Sunday, November 29, 2009

An English upper class twits get-together

During its long history the 'Times' never was radical and, since the ascendency of Rupert Murdoch, it most certainly hasn't become so. Therefore, when we read of  highborn civil service mandarins failing to disguise the crimes of their government by employing "those linguistic tricks and sleights of semantics that made Yes Minister such a pleasure to watch", we can rest assured, the war in Iraq was illegal and so obviously so, that there might even be sectors of the British establishment who are ready to drop Anthony Charles Linton Blair, the spin and grin man, war criminal and hypocritie extraordinaire, like a hot or, at least, hottish potato.

Already, this week we have the myth of the "Saadam threat" laid bare for what it was; namely, a threat that had to be manufactured to provide justification for an illegal war that Blair had already committed himself to in the middle of 2002 after a nice cosy little meeting with George W Bush. Therefore, the intention to take Britain into an illegal war and the political and personal committment to do so , were establish facts despite Blair continuing to tell the British public and the House of Commons that war could be avoided. He had decided to take Britain to war but continued to mislead the public as to his intentions!

Moreover, Blair was absolutely aware that he was taking Britain into a war that was illegal for, although a rogue, hypocrite and war criminal, the man with the spin and the grin is certainly no idiot. Therefore when, on July 29th 2002, Lord Goldsmith,  Mr Blair's top law officer at the time, told him that deposing Saadam would be a breach of international law, while pointing out exactly why this would be so, Blair had no reason to doubt him. Moreover, there is no evidence to suggest that he ever did but rather prefered to bully Lord Goldsmith to back down.

If anything surprises it is the audacity with which this pathetic "gentlemen's" club reveals facts that points to all of them being effectively involved in a war crime. Well, "audacity" is probably the wrong word and the evidence would seem to suggest that they really do live in a little world all of their own where they don't take responsibility for the consequences of their actions. Rob Liddle, in the 'Time's' article mentioned above, writes: "This whole procedure is a little like a very upper-class version of the Channel 4 series Come Dine with Me, with charming, learned and polite knighted people asking the gentlest of questions of charming, learned and polite knighted people, before breaking for lunch." No, while Sir Jeremy Greenstock, Britain's UN ambassodor threatened to resign, he didn't, none of them did and what might that have done to their pathetic little careers? On the other hand, what might it have done to Tony's war? We can only speculate but because we can only speculate the little upper class twits get-together  that is so lackadaisically blowing the whistle on its ex-boss is in the process of incriminating itself and if they think that they didn't have an alternative to going along with what they knew was a crime then they are spineless creatures of the worst sort and in an ideal world they would all be following Tony to the Hague and a trial in front of the ICC. 

No comments: