" It may never lead to his being tried in any court, but there is nevertheless a public verdict of his responsibility for the British action in Iraq." ...
Why might it never lead to a trial? What right does he have to make such an assertion and then pour his feeble outrage onto paper for the public domain, and at the same time imply that 'International Law needs to be clarified' - International Law prohibiting War is the clearest Law on the planet. What planet is Rees-mogg on, or more to the point what drugs?
Is not the Law clear? YES.
Has not the crime been reported to British Police? YES
Is there an investigation under way(ish) at The London Metropolitan Police War Crimes Unit? YES
Is this a secret or covert operation, requiring special police investigation? NO!
So, why is Rees Mogg not saying all of this and not asking the following questions :
WHY IS THAT INVESTIGATION STALLED?
WHO IS STALLING IT?
AND WHAT ARE THE FULL CHARGES, and the LIST OF ALL THOSE LEGALLY LIABLE FOR THESE WAR CRIMES?
Is it possible he is unaware of all this? Hardly.
Very slightly since those involved
( http://www.makewarshistory.org.uk )
have written to EVERY MP, to every News Media outlet, have hosted meetings in both Houses of Parliament, posted videos to youtube, have facebook, myspace, twitter and other online resources, which have been active for quite some time (the first attempt at reporting war crimes was in 2001, for Afghnaistan!) and have an online international campaign informing people of the Law, and asking that the Law be obeyed, calling their campaign a CIVIL OBEDIENCE campaign. Hardly the shrinking violets of the activist movement, yet totally ignored by mainstream mdeia, an absolutely focussed and active ignorance. Caught in the act of ignoring.
While certain forces may have bulldozed towards war, as Rees Mogg writes, certain others (public intellectuals, media pundits etc ) refused to face the facts at the time : That War as a Tool of Policy Enforcement is wrong, amoral AND illegal.... and they parroted the lines that Policy dictated. Terrorists. WMD. Nasty Dictators (who used weapons systems our State sold him on his own people, who waged a war with Iran on our States behalf). Half truths are often worse than outright lies.
http://www.medialens,org a British website that had been challenging the way in which media reports wars with such deep bias as to actively support those wars, is replete with such examples, carefully de-constructed, almost to tedium, based on irrefutable evidence, by the medialens crew; and vehemently defended by said intellectuals and pundits. Some of the former is quite entertaining. Most of the latter is utterly reprehensible.
And now, when the veil is lifted by Blair himself, when he exposed his crass logic and astute denial before Chilcott's gentle probing, in full public view, (with no option but to go the whole hog), a veil many of us have been able to pierce and had removed, even as he prepared for war, and so now, some of these intellectuals finally find their voice? Give us a break!
STOP THE WAR coalition must have known at the time that the war was utterly illegal. They have access to the best legal minds in the country. Look to the results of their actions. Did they inform or mop up concern? Did they harness the compassion, the horror and anger of the people and use that to act, or did they organise a we will 'do our best' gig, much as Bob Geldof might have, again mopping up concern, knowing that it was futile because it offered no real challenge?
A general strike would have been a good move. A blockade by the 2 million people and their friends who did not turn up for the march, yet who supported the intent of that march in Hyde Park would have been fun. And effective.It was estimated that for every one person on that march at least another 4 agreed with them. Some say 15. That's between 8 and 30 million people. That's a lot of power if marshalled. Polls say more than that opposed the war. Anyways, STWC failed, and failed miserably, in their stated aims.
So back to the future, 2010 : the majority of mainstream media even still parrot the policy line; Blair's testimony last Friday was 'assured', a 'fine performance' according to most press this weekend...
Iran still the de-stabilising force in Iraq ( a lie I have dealt with in detail elsewhere), Tony the 'victim' of circumstance and unfortunate planning...
The disconnect is further highlighted with the recent press coverage of the issue of assisted death in cases of severe debilitating painful fatal disease, where the assistance is requested by individuals whose minds are clear, whose intent is clear, whose assistant is a close and dearly loved one.
The DPP saw fit to go ahead with a prosecution for murder for a woman who helped her daughter, who had lain in bed for nearly 20 years, her body shattered by disease, her life shattered by constant unrelenting pain, who had decided enough is enough and I want to die, and was so weakened she required assistance up to the point she herself pressed the plunger of the syringe containing her final does, her final act in her own life.
Yet stalls with regard to a man and a system that not only failed to protect a nation of 29 million innocent people, but actively and illegally enabled a war of aggression, that denied the Iraqis grass roots democracy when the Iraqis made so bold as to unite and hold their own elections, that selected it's own chosen men to run Iraqs cities, towns and villages, that actively funded and supplied a police force that actively repressed those who dared to engage their own democracy, that started a war of resistance that was portrayed as 'sectarian', that led to even more slaughter, torture, terror for Iraqis?
These are the facts.
What say you now, Rees Mogg? Defend your pious stance from this perspective. You cannot!
Take a walk to your local police station, and report the crimes of Blair and the UK Government. Do something useful.
Do what you love, it's your gift to universe