Home | Community | Message Board


MRCA Tyroler Gluckspilze
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Impeach Blair
    #3051449 - 08/26/04 02:14 AM (12 years, 3 months ago)

Now for the politics of last resort - impeach Tony Blair

Having duped us into war, the prime minister must be held to account

Adam Price
Thursday August 26, 2004
The Guardian

New Labour, new politics - that was the promise. In Blair's own words in his first speech as leader to the Labour party conference: "It means being open. It means telling it like it is. Let's be honest. Straight. Those most in need of hope deserve the truth."

Now, almost a decade later, his words sound like self-parody. And yet there remains a certain resonance about them. Truth is the foundation of democracy. Without truth, there can be no trust, and without trust, politics loses its very legitimacy. And that is the tragedy of what has befallen us all in the last three years of this premiership - alongside the personal tragedies of the 64 British service personnel and 13,000 Iraqis who have paid the highest price for what has become the cruellest of deceptions.

Faced with this charge of having duped us into war, the prime minister responds with a certain injured innocence: "Are people questioning my integrity? Are they saying I lied?" Of course, professional communicators such as the prime minister almost never tell lies. For the most part it's perfectly easy to mislead the public without resorting to that. As Robin Cook wrote in his diary, Blair was "far too clever" for that. Rather than allege there was a real link between Saddam and Bin Laden "he deliberately crafted a suggestive phrase designed to create the impression that British troops were going to Iraq to fight a threat from al-Qaida".

There is more than one way not to tell the truth: half-truths, omissions and deliberate ambiguities can be just as effective as crude lies if the mission is to mislead. All this would still be in the realm of conjecture, of course, if it had not been for the death of David Kelly and Bush's decision to have his own inquiry. Without these unforeseen events we would never have had access to the information revealed through the Butler and Hutton inquiries.

But we do. We now know what Blair knew, and when he knew it, and the contrast with his public statements at the time, which are set out in the report, A Case To Answer, by Dan Plesch and Glen Rangwala, published today. It's on the basis of that report that I am prepared to state - unprotected by parliamentary privilege, unfettered by the rules of parliamentary language and without equivocation - that the prime minister did not tell the truth. Instead he exaggerated, distorted, suppressed and manipulated the information for political ends. This was an organised deception to win over a sceptical parliament and public to the military action he had long ago promised his ally Mr Bush.

The evidence for Blair's duplicity is overwhelming. He claimed in early 2002 that Iraq had "stockpiles of major amounts of chemical and biological weapons" while the assessment of the joint intelligence committee at the time was that Iraq "may have hidden small quantities of agents and weapons". He told the TUC in September 2002 that Saddam "had enough chemical and biological weapons remaining to devastate the entire Gulf region", while the intelligence assessment was that "Saddam has not succeeded in seriously threatening his neighbours".

Blair displayed the most despicable cynicism of all when he warned that "it is a matter of time, unless we act and take a stand before terrorism and weapons of mass destruction come together", even though the government was later forced to admit to the Butler inquiry that "the JIC assessed that any collapse of the Iraqi regime would increase the risk of chemical and biological warfare technology or agents finding their way into the hands of terrorists, and that the prime minister was aware of this". He knew the nightmare scenario he painted would be more, not less, likely if we invaded Iraq, yet he gave the opposite impression to translate anxiety into support for the war.

If he was guilty of mismanagement, miscalculation or mere mistakes then the proper place to hold him to account would be the ballot box. Deliberate misrepresentation, however, is what marks this prime minister out. When Peter Mandelson caused "incorrect information" to be given to the house, and Beverley Hughes admitted giving a "misleading impression", they resigned in accordance with the ministerial code, which states: "Ministers who knowingly mislead parliament will be expected to offer their resignation to the prime minister". Unfortunately, the code is silent on what to do with a miscreant prime minister.

His refusal to resign in the face of such evidence is unprecedented. There are strong indications, detailed in the report, that he made a secret agreement with President Bush which is illegal under constitutional law. Yet there are to be no further enquiries, no further comment from the prime minister, and no hope of ever seeing the attorney general's full advice. A motion of no confidence would simply divide the house on party lines and fail to focus on the actions of Blair. And, as John Baron MP recently discovered, accusing another member of misleading the house is deemed "unparliamentary".

Accountability is the lifeblood of democracy. Why should the public bother getting involved in politics if ministers can lead us into war on a false prospectus and not even utter a single word of apology? So what remedy do parliament and people have in these desperate circumstances? Historically, impeachment has been used by parliament against individuals to punish "high crimes and misdemeanours".

One MP is all it takes to make the accusation of high crimes and misdemeanours against a public official for an impeachment process to begin. Once an MP has presented his or her evidence of misconduct to the Commons in a debate, and if a majority of elected members agree there is a case to answer, a committee of MPs is established to draw up articles of impeachment, which will list each charge individually. The case goes before the Lords.

Three centuries ago the Commons called impeachment "the chief institution for the preservation of the government". It has been a key weapon in the long struggle of parliament against the abuse of executive power. It has been revived before, after long periods of disuse, when the executive's hold on power-without-responsibility seemed every bit as total as today.

Today a number of MPs, including myself, are declaring our intention to bring a Commons' motion of impeachment against the prime minister in relation to the invasion of Iraq. This is the first time in more than 150 years that such a motion has been brought against a minister of the crown, and it is clearly not an undertaking we enter into lightly. We do it with regret, but also with resolve. For our first duty is to the people we represent, who feel they were misled, whose trust was betrayed, who have been placed in harm's way by the irresponsible actions of this prime minister. It is in their name that we impeach him. It is in their name, and with all the authority vested in us, that we implore him now to go.

? Adam Price is Plaid Cymru MP for Carmarthen East and Dinefwr


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineDivided_Sky
Ten ThousandThings

Registered: 11/02/03
Posts: 3,171
Loc: The Shining Void
Last seen: 8 years, 6 months
Re: Impeach Blair [Re: Xlea321]
    #3051489 - 08/26/04 02:24 AM (12 years, 3 months ago)

If I am not mistaken the Hutton Inquiry showed that Blair did not knowingly make any false or misleading claims except the 45 min WMD one.

I wish Tony Blair was our president.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,733
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 4 months, 2 days
Re: Impeach Blair [Re: Divided_Sky]
    #3051933 - 08/26/04 05:02 AM (12 years, 3 months ago)

If Im not mistaken Hutton was handpicked to carry out the "inquiry" and many of his "findings" are highly questionable. I suppose these sort of things appease the gullible though.


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 33,778
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Impeach Blair [Re: GazzBut]
    #3052041 - 08/26/04 05:57 AM (12 years, 3 months ago)

And there are few findings the inquiry could have made that would satisfy those with their minds already made up.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,733
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 4 months, 2 days
Re: Impeach Blair [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #3052096 - 08/26/04 06:49 AM (12 years, 3 months ago)

Irrelevant. The fact remains that the report has been widely criticised based on its contents relation to realiry.


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 33,778
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Impeach Blair [Re: GazzBut]
    #3053946 - 08/26/04 04:57 PM (12 years, 3 months ago)

No more irrelevant than "I suppose these sort of things appease the gullible though".


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineZahid
Stranger
Registered: 01/21/02
Posts: 4,779
Last seen: 12 years, 2 months
Re: Impeach Blair [Re: Xlea321]
    #3054013 - 08/26/04 05:11 PM (12 years, 3 months ago)

Blair has enough opposition to deal with.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinedeafpanda
Stranger
Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 984
Loc: Inguland
Last seen: 5 years, 1 month
Re: Impeach Blair [Re: Zahid]
    #3054384 - 08/26/04 06:57 PM (12 years, 3 months ago)

He'll get a third term though, the bastard.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleCJay
Dark Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 02/02/04
Posts: 931
Loc: Riding a bassline
Re: Impeach Blair [Re: Divided_Sky]
    #3057032 - 08/27/04 08:10 AM (12 years, 3 months ago)

"Blair did not knowingly make any false or misleading claims except the 45 min WMD one."

That in itself was a pretty big one....look what it did for the War campaign

But yes, he ain't quite Bush! hehehehehehehheheheheh

Fuckin' cunnin, lyin, manipulative, crony-club, muthafucker and an excellent orator to boot.

Shit he's an exemplary politician !


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,733
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 4 months, 2 days
Re: Impeach Blair [Re: Divided_Sky]
    #3057178 - 08/27/04 10:10 AM (12 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

If I am not mistaken the Hutton Inquiry showed that Blair did not knowingly make any false or misleading claims except the 45 min WMD one.

I wish Tony Blair was our president.




Of course you are aware that Hutton is a Blairite and his report has been roundly criticised by many people on both sides of the political divide in the UK.


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineEchoVortex
(hard) member
Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 859
Last seen: 8 years, 2 months
Re: Impeach Blair [Re: Xlea321]
    #3057504 - 08/27/04 12:07 PM (12 years, 3 months ago)

I find it refreshing that UK liberals are so hard on Blair, a LABOUR prime minister, for having betrayed their principles. If only there were more Republicans in the US who had that kind of integrity vis-a-vis Bush.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Impeach Blair [Re: EchoVortex]
    #3058634 - 08/27/04 04:50 PM (12 years, 3 months ago)

Labour politicians seem to be realising the Labour party leadership has been hijacked by a handful of tories that call themselves "new labour". Seeing Blair siding with such a dangerous lunatic far-right President has been a wake up call to them.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinest0nedphucker
Rogue State
Male
Registered: 04/17/03
Posts: 1,047
Loc: Wales (yes it is a countr...
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
Re: Impeach Blair [Re: Xlea321]
    #3061133 - 08/28/04 06:46 AM (12 years, 3 months ago)

This campaign is nothing more than political oppurtunism by a little known Plaid Cymru MP.

Impeachment has been judged obselete and rightly so. This is hardly suprising considering the last time impeachment was used was in 1806 regarding Warren Hastings, Governor-General of India between 1789 and 1795. I'm quite sure that 90% of the population were unaware we could even impeach our officials.

Add to that the fact that the impeachment would have to be passed through the House of Commons. With Labour holding 413 seats out of a possible 659 seats, this prospect is laughable. Personally I think we have more chance of George Galloway becoming PM.  :lol:


I sure reading it put a big smile on your face though...

*Bush, Blair, CIA How many kids have you killed today?
*Rinse throughly
*Repeat as necessary

Quote:

Labour politicians seem to be realising the Labour party leadership has been hijacked by a handful of tories that call themselves "new labour".




'New Labour' is a lot closer to the center  than 'Labour' (Thank god) but it is by no means Conservative.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Impeach Blair [Re: st0nedphucker]
    #3061319 - 08/28/04 09:52 AM (12 years, 3 months ago)

I sure reading it put a big smile on your face though...

Nope, I'm afraid I can't find much to smile about to do with Blair and Iraq. Those thousands of butchered people and kids with their arms blown off tend to take the humour out of it a little.

Bush, Blair, CIA How many kids have you killed today?

A US military spokesman says the soldiers motioned the vehicle to stop but their signals were ignored. However, according to the Washington Post, Captain Ronny Johnson, who was in charge of the checkpoint, blamed his own troops for ignoring orders to fire a warning shot.

"You just fucking killed a family because you didn't fire a warning shot soon enough!", he reportedly yelled at them.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/dailybriefing/story/0,12965,927233,00.html

'New Labour' is a lot closer to the center than 'Labour' (Thank god) but it is by no means Conservative.

It certainly is on Iraq.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Blair Urges U.N. to Consider Action On Iran daimyo 427 4 01/11/06 11:31 AM
by Seuss
* Three out of five say Blair lied Xlea321 286 0 09/30/03 01:45 AM
by Xlea321
* The Impeachment of Bush.
( 1 2 3 4 ... 9 10 all )
THE KRAT BARON
9,812 185 08/06/05 11:39 AM
by Los_Pepes
* European Parliament Endorses EU Constitution heidegger 358 1 01/14/05 07:19 PM
by Alan Stone
* Blair Projected to Win Third Term Today Polls Show. lonestar2004 594 7 05/09/05 09:30 AM
by uno
* Blair's "Special" Relationship st0nedphucker 458 2 05/21/04 12:06 AM
by Evolving
* Blair impeachment over Iraq urged Alex213 570 4 01/10/06 05:12 PM
by ACN45
* Blair and his "scabby little friend" Xlea321 241 0 10/05/03 03:26 AM
by Xlea321

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Prisoner#1, Enlil
841 topic views. 0 members, 2 guests and 6 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Gaiana.nl
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.053 seconds spending 0.003 seconds on 14 queries.