We Still Have Some Power... Or Do We?
Today a petition directed at the Prime Minister was printed on the front page of The Independent newspaper. It was signed by various important people (including Sir Menzies Campbell and Clare Short) and called upon Blair to demand a ceasefire in the Middle East.
This evening, he and Bush did just that. This is heartening. It would appear that this petition actually worked and Blair listened to us for a change. However, is this really the case? If the past few years of Blair's Premiership have told us anything, it's that he does not listen to the people. He didn't listen over Iraq, he didn't listen over tuition fees, ID Cards, Anti-terror legislation or, indeed, anything. It seems that, far from being a good Democratic leader and listening to the electorate, he does what he wants and damned be everyone else. In fact, Blair's tenure as Prime Minister has been characterised by a very "Mother knows best" attitude (or, if you're wanting something more accurate, "Big Brother knows best").
This is shocking in itself, but then lets just have a look at what he's done with this attitude. In the case of anti-terror legislation he has pushed through some shoddily-written, totalitarian rubbish against the will of the people. What is his agenda here? In the case of Iraq, what was his agenda there? Was it, as I suspect, to please George Bush and Washington? In fact, if you want to know how far up Bush's arse Blair's tongue goes, take a look at this little known piece of information:
In the recent cabinet reshuffle, Jack Straw was demoted from Foreign Secretary (a position he was very good at, to be replaced by Beckett, who had been awful at DEFRA) to the non-position of Leader of the House of Commons. Why? Because Washington said so. I'd be surprised if Bush wasn't feeling a tickling sensation in his stomach by now. Yes Mr. Bush, that really is Tony's tongue.
Anyway, all this suggests that Bush and Blair were going to call for a ceasefire anyway and the question was when. So, why didn't they call for a ceasefire immediately and save hundreds of lives? Was it their intention to allow Israel to murder a few more innocents and break a few more articles of the Geneva convention by bombing refugees (whom they had ordered out) and the International Red Cross (along with the UN, after beig warned on numerous occaisions)? This shows a shocking disregard for human life on the part of our leaders, or should I say a shocking disregard for Arab life?
Her Majesty's Government, and the Prime Minister in particular, has blood on its hands. Their failure to immediately call for a ceasefire and act to preserve life and has led to unnecessary loss of life. It is time the Government put that "ethical foreign policy" into practice and acted with some morality. If the Government doesn't start listening to us, we must vote them out.
This evening, he and Bush did just that. This is heartening. It would appear that this petition actually worked and Blair listened to us for a change. However, is this really the case? If the past few years of Blair's Premiership have told us anything, it's that he does not listen to the people. He didn't listen over Iraq, he didn't listen over tuition fees, ID Cards, Anti-terror legislation or, indeed, anything. It seems that, far from being a good Democratic leader and listening to the electorate, he does what he wants and damned be everyone else. In fact, Blair's tenure as Prime Minister has been characterised by a very "Mother knows best" attitude (or, if you're wanting something more accurate, "Big Brother knows best").
This is shocking in itself, but then lets just have a look at what he's done with this attitude. In the case of anti-terror legislation he has pushed through some shoddily-written, totalitarian rubbish against the will of the people. What is his agenda here? In the case of Iraq, what was his agenda there? Was it, as I suspect, to please George Bush and Washington? In fact, if you want to know how far up Bush's arse Blair's tongue goes, take a look at this little known piece of information:
In the recent cabinet reshuffle, Jack Straw was demoted from Foreign Secretary (a position he was very good at, to be replaced by Beckett, who had been awful at DEFRA) to the non-position of Leader of the House of Commons. Why? Because Washington said so. I'd be surprised if Bush wasn't feeling a tickling sensation in his stomach by now. Yes Mr. Bush, that really is Tony's tongue.
Anyway, all this suggests that Bush and Blair were going to call for a ceasefire anyway and the question was when. So, why didn't they call for a ceasefire immediately and save hundreds of lives? Was it their intention to allow Israel to murder a few more innocents and break a few more articles of the Geneva convention by bombing refugees (whom they had ordered out) and the International Red Cross (along with the UN, after beig warned on numerous occaisions)? This shows a shocking disregard for human life on the part of our leaders, or should I say a shocking disregard for Arab life?
Her Majesty's Government, and the Prime Minister in particular, has blood on its hands. Their failure to immediately call for a ceasefire and act to preserve life and has led to unnecessary loss of life. It is time the Government put that "ethical foreign policy" into practice and acted with some morality. If the Government doesn't start listening to us, we must vote them out.
posted by CJM | 10:48 PM
1 Comments:
It's too little too late.
Post a Comment
<< Home