Blunkett's cunning attack on Short
Blunkett is implying Clare Short is lying about the British bugging the UN Secretary General. Short claims to have seen the transcripts of Kofi Anan's conversations, and Blunket says he hasn't.
It sounds quite damning. But is it? Isn't it possible Blunkett is playing with words here? He's not saying the transcripts don't exist. He's merely saying he hasn't seen them.
And he is of course blind.