAMES,

Drakes Broughton,

Pershore.