British general urges Tony Blair impeachement

[sappatz]

the thug and war criminal sitting in downing street should be impeached :

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4594216.stm

[Spartacus]

No doubt Chico would say General Sir Michael Rose is a tree hugging, lefty, terrorist appeaser and apologist.

But then again it's easy for people like him to talk tough while hiding behind the dead bodies of others.

[AtW]

Is there actually such a legal term as "impeachment" in the UK?

[Lucifer Box]

Is there actually such a legal term as "impeachment" in the UK?

Yes.

See here for details: Legal opinion on the impeachment of the Prime Minister, by Rabinder Singh QC and Professor Conor Gearty of Matrix.

[Churchill]

Yes.

See here for details: Legal opinion on the impeachment of the Prime Minister, by Rabinder Singh QC and Professor Conor Gearty of Matrix.

That'd be a chuckle, Matrix defending Blair... Do you think he'd get a preferential rate?

[AlfredJPruffock]

Fascinating article, and having being very much in favour of Blairs impeachment following the Iraq fiasco it is interesting to read the comments of such a senior millitary figure.

General Sir Michael said the consequences for Iraq and the war on terror had been "quite disastrous".

"Certainly from a soldier's perspective there can't be any more serious decision taken by a prime minister than declaring war," he said.

Hear Hear General Sir Michael!

I would further venture that we ought to consider trying Blair under the Dangerous Organised Criminal Act, and even the Dangerous DisOrganised Criminal Act !

Games up Tony.

[stackpole]

A cross-Commons group of 100 MPs want the same thing.

If I recall correctly, it was Tory policy to support the decision because IDS, then Tory leader, got a private viewing of the evidence. I believe most Tories who backed invasion on the say-so of IDS now regret that decision.

Furthermore, the Tories haven't been able to criticise Blair so far without looking fools themselves.

Therefore, all they can do is hope for an inquiry into the evidence given to the house, and the further evidence that IDS was shown.

[DodgyAgent]

A cross-Commons group of 100 MPs want the same thing.

If I recall correctly, it was Tory policy to support the decision because IDS, then Tory leader, got a private viewing of the evidence. I believe most Tories who backed invasion on the say-so of IDS now regret that decision.

Furthermore, the Tories haven't been able to criticise Blair so far without looking fools themselves.

Therefore, all they can do is hope for an inquiry into the evidence given to the house, and the further evidence that IDS was shown.

I am not sure that a UN general with a light blue beret on his head is the right person to be taken seriously.

[ALM]

I am not sure that a UN general with a light blue beret on his head is the right person to be taken seriously.

Trust you to focus on the colour of his beret. Why not examine the validity of his assertion? Whatever the history of the UN may be I'd take their word far more seriously than the likes of Blair and Bush who took us to war on a pack of lies and helped arrange the needless murder of many thousands, some of which were our own soldiers.

[DodgyAgent]

Trust you to focus on the colour of his beret. Why not examine the validity of his assertion? Whatever the history of the UN may be I'd take their word far more seriously than the likes of Blair and Bush who took us to war on a pack of lies and helped arrange the needless murder of many thousands, some of which were our own soldiers.

If he has a blue beret and he is retired, then just what credibility does he have? what is his agenda exactly? I am quite happy to accept the validity of his argument, I am not necessarily happy to accept him as a credible person to make the claim just because he is a general.