| Author |
Message |
    
The Boy
Member
Username: The_boy
Post Number: 187
Registered: 02-2009
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 20, 2010 - 01:34 pm: | |
Aside from whether Tony Blair had huge support (1-2 million marched against the war before it even began - unprecedented, the biggest demonstration in British history, etc.), he broke the law. International law. Britain is signed up to the International Criminal Court at The Hague, so if there was enough will and the resources were available, Blair could be prosecuted for war crimes.
"comparing our government to the government of Zimbabwe (for example) isn't comparing apples with apples."
I agree. To do so is, I think, like a punter saying, "So I hit my wife, but look at next door: he hits his wife AND his kids..." It means that nothing ever changes. |
Duende
Member
Username: Duende
Post Number: 95
Registered: 11-2008
| | Posted on Friday, January 15, 2010 - 01:18 pm: | |
"Terrorist Acts are understood as:
- Intended to create fear or terror (-check)
- Perpetrated for an ideological goal( - check)
- Deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants" (-check, the second bit anyway)
I was ticking the above off thinking about Iraq during some 'Extremism Awareness' training recently. While I don't think it's fun to get hung up on labels like war criminal: as Forest Gump's mum said: 'Stupid is as Stupid does'.
Imo Tony Blair matches up nicely to the WHO 'psychotic' check list but he did have huge public support and was inevitably 'a man of his time'. That's a fair defence of the individual, or puts him into perspective, but it mustn't defend the monstrous acts he was part of. A slave trader may have had huge public support, be a gentle, loving father, a devout Catholic and be a 'man of his time' but his acts were still monstrous. I know what is monstrous here is a matter of debate but that's why people should 'bang on' when monstrous acts are committed and other's just don't see it, for whatever reason.
I was born in a developing country, have travelled in 4 continents and I'm not at all proud of British imperial history (miltary or economic). Lots of nice people I'm sure, very few demons just lots of monstrous systems and suffering. There are lots of things that are admirable about the UK but comparing our government to the government of Zimbabwe (for example) isn't comparing apples with apples. |
The Boy
Member
Username: The_boy
Post Number: 184
Registered: 02-2009
| | Posted on Monday, January 11, 2010 - 11:13 am: | |
'If Blair is to face an international trial, then the International Criminal Court (ICC) at The Hague - to which Britain is a signatory - would be the likeliest forum.
While the ICC has said that it will not conduct prosecutions for the Crime of Aggression until it has been defined by its own working group, the court's chief prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, told the Sunday Telegraph in 2007 that he would be willing to launch an inquiry into US/UK war crimes in Iraq. Charges could also be brought against Blair at the ICC for failing to prosecute the war in a "proportionate manner".
From Iraq itself, there are also moves to bring Blair to book. It has been reported that lawyers acting for Tariq Aziz, the former deputy leader of the country, now held in captivity, have written to Britain's top legal adviser asking permission to prosecute Blair for war-crimes.'
http://www.newsroompanama.com/world/europe/616-tony-blair-one-stepnearer-to-pros ecution
'What we have done to Iraq is almost beyond comprehension, truly. The one thing I find even more mind-boggling is the almost complete inability of so many people in Britain and America to perceive what we have done, or to give a damn about it. Iraq now is incomparably worse than it was pre-2003, and particularly pre-1990 when US-UK sanctions began destroying the country.' |
pipling
Member
Username: Reality
Post Number: 267
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, January 07, 2010 - 08:25 am: | |
TB
If you are so sure go for it then and put your money where your mouth is....
I will therefore await with keen anticipation news of your private prosecution of Tony Blair under the Nuremberg principles! |
The Boy
Member
Username: The_boy
Post Number: 180
Registered: 02-2009
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 05, 2010 - 12:31 pm: | |
According to the editors Counterpunch’s agenda is ‘muckraking with a radical attitude’. From what I’ve read on Counterpunch over the past five years or so, I don’t see how it is "a rag which spins a line in an extremely provocative sensationalist manner".
"As far as I'm concerned TB the targets of your allegations of criminal behaviour and the 'injustices' which you highlight are highly selective and depend on your own 'world view'."
My world view involves a belief that "launching a war of aggression is a crime that no political or economic situation can justify".[1]
"You have chosen the Iraq war and the decisions around it as your bugbear or 'mission'… I just think you bang on about the Iraq war and Blair too much to the exclusion of too many other 'appropriate targets'."
You are right that I ‘bang on’ about Blair and the Iraq war. I also ‘bang on’ about Afghanistan and Palestine, and perhaps I should ‘bang on’ about other crimes carried out and supported by the British government, who are the most appropriate target for my ire because their crimes are done in my name and as a citizen of this country I have a responsibility to oppose them.
"Describing Blair as a war criminal is simplistic and inappropriate in my view because it does a disservice to the historical context of the war and the reasons behind it."
‘The Nuremberg Principles, a set of guidelines established after World War II to try Nazi Party members, were developed to determine what constitutes a war crime. The principles can also be applied today when considering the conditions that led to the Iraq war and, in the process, to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, many of them children, and to the devastation of a country's infrastructure.
Perhaps one of the most serious breaches of international law by the Bush administration (supported by the Blair administration) was the doctrine of "preventive war." In the case of the Iraq war, it was carried out without authorization from the U.N. Security Council in violation of the U.N. Charter, which forbids armed aggression and violations of any state's sovereignty except for immediate self-defense.’[2]
"To initiate a war of aggression is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."[3]
"…At least we have a form of democracy here…"
Indeed, so why not use our democratic right to protest against war crimes committed by our government? As well as rights we have responsibilities. One of the few things I am pleased that the current government has done is to introduce Citizenship into the National Curriculum. ‘Citizenship is about understanding the rights and responsibilities you have as a member of society.’[4]
[1] Robert Jackson, the chief U.S. prosecutor for the Nuremberg Tribunal
[2] http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20090526cc.html
[3] Robert Jackson, the chief U.S. prosecutor for the Nuremberg Tribunal
[4] http://www.need2know.co.uk/law/citizenship |
pipling
Member
Username: Reality
Post Number: 266
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 05, 2010 - 08:57 am: | |
Counterpunch is notorious because of its agenda. Its a rag which spins a line in an extremely provocative sensationalist manner. The quotation in your original post is a distorted comic book caricature of reality.
As far as I'm concerned TB the targets of your allegations of criminal behaviour and the 'injustices' which you highlight are highly selective and depend on your own 'world view'. Yo have chosen the Iraq war and the decisions around it as your bugbear or 'mission'. The post incidentally reeks of anger and bitterness over the unfairness and 'injustices' in this world. I'm sure we all have these feelings towards other people, (especially those in power) and/or perceived injustices. Such individuals are there to be shot down. I felt the same way about Thatcher as you do about Blair. You describe yourself as highlighting injustice and criminal behaviour. Its interesting to note that many of the tyrants in this world came to power on a surge of energy of self righteousness by doing the same thing! I think you need to be aware of that and see things in context a bit more. Blair and Thatcher were both people 'of their time'. Although many hate them, there was also a lot of support for what they did. Describing Blair as a war criminal is simplisic and inappropriate in my view because it does a disservice to the historical context of the war and the reasons behind it. Also at least we have a form of democracy here and I for one appreciate the fact that Chris Floyd can express his views freely.... now on the other hand if he was in Tehran or Harare.
I've done a lot of travelling over the years due to my interest in wildlife and I've been to countries governed by regimes that would make Tony Blair look like a saint. They say travel broadens the mind. It certainly gave me some perspective! When humans gain power they use it to do all sorts of things, many of them criminal and corrupt. I'm not complacent about that TB; I just think you bang on about the Iraq war and Blair too much to the exclusion of too many other 'appropriate targets'. |
The Boy
Member
Username: The_boy
Post Number: 179
Registered: 02-2009
| | Posted on Monday, January 04, 2010 - 08:10 am: | |
Pipling, how is Counterpunch a 'notorious rag'? That's not a rhetorical question; I'm genuinely interested in your opinion.
You say, "Welcome to reality! Human beings are corrupt", which in my opinion is tantamount to saying, "Shit happens, nothing changes, so let's just get on with our lives." Such things are easy to think and say when you're not on the receiving end of criminal behaviour. The point, surely, is to highlight injustices when we can and do something about them if possible. Indeed, isn't that what Napo is at least partly about? |
pipling
Member
Username: Reality
Post Number: 264
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, January 03, 2010 - 07:42 am: | |
Some American hack called Chris Floyd decides to write an overblown 'article' full of hyperbole in the notorious rag 'CounterPunch' He probably doesn't even have any views himself, he just spins a line and they lap it up!
Welcome to reality! Human beings are corrupt. If Chris Floyd had the 'where with all' to control power in the same way that Obama and Blair do/did.... how do we know he wouldn't end up doing the same things? In any event I thought Blair looked nicely tanned and healthily fit in his interview with Fern Britton. |
Rob Palmer
Moderator
Username: Rob_palmer
Post Number: 516
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 - 10:11 am: | |
And, of course, one man's better is usually another man's worse! Look at the Health debate in the US.
I don't think, therefore I'm not.
|
Rob Palmer
Moderator
Username: Rob_palmer
Post Number: 515
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 - 09:49 am: | |
Good point, Justa. Change can be about creating the illusion of progress. We need better. I have a real concern that one of the problems is Governments having to be re-elected on a five year cycle. They spend at least a third of that time manoeuvring for re-election and not getting on with the work that matters and offering populist solutions to problems rather than effective ones. Trouble is, if they are not up for an election that frequently, we're stuck with them. Maybe we should have bi-annual 'electorate satisfaction surveys' where everyone is asked whether they think the Government of the day is taking the Country in the direction its people wants?
I don't know the answers (in case anyone thought I did  )
I don't think, therefore I'm not.
|
justa TPO
Member
Username: Justa_tpo
Post Number: 422
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 08:26 pm: | |
The point is not to change it, the point is to make it better!
We've had change.. it's crap. |
The Boy
Member
Username: The_boy
Post Number: 174
Registered: 02-2009
| | Posted on Monday, December 28, 2009 - 12:35 pm: | |
'...The world is complicated...The point is to change it...'
|
Rob Palmer
Moderator
Username: Rob_palmer
Post Number: 514
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, December 27, 2009 - 04:19 pm: | |
Yes, TB, you are right. The world is complicated.
I don't think, therefore I'm not.
|
The Boy
Member
Username: The_boy
Post Number: 173
Registered: 02-2009
| | Posted on Saturday, December 26, 2009 - 04:08 pm: | |
Since leaving office, Tony Blair has dipped his blood-smeared snout into various corporate troughs, amassing millions, while simultaneously becoming one of the great whited sepulchres of our day, making a great show of his conversion to Catholicism, his "faith foundation," and so on. He has even lectured at Yale Divinity School. But this holy huckster looks more haunted every day. The glaring, bulging eyes, the frantic rictus of his grin – indistinguishable from the grimace of a man in gut-clenching pain --- and the ever-more strident, maniacal defense of his war crimes give compelling testimony to the hellish fires consuming his psyche...
...Obama has taken the words he used to instigate the certain death of thousands of human beings and the acceleration of hatred, extremism, chaos and brutal corruption around the world -- and offered them as justification for the hideous, unabashedly Orwellian doctrine at the core of his (Nobel) speech: War is Peace. In this perverse inversion of values, Obama, as a warmaker, is actually a peacemaker, you see -- and thus a legitimate heir to the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr., who was evoked at several points in the speech...
http://www.chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/1-latest-news/1886-miraculo us-organ-blair-obama-and-the-narcissists-defense.html |
|
