OK. So it's perfectly plausible that knowledge (and people) from Iranian backed Hezbollah has found it's way into the Iraqi resistance.

But that's not surprising. This is the bazaar of violence. It's a market. And markets co-ordinate the actions of people at a distance. They move goods and services and ideas from one part of the world to another.

Globalization means you shouldn't be surprised to find influences from anywhere turning up in Iraq today.

So here's the question. Why is this being escalated up the political agenda? BBC NEWS | Iran 'role' in Iraq bombs - Blair

Why is Tony Blair making an issue out of something so obviously likely to happen?

The only plausible explanation is that he is trying to make political capital out of it. He is trying to put pressure on Iran. Or to build up the "case against Iran" for referal to the UN Security Council. And given recent history, we can only presume that that's intended to pave the way for some kind of punitive action against Iran : either economic (although let's face it, if the US and Europe try to boycott buying oil from Iran, the Chinese and Indians will be laughing like drains); or military.

There's no way a conventional war against Iran is possible. So we're looking at punitive air raids or first nuclear strike. Either way, things are getting fucking scary.

There are a couple of other outside possibilities I suppose. But for them to be true Blair (and his puppetmasters) would have to be spectacularly sneaky or spectacularly dumb. Oh ...

One possibility : maybe they're trying to discredit the UN security council for once and for all. Perhaps, as Iraq goes wrong, people will start to feel that the UN was wise to try to resist. So Blair and Bush try to force yet another showdown in the UN (where, at least China, probably won't authorize any sort of punishment of Iran) and everyone will focus on the unworkability of the whole UN system.

At the other end of the scale. Maybe Blair just doesn't realize that he has no credibility. He might just genuinely believe that if Iranian ideas found their way into Iraq, then there must be official Iranian state backing. And so he assumes that if he gets up and makes this statement, everyone will go "Tut tut! Those wicked Iranians, huh? Something must be done." And then, maybe, the Iranians will feel a bit shamed, and decide to pull back. When in fact, the natural reaction of any sentient creature listening to Blair is, "Yeah, right. You think we're gonna be fooled this time?" And the Iranians are like. "Weeeelll, if you really wanna make something of it ... if you really want us to get involved ..."

Oh. And it's been said often. But it stands repeating. In the most sober, least pissed-off, shrill or argumentative voice possible.

When Blair says : "There is no justification for Iran or any other country interfering in Iraq You know, he sounds like he's starting from the assumption that what's going on in Iraq at the moment is some kind of home-grown dynamic. That the Iraqis are quietly getting on with their business, and obviously it would be wrong for any other countries to come and stick their nose in and affect political and economic structure of Iraq.

We can't tell, of course, whether Blair says that because he's trying to confuse us, or because he's confused himself. But either way, this man is not fit to run a country.