not into the sunset for blair
CANAUK Director William J Spring in a statement headed Don't Let Him Walk off into the Sunset has called for links between groups and individuals endeavouring to bring the ancien regime to account. "An entirely new political force - not necessarily a party - needs to emerge, untainted by the errors and moral turpitude of the Blair regime...But now Blair's gone, probably by now, or very soon he will be beyond the jurisdiction. But he will return to UK from time to time. At that point he should be confronted by the full array of legal instruments." The statement is pasted below and on the blog. The statement can be reproduced in whole or part in any media, subject only to proper acknowledgement.
Don't Let Him Walk off into the Sunset
On the day of Mr Blair's resignation I e mailed a "Note to MPs."
I reproduce it at the end of this summary, under the Sillars story, which is taken from
http://www.holyrood.com/content/view/539/23/
Since writing the Note to MPs we have seen the last spin/deception, (the creation of a 'political consensus' that Blair was a great leader, flawed merely by 'events' ) finally unravel.
In standing to applaud Blair and urging his MPs to do likewise "Dripping Wet Dave" proved to the UK public there is only one party - the party of capitalism and globalism.
In effect a one party state operates as evidenced e.g. in the parachuting in to a Cabinet post of a senior Tory, and the appointment - who cd believe it possible - of an ex CBI Director General to a Labour (?) Government.
The consensual applause (in violation of Parliamentary convention) also demonstrated how impossible it is to look to the Tories when seeking to hold the Blair regime to account.
I don't know what the Lib Dems did - but the Scots and Welsh Nationalists did not participate in this charade.
So we, the English people, have to look to the Scots and Welsh nationalists for principled opposition to the Government.
A former Scots Nationalist MP, Jim Sillars, has now given a dossier (approximately 11,000 words long) to the Lord Advocate in Edinburgh indicating why Blair cd be brought before the Scottish Courts. See the report below.
As for the Lib Dems at least Charles Kennedy tried to oppose the Govt's foreign policy.
Ming Campbell opposes the Iraq war, but undercuts these efforts by his support for the war in Afghanistan.
Lynne Featherstone MP informs me that the reason for this is that the war in Afghanistan is legal. Also Ming Campbell wants to maintain the credibility of NATO, which is why the children die.
There might have been a UN resolution providing "cover" - (although now Jim Addington is dead it is going to be more difficult for me to verify the situation, for he knew everything about UN resolutions, and he wd always answer any questions I put to him with his usual amicability.)
But that is hardly the point.
The basic problem is the UN Security Council, as dominated by the US.
This unipolar domination has led the Security Council (SC) into a series of follies including resolution 1441, which came near to violating the UN Charter, and contained a fallacy, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.
That resolution shd be annulled and expunged from the record of the United Nations.
For a long time Britain and the USA have been assiduously seeking to destroy the UN in making the SC a creature of their will.
Jim Addington of Action for UN Renewal whose death, at the age of 82 I heard of last week, was one of the (relatively few) clear thinkers re international relations in British politics, in consequence of which he never made it to the Cabinet table, (nor was he an MP @ any time as far as I know.)
But it was Jim who drummed on about this great danger, of allowing the SC to override the UN General Assembly, to arrogate to itself more and more powers, de facto increasing the powers of Washington
If there is an international order it is summed up in the UN Charter. This the UK used to support, or said it did, but under the bellicose rule of Blair resulted in a disastrous series of wars the legacy of which is that hundreds of millions of Muslims are now eager to tear English and Scotsmen and women to shreds.
In the Blair - Brown change over, Parliament instead of facing up to these enormities went through an Asiatic charade by which no one shd lose face and everyone must bow and scrape.
But at least in Japanese corporate culture the top man does accept responsibility when things go wrong.
What MPs should have done, some time ago, rather than applaud Blair and give him a way out, they shd have revived the old Junker tradition, or its political equivalent, and ushered him into a vacant room, left him with a glass of whisky and a loaded revolver and allowed him to do the honourable thing.
The question is: do we let Blair to walk off into the sunset without pursuit?
One day after the unedifying Commons spectacle the picture palace collapsed.
All the attempts to hide reality and evade the brutal truth about the Blair legacy came unstuck.
Prior to the general applause given in the Commons, there was a standing ovation @ the Cabinet table given by Blair's ministers.
While he was receiving this round of applause a UK soldier - I think from the 4th Rifles - was dying of injuries he'd received in Basra, and after the second round of applause in the Commons, 3 UK soldiers died in a roadside bomb, and I believe another soldier was seriously injured, and then came the attempted attacks on London, and the Glasgow incident.
His legacy has been one of war, and as wars are never one sided, and there is always an enemy, his legacy has been to create that enemy.
Blairs last war earlier this year was on Africa - authorising US war planes to attack Somalian villages from US bases on the UK colony of Diego Garcia, an air bombardment combined with a surrogate invasion which provoked the biggest refugee crisis in Africa yet.
But Somalia doesn't get a mention in the media, only Darfur.
But at the beginning there was Serbia, the Racak massacre, the rationale for 'humanitarian' war.
"Spring has come early to the Balkans" said Madeleine Albright hearing from its organiser William Walker
of the success of his staged massacre. Walker did his CIA internship directing US sponsored death squads in Central America and then applied his skills to the Balkans.
After Serbia, there was Afghanistan and Sierra Leone, (which was nothing to do about diamonds, it was done to stop Africans chopping off each other arms). But nothing similar has been done about Zimbabwe.
There was another war in Macedonia, followed by Iraq, and the Israeli siege of Gaza, and last year's war in the Lebanon, all of these supported by Blair and in the case of Lebanon he had prior knowledge that an incident involving the supposed kidnap of an Israeli soldier wd be staged to justify the Israeli invasion and famously tried to obstruct a cease fire.
The entire foreign policy of the Blair Government was predicated on lies.
Profumo told one lie to Parliament, got found out and then went down to the East End for the rest of his life.
Then there is Blair's endorsement of torture.
Macshane denies that UK air space and UK airports have been used for 'extraordinary rendition.'
In practical terms 'extraordinary rendition' means sending someone to Uzbekistan to be boiled in a pot.
But who can believe Macshane's denials?
We can never win a war on terror when we ourselves descend to the level of the barbarians.
But now Blair's gone, probably by now, or very soon he will be beyond the jurisdiction.
But he will return to UK from time to time.
At that point he should be confronted by the full array of legal instruments. The fact he has resigned his seat does not preclude his impeachment by Parliament. There are too numerous breaches of domestic law, such as The Geneva Convention Act, for which he can be held accountable, such as the massacre by the SAS of unarmed prisoners at Mazar i Sharif.
All individuals and groups not prepared to indemnify Blair, as Ford indemnified Nixon, and Bush Scooter Liddy, should now establish links and develop a liaison, first on the internet.
We need to exchange blog spots and web site addresses.
This could lead on to a meeting at some stage. But some money will be needed to get this up and running.
A general theme might be "Blair for the Hague" as summing up the intent of holding him accountable.
But there is a problem. It was not only Blair.
It's the entire political class who have let this country down, they are all Guilty Men who have brought Britain to the brink of ruin, and involvement in endless war.
The Halifaxes and Simons of today are IDS, and Michael Ancram, Jack Straw, Hoon, and Brown himself.
The ancien regime is implicated in its collectivity in the ongoing tragedy and even if they say sorry as a short term expedient by now it will be regarded as a sham.
An entirely new political force - not necessarily a party - needs to emerge, untainted by the errors and moral turpitude of the Blair regime.
The fourth party within the Labour Party, people like Corbyn, Bob Marshall Andrews, Glenda Jackson should co-operate across the spectrum with Tories such as Douglas Hogg, Dominic Grieve.
Lib Dems, or some of them such as Norman Baker MP, courageous enough to finger Blair for the Murder of Dr Kelly, need a role in this.
Things are bad and are going to get worse.
And the Churches should also say more.
Why is it we have had to rely for the voice of morality in international relations on Pinter and Pilger, neither of them prominent Churchmen.
Tthe Churches need to be involved to promote dialogue with our Muslim friends.
I am opposed to Wahabbi style style intolerance and against the persecution of Christians by whoever. Let a thousand flowers bloom. But I can understand the abhorrence of many Muslims confronted with the degenerate state of UK society.
Why are our boys dying in Afghanistan? A hundred and fifty years ago they died for the Empire."Play up, play up and play the game."
Now they die for 'democracy', for reconstruction projects, for Rupert Murdoch, and his page three girls, for Big Brother, and hybrid babies, a right dreamed up by demented scientists at the University of Newcastle, which Blair, (the potential Catholic convert), in virtually his last legislative act included in a bill due to be placed before the Commons in the autumn.
On balance I'd rather live under the Taliban.
A society spiritually deprived as we are inevitably invites destruction.
A Committee for Public Safety needs to be formed of individuals who will put this country first.
"Speak for England" Greenwood was told in the May debate in 1940.
So far the only people appearing to put England first are the Nats, seemingly out of the loop of corruption otherwise known as the old boy network which emasculates the main parties and renders them ridiculous in the eyes of the public.
Suggestions on how this debate can be forwarded are welcome.
My blog spot is www.canauk-politics-religion.blogspot.com
I received this from Jan Oberg. This is Robert Fisk at his best.
"How could Blair possibly get this job? by Robert Fisk
I remain overwhelmed that this vain, deceitful man, this proven liar, a trumped-up lawyer who has the blood of thousands of Arab men, women and children on his hands is really contemplating being "our" Middle East envoy. http://www.counterpunch.org/fisk06232007.html
Here are some of my answers to how on earth Blair could get that job:
1. Literally no one among the top leaders of the international "community" has any professional training or personal understanding of conflict-resolution, reconciliation and peace - so, take what you have. The appointment of Blair is revealing of the intellectual and moral poverty of leaders is mind-boggling
2. Western leaders who have violated international law, who could be indicted for war crimes and who have consistently lied to the world either keep their positions or get promoted - e.g. Blair, Clinton, Albright, Fogh Rasmussen, Javier Solana, Wesley Clark, Bush...
3. Ban Ki-moon, the new Secretary-General of the UN, one of the "Quartet", regrettably has accepted (or been forced to accept) a non-convicted war criminal as his envoy - meaning he lacks civil courage.
4. The West no longer has a sense of history - the UK, like the US, being among the world's least fit countries to mediate in the Middle East
5. The West, including Russia of course, by definition always does right and might is right.
6. The West cares only about the elites.
Diplomats and commentators all over the place agree that Blair is a guy government leaders will meet while he is loathed by citizens throughout the Arab world and Iran. But who cares about that?
7. Spin, charisma, deceit and the marketing of a policy today is much more important than knowledge, decency, ethics and the quality content of policy - and mainstream media reflect the power that be.
8. The West has no sensitivity, no sense of shame and no ability to deeply empathize with anybody outside its own countries; otherwise it would not humiliate the feelings of millions by making non-convicted war criminal Blair its envoy. It would rather have arrested him.
9. Blair not only "did" Iraq, he also "did" Serbia-Kosovo.
Remember that he stood by that NATO crime by explaining that he had not had all the facts and had not read all the books but "I thought we had a good case."
That sort of argument is enough to get away with it!So I regret to tell you, Mr Ban-Ki moon, Mr. Bush, Mr. Putin and Mr Solana - that as one among "we the peoples of the United Nations" I want you to know that Tony Blair is not my envoy.
I wonder only about this: through which international - globalized - democratic procedures was this man offered this terribly important job?
And in competition with whom was his qualifications judged to be the best for all of us and for peace in the Middle East - apart from his charisma, of course.
Try Blair as war criminal
Former MP Jim Sillars has called for outgoing Prime Minister Tony Blair to be tried as a war criminal under Scots law for his actions over the Iraq War. Invoking precedents from the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals held after WWII, Sillars has sent a 10,000 word submission to Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini calling on her to charge Blair under Scots law.Sillars said: "Blair can, in my opinion, be tried in a Scottish court; and the evidence of his conspiracy through deception, lies and misinformation, and his intention of committing the illegal act of regime change through aggressive war, is quite clear."Western nations, with Blair as Britain’s voice, are great preachers to the rest of the world about the worth of democracy and the rule of law. It stains democracy and mocks the law when a Prime Minister can, deliberately; set out to wage aggressive war knowing full well that he was committing a criminal act in international law."In his letter to Angiolini, Sillars identifies possible witnesses like Air Marshall Sir Jock Stirrup who he says may be in a position to support his claim that Blair engaged in an illegal conspiracy to invade Iraq.Sillars also says that his political background should not colour the nature of the complaint: "Although I have a political past, this complaint as set out in the enclosed document is based on legal principles and case law, and I shall be obliged if you will examine it in that light, and in that light alone. "You will find that the research is sound, and that the case against Tony Blair is a strong one. You, of course, will be able to dig wider and deeper than I can as an ordinary citizen, and I am sure that when you do you will reach the same conclusion as contained in the complaint."Sillars represented both Labour and the SNP at Westminster and is married to Independent MSP Margo MacDonald.A spokesperson for the Crown Office said: "We can confirm receipt of correspondence from Jim Sillars. This will be considered and a response will be issued in due course."
Note to MPs
Nothing has indicated more your profound disconnection with the UK population than the collective applause given to Tony Blair as he made his last exit from the Chamber today.
One applauds people who are honourable.
Mr Blair is not, and was not, and never could be regarded as honourable.
But this note does not concern him.
It is Parliament which today sank to its lowest level in the public estimation, as reminiscent of the stage-managed meetings of the Reichstag in the 1930's, or the applause given by MPs to Chamberlain when he announced he was going to meet Hitler at Munich.
We deplore the moral and intellectual decline of Parliament.
"Men are we, and must grieve when even the shade
Of that which once was great has pass'd away."
The Emperor (Blair) never did have any clothes. His pretence to statesmanship was always a sham, and the appointment of this war mongerer as a so called Peace Envoy is both ludicrous and obscene.
William Spring Director CANA UK
CANAUK was established @ Highgate Magistrates Court London in May 1999, when William Spring representing "Christians Against Nato Aggression" sought summonses against Tony Blair (and other NATO leaders) under the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act, alleging that he and they "conspired to cause explosions and to murder people in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia "(FRY) and further "conspired to cause a projectile to descend upon a railway bridge in the FRY, and upon an engine on that said bridge."
Don't Let Him Walk off into the Sunset
On the day of Mr Blair's resignation I e mailed a "Note to MPs."
I reproduce it at the end of this summary, under the Sillars story, which is taken from
http://www.holyrood.com/content/view/539/23/
Since writing the Note to MPs we have seen the last spin/deception, (the creation of a 'political consensus' that Blair was a great leader, flawed merely by 'events' ) finally unravel.
In standing to applaud Blair and urging his MPs to do likewise "Dripping Wet Dave" proved to the UK public there is only one party - the party of capitalism and globalism.
In effect a one party state operates as evidenced e.g. in the parachuting in to a Cabinet post of a senior Tory, and the appointment - who cd believe it possible - of an ex CBI Director General to a Labour (?) Government.
The consensual applause (in violation of Parliamentary convention) also demonstrated how impossible it is to look to the Tories when seeking to hold the Blair regime to account.
I don't know what the Lib Dems did - but the Scots and Welsh Nationalists did not participate in this charade.
So we, the English people, have to look to the Scots and Welsh nationalists for principled opposition to the Government.
A former Scots Nationalist MP, Jim Sillars, has now given a dossier (approximately 11,000 words long) to the Lord Advocate in Edinburgh indicating why Blair cd be brought before the Scottish Courts. See the report below.
As for the Lib Dems at least Charles Kennedy tried to oppose the Govt's foreign policy.
Ming Campbell opposes the Iraq war, but undercuts these efforts by his support for the war in Afghanistan.
Lynne Featherstone MP informs me that the reason for this is that the war in Afghanistan is legal. Also Ming Campbell wants to maintain the credibility of NATO, which is why the children die.
There might have been a UN resolution providing "cover" - (although now Jim Addington is dead it is going to be more difficult for me to verify the situation, for he knew everything about UN resolutions, and he wd always answer any questions I put to him with his usual amicability.)
But that is hardly the point.
The basic problem is the UN Security Council, as dominated by the US.
This unipolar domination has led the Security Council (SC) into a series of follies including resolution 1441, which came near to violating the UN Charter, and contained a fallacy, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.
That resolution shd be annulled and expunged from the record of the United Nations.
For a long time Britain and the USA have been assiduously seeking to destroy the UN in making the SC a creature of their will.
Jim Addington of Action for UN Renewal whose death, at the age of 82 I heard of last week, was one of the (relatively few) clear thinkers re international relations in British politics, in consequence of which he never made it to the Cabinet table, (nor was he an MP @ any time as far as I know.)
But it was Jim who drummed on about this great danger, of allowing the SC to override the UN General Assembly, to arrogate to itself more and more powers, de facto increasing the powers of Washington
If there is an international order it is summed up in the UN Charter. This the UK used to support, or said it did, but under the bellicose rule of Blair resulted in a disastrous series of wars the legacy of which is that hundreds of millions of Muslims are now eager to tear English and Scotsmen and women to shreds.
In the Blair - Brown change over, Parliament instead of facing up to these enormities went through an Asiatic charade by which no one shd lose face and everyone must bow and scrape.
But at least in Japanese corporate culture the top man does accept responsibility when things go wrong.
What MPs should have done, some time ago, rather than applaud Blair and give him a way out, they shd have revived the old Junker tradition, or its political equivalent, and ushered him into a vacant room, left him with a glass of whisky and a loaded revolver and allowed him to do the honourable thing.
The question is: do we let Blair to walk off into the sunset without pursuit?
One day after the unedifying Commons spectacle the picture palace collapsed.
All the attempts to hide reality and evade the brutal truth about the Blair legacy came unstuck.
Prior to the general applause given in the Commons, there was a standing ovation @ the Cabinet table given by Blair's ministers.
While he was receiving this round of applause a UK soldier - I think from the 4th Rifles - was dying of injuries he'd received in Basra, and after the second round of applause in the Commons, 3 UK soldiers died in a roadside bomb, and I believe another soldier was seriously injured, and then came the attempted attacks on London, and the Glasgow incident.
His legacy has been one of war, and as wars are never one sided, and there is always an enemy, his legacy has been to create that enemy.
Blairs last war earlier this year was on Africa - authorising US war planes to attack Somalian villages from US bases on the UK colony of Diego Garcia, an air bombardment combined with a surrogate invasion which provoked the biggest refugee crisis in Africa yet.
But Somalia doesn't get a mention in the media, only Darfur.
But at the beginning there was Serbia, the Racak massacre, the rationale for 'humanitarian' war.
"Spring has come early to the Balkans" said Madeleine Albright hearing from its organiser William Walker
of the success of his staged massacre. Walker did his CIA internship directing US sponsored death squads in Central America and then applied his skills to the Balkans.
After Serbia, there was Afghanistan and Sierra Leone, (which was nothing to do about diamonds, it was done to stop Africans chopping off each other arms). But nothing similar has been done about Zimbabwe.
There was another war in Macedonia, followed by Iraq, and the Israeli siege of Gaza, and last year's war in the Lebanon, all of these supported by Blair and in the case of Lebanon he had prior knowledge that an incident involving the supposed kidnap of an Israeli soldier wd be staged to justify the Israeli invasion and famously tried to obstruct a cease fire.
The entire foreign policy of the Blair Government was predicated on lies.
Profumo told one lie to Parliament, got found out and then went down to the East End for the rest of his life.
Then there is Blair's endorsement of torture.
Macshane denies that UK air space and UK airports have been used for 'extraordinary rendition.'
In practical terms 'extraordinary rendition' means sending someone to Uzbekistan to be boiled in a pot.
But who can believe Macshane's denials?
We can never win a war on terror when we ourselves descend to the level of the barbarians.
But now Blair's gone, probably by now, or very soon he will be beyond the jurisdiction.
But he will return to UK from time to time.
At that point he should be confronted by the full array of legal instruments. The fact he has resigned his seat does not preclude his impeachment by Parliament. There are too numerous breaches of domestic law, such as The Geneva Convention Act, for which he can be held accountable, such as the massacre by the SAS of unarmed prisoners at Mazar i Sharif.
All individuals and groups not prepared to indemnify Blair, as Ford indemnified Nixon, and Bush Scooter Liddy, should now establish links and develop a liaison, first on the internet.
We need to exchange blog spots and web site addresses.
This could lead on to a meeting at some stage. But some money will be needed to get this up and running.
A general theme might be "Blair for the Hague" as summing up the intent of holding him accountable.
But there is a problem. It was not only Blair.
It's the entire political class who have let this country down, they are all Guilty Men who have brought Britain to the brink of ruin, and involvement in endless war.
The Halifaxes and Simons of today are IDS, and Michael Ancram, Jack Straw, Hoon, and Brown himself.
The ancien regime is implicated in its collectivity in the ongoing tragedy and even if they say sorry as a short term expedient by now it will be regarded as a sham.
An entirely new political force - not necessarily a party - needs to emerge, untainted by the errors and moral turpitude of the Blair regime.
The fourth party within the Labour Party, people like Corbyn, Bob Marshall Andrews, Glenda Jackson should co-operate across the spectrum with Tories such as Douglas Hogg, Dominic Grieve.
Lib Dems, or some of them such as Norman Baker MP, courageous enough to finger Blair for the Murder of Dr Kelly, need a role in this.
Things are bad and are going to get worse.
And the Churches should also say more.
Why is it we have had to rely for the voice of morality in international relations on Pinter and Pilger, neither of them prominent Churchmen.
Tthe Churches need to be involved to promote dialogue with our Muslim friends.
I am opposed to Wahabbi style style intolerance and against the persecution of Christians by whoever. Let a thousand flowers bloom. But I can understand the abhorrence of many Muslims confronted with the degenerate state of UK society.
Why are our boys dying in Afghanistan? A hundred and fifty years ago they died for the Empire."Play up, play up and play the game."
Now they die for 'democracy', for reconstruction projects, for Rupert Murdoch, and his page three girls, for Big Brother, and hybrid babies, a right dreamed up by demented scientists at the University of Newcastle, which Blair, (the potential Catholic convert), in virtually his last legislative act included in a bill due to be placed before the Commons in the autumn.
On balance I'd rather live under the Taliban.
A society spiritually deprived as we are inevitably invites destruction.
A Committee for Public Safety needs to be formed of individuals who will put this country first.
"Speak for England" Greenwood was told in the May debate in 1940.
So far the only people appearing to put England first are the Nats, seemingly out of the loop of corruption otherwise known as the old boy network which emasculates the main parties and renders them ridiculous in the eyes of the public.
Suggestions on how this debate can be forwarded are welcome.
My blog spot is www.canauk-politics-religion.blogspot.com
I received this from Jan Oberg. This is Robert Fisk at his best.
"How could Blair possibly get this job? by Robert Fisk
I remain overwhelmed that this vain, deceitful man, this proven liar, a trumped-up lawyer who has the blood of thousands of Arab men, women and children on his hands is really contemplating being "our" Middle East envoy. http://www.counterpunch.org/fisk06232007.html
Here are some of my answers to how on earth Blair could get that job:
1. Literally no one among the top leaders of the international "community" has any professional training or personal understanding of conflict-resolution, reconciliation and peace - so, take what you have. The appointment of Blair is revealing of the intellectual and moral poverty of leaders is mind-boggling
2. Western leaders who have violated international law, who could be indicted for war crimes and who have consistently lied to the world either keep their positions or get promoted - e.g. Blair, Clinton, Albright, Fogh Rasmussen, Javier Solana, Wesley Clark, Bush...
3. Ban Ki-moon, the new Secretary-General of the UN, one of the "Quartet", regrettably has accepted (or been forced to accept) a non-convicted war criminal as his envoy - meaning he lacks civil courage.
4. The West no longer has a sense of history - the UK, like the US, being among the world's least fit countries to mediate in the Middle East
5. The West, including Russia of course, by definition always does right and might is right.
6. The West cares only about the elites.
Diplomats and commentators all over the place agree that Blair is a guy government leaders will meet while he is loathed by citizens throughout the Arab world and Iran. But who cares about that?
7. Spin, charisma, deceit and the marketing of a policy today is much more important than knowledge, decency, ethics and the quality content of policy - and mainstream media reflect the power that be.
8. The West has no sensitivity, no sense of shame and no ability to deeply empathize with anybody outside its own countries; otherwise it would not humiliate the feelings of millions by making non-convicted war criminal Blair its envoy. It would rather have arrested him.
9. Blair not only "did" Iraq, he also "did" Serbia-Kosovo.
Remember that he stood by that NATO crime by explaining that he had not had all the facts and had not read all the books but "I thought we had a good case."
That sort of argument is enough to get away with it!So I regret to tell you, Mr Ban-Ki moon, Mr. Bush, Mr. Putin and Mr Solana - that as one among "we the peoples of the United Nations" I want you to know that Tony Blair is not my envoy.
I wonder only about this: through which international - globalized - democratic procedures was this man offered this terribly important job?
And in competition with whom was his qualifications judged to be the best for all of us and for peace in the Middle East - apart from his charisma, of course.
Try Blair as war criminal
Former MP Jim Sillars has called for outgoing Prime Minister Tony Blair to be tried as a war criminal under Scots law for his actions over the Iraq War. Invoking precedents from the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals held after WWII, Sillars has sent a 10,000 word submission to Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini calling on her to charge Blair under Scots law.Sillars said: "Blair can, in my opinion, be tried in a Scottish court; and the evidence of his conspiracy through deception, lies and misinformation, and his intention of committing the illegal act of regime change through aggressive war, is quite clear."Western nations, with Blair as Britain’s voice, are great preachers to the rest of the world about the worth of democracy and the rule of law. It stains democracy and mocks the law when a Prime Minister can, deliberately; set out to wage aggressive war knowing full well that he was committing a criminal act in international law."In his letter to Angiolini, Sillars identifies possible witnesses like Air Marshall Sir Jock Stirrup who he says may be in a position to support his claim that Blair engaged in an illegal conspiracy to invade Iraq.Sillars also says that his political background should not colour the nature of the complaint: "Although I have a political past, this complaint as set out in the enclosed document is based on legal principles and case law, and I shall be obliged if you will examine it in that light, and in that light alone. "You will find that the research is sound, and that the case against Tony Blair is a strong one. You, of course, will be able to dig wider and deeper than I can as an ordinary citizen, and I am sure that when you do you will reach the same conclusion as contained in the complaint."Sillars represented both Labour and the SNP at Westminster and is married to Independent MSP Margo MacDonald.A spokesperson for the Crown Office said: "We can confirm receipt of correspondence from Jim Sillars. This will be considered and a response will be issued in due course."
Note to MPs
Nothing has indicated more your profound disconnection with the UK population than the collective applause given to Tony Blair as he made his last exit from the Chamber today.
One applauds people who are honourable.
Mr Blair is not, and was not, and never could be regarded as honourable.
But this note does not concern him.
It is Parliament which today sank to its lowest level in the public estimation, as reminiscent of the stage-managed meetings of the Reichstag in the 1930's, or the applause given by MPs to Chamberlain when he announced he was going to meet Hitler at Munich.
We deplore the moral and intellectual decline of Parliament.
"Men are we, and must grieve when even the shade
Of that which once was great has pass'd away."
The Emperor (Blair) never did have any clothes. His pretence to statesmanship was always a sham, and the appointment of this war mongerer as a so called Peace Envoy is both ludicrous and obscene.
William Spring Director CANA UK
CANAUK was established @ Highgate Magistrates Court London in May 1999, when William Spring representing "Christians Against Nato Aggression" sought summonses against Tony Blair (and other NATO leaders) under the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act, alleging that he and they "conspired to cause explosions and to murder people in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia "(FRY) and further "conspired to cause a projectile to descend upon a railway bridge in the FRY, and upon an engine on that said bridge."
posted by William Spring at 3:31 PM
0 comments
