• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

The greatest moral failure of Tony Blair's premiership


Mr Crowley

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
311
Sunday 08 February 2009 00:12

The greatest moral failure of Tony Blair's premiership

Tony Blair was "appalled" when it was first revealed, some five years ago, that Iraqi prisoners were being tortured in Abu Ghraib. "Nobody underestimates how wrong this is or how wrong this will seem to be," said the then prime minister.

His brother in arms George W Bush claimed to feel "deep disgust" and declared that his White House would not stand for it. "I do not like it one little bit," said the then American president. "That's not the way we do things."

Oh, but it was the way they did things. And those things were done because they had been permitted and encouraged from the highest levels. Torture was sanctioned by George W Bush early in 2002 when he signed the now notorious memorandum declaring that the Geneva Convention on the treatment of prisoners of war did not apply to members of al-Qaida and the Taliban.

As for Tony Blair, he did underestimate how wrong it was. He was never quite appalled enough about torture to remonstrate publicly with his ally in the White House as the Bush administration betrayed the west's best values and the very causes of human rights and the rule of law that they were supposed to be fighting for in Iraq and Afghanistan. If there is any evidence that Tony Blair used his private face time with George W Bush to protest about what was being perpetrated in the names of America and Britain, I have never come across it.

From those strokes of the presidential pen flowed the outrages in the cells of Abu Ghraib and the cages of Guantánamo, at the Bagram air base in Afghanistan and CIA "black sites" in Europe and around the world. From that sprang "extraordinary rendition", the Orwellian euphemism for state-licensed kidnap, and "enhanced interrogation", the spin-torturer's way of describing his trade in pain.

We now have confirmation from the government itself. Barack Obama's attorney-general says America used torture. The armed services committee of the Senate, which recently delivered the most definitive official account of what happened, says America used torture.

Why America turned to the dark side was briskly explained by Joseph Cofer Black who for a time ran the CIA's counterterrorist centre. "There was a world before 9/11 and there was a world after 9/11," he told one hearing. "After 9/11, the gloves came off."

And on came ghost prisons, water-boarding and the out-sourcing of torture to foreign contractors.

In the aftermath of 9/11, a climate was created in which the immoral was presented as moral. We started hearing a lot about the "one day to save the world" scenario which justifies torture on the grounds that it may be the only way to force a terrorist to reveal the deadly conspiracy that is about to kill thousands of people.

This idea gained popular currency in the mass media, notably through 24, the American television series starring Kiefer Sutherland. Each day in the life of Agent Jack Bauer sees him heroically thwart a nuclear bomb/bio-weapon/presidential assassination plot by using violence to extract information. Each cliffhanger is resolved by Agent Jack defusing the threat and killing the conspirators with seconds to spare. The conclusion we are invited to draw is that torture is a necessary evil that always works.

In its seventh season, now showing on Sky, the opening episode of the latest day suggested that the script writers were accommodating to the new sensibilities of the Obama era. Agent Jack is wanted for questioning about his illegal activities by the FBI. But he is portrayed as the hero again when he defiantly defends his methods before a congressional hearing and the twist is that they need him to save the world again from a fresh threat to America.

David Cameron is a fan of the show. Some of Mr Blair's staff used to call him "Agent Tony". But the premise and the message of 24 are both wrong. The "one day to save the world" scenario rarely occurs in the real struggle against terrorists and rogue states. Experienced interrogators say that torture is extremely unreliable as a means of yielding solid intelligence and often produces false confessions from victims who will say anything to end the pain. Resources are then squandered in pursuit of fantasy plots.

Charles Guthrie is no one's idea of a bleeding heart liberal. He served with the SAS and was commandant of the intelligence corps before he became chief of the defence staff. As he puts it, torture is not only illegal, unethical, ineffective, cruel and counter-productive, it is also plain dumb. "Western use of torture to counter terror has been a propaganda coup for al-Qaida and a recruiting sergeant for its global jihad. Our hypocrisy has radicalised our enemies and corroded the power we base on our proclaimed values."

Agent Jack is presented as a moral man compelled to do bad things for the greater good. That is how George W Bush and Tony Blair saw themselves too. The "War on Terror" was such an absolutist cause for them that the good end of protecting liberal democracies from murderous extremists became the justification for repulsive means. That sacrifice of civilised principles and law in the name of security has been repudiated by Barack Obama. It has also been rejected by our own foreign secretary in his recent speech in Mumbai in which David Miliband declared the "War on Terror" to be a mistake.

Yet this shameful period will not be so smoothly and simply buried. Though neither of them was in their jobs when this swamp was created, it continues to suck at both president and foreign secretary. Even under new management, the United States wants to keep its secrets. Threatened by America with a withdrawal of intelligence co-operation, David Miliband has just suppressed the publication of grave allegations about the activities of US and British officials in the case of Binyam Mohamed. In the view of two high court judges, what happened to him "gives rise to an arguable case of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment". There was a "very considerable public interest" in publication, they argued, "particularly given the constitutional importance of the prohibition against torture".

The David Miliband that I know is a humane and liberal man who utterly abhors torture. Yet he finds himself suppressing a dossier about the crime, doing so in the name of national security, the very invocation used to justify torture in the first place. Barack Obama has started to dismantle the grisly apparatus created by his predecessor. One of his earliest acts was to order the closure of Guantánamo and reimpose a total prohibition on the use of torture by American agents. The new occupant of the White House seems to hope that this will be sufficient to purge his country's conscience and clear its name in the world. He shows no enthusiasm for bringing anyone to trial for war crimes, saying: "We need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards."

The British government would also be very grateful if everyone averted their eyes from this dark chapter. In that hope, they are likely to be disappointed. "There's a lot more to be raked up," one senior British official told me recently. The Binyam case is far from the only one involving allegations that British agents colluded in torture. We already have an official admission that the base at Diego Garcia was used for extraordinary rendition by the CIA and there is a wide suspicion that it went further than that.

When I talk to people at very senior levels in government, I don't find them willing to put a hand on heart and swear that British agents were never complicit in torture. British and American intelligence are closely enmeshed; it stretches credulity to snapping point that no one in the Blair government knew what was being perpetrated.

On the same day that the foreign secretary was facing accusations of a cover-up, Tony Blair was in Washington wearing his faith on his sleeve. At a "prayer breakfast" with Barack Obama, the former prime minister made more than 30 mentions of God and declared: "We pray that in acting we do God's work and follow God's will."

Only God knows how Tony Blair reconciles his conscience with his role in this disgraceful period. It was not as if the Bush administration made much pretence about it. "Bad things happen to bad people," baldly declared Vice-President d**** Cheney.

Did Tony Blair never ask what was going on? If he did not ask, was it because he knew he would not like the answer? His own law officers were highly uncomfortable with the legal black hole created at Guantánamo. Charlie Falconer, not only his lord chancellor but also one of his closest allies, tried to persuade his friend to raise his voice in opposition. He failed. "An anomaly" was all Mr Blair would ever say about Camp Delta when he was prime minister.

The true extent to which British officials colluded in torture is yet to be established. In terms of ethical complicity, I think we can already begin to return a verdict. As the God-fearing Tony Blair knows, there are sins of commission and there are sins of omission. "We have condoned with our silence torture committed by others," says Charles Guthrie, his favourite general.

That was arguably the biggest moral failure of Tony Blair's premiership.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I thought that this was a good article, particularly in regard to the referances to the use of entertainment media to condition the populace. It should come as no surprise that 24 is a product of the Murdoch Fox Network.
Whilst I would agree that the issue of torture represents a huge moral failure on behalf of the British, I don't think it is their most significant. Call me parochial but I think that Blair's airbrushing of state collusion in Ireland is a greater moral failure.
 
Last edited:

Mr Crowley

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
311
Jaysis, you are following me around the board like a bad smell.
Rather irate today aren't we.
Any opinions on the contents of any of the threads at all or is it all part of the 'look at me I want to be a mod' campaign?
 

Thac0man

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
6,482
Twitter
twit taa woo
Jaysis, you are following me around the board like a bad smell.
Rather irate today aren't we.
Any opinions on the contents of any of the threads at all or is it all part of the 'look at me I want to be a mod' campaign?
To recep.... you should not post copyrighted articles, unabridged, on P.ie. Tis one of the few posting rules we have on P.ie. Selected quotes or a link will do instead, padded out with opinion authored by yourself.

And I don't have to follow you anywhere. You have conviently reversed a dump truck full of cut and paste onto P.ie and off loaded it onto one section of the forum.
 

Mr Crowley

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
311
I have another couple of threads that you missed.
'Oh the humanity!'
 

blinding

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
17,838
Tony Blair got every promotion that he ever achieved by being a grade A ass kisser.
Its hardly surprising that even though he was the british PM that he cruised around looking for more rich and powerful people to ass kiss.This type of individual is unsuited for the highest office in any country as he will always lay down on his back with his legs in the air like the lapdog that is his inate nature.

He was also an outragous spiv witnessed by his sponging of holiday homes from the rich and powerful. During the recent crisis in Gaza he was in Washington recieving an honour from his master GW What more needs to be said about the peace envoy to the middle East.
 

factual

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Messages
8,761
To be fair to him, he was good in the six counties, with his work resulting and culminating in the GFA.
 

Seánod

Active member
Joined
Apr 5, 2005
Messages
208
To be fair to him, he was good in the six counties, with his work resulting and culminating in the GFA.
The only 'good' policy for any British Prime Minister in the Six Counties is to get out, and stay out.

Blair doesn't fit the criteria.
 

Mr Crowley

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
311
To be fair to him, he was good in the six counties, with his work resulting and culminating in the GFA.
And the inanities just keep on rolling.
 

Mushroom

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
15,777

Mushroom

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
15,777
Do you have a peddle at every mention of SF?
San Francisco? Nice town, but not really my cup of tea. But why do you ask?
 

Weevil

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 24, 2013
Messages
1,606
The article quoted refers to
Blair as 'God fearing'.

Like his pop-culture clone Bono, he is anything but God-fearing.

They both believe themselves to be God's will made flesh, and beyond the bounds of everyday morality.
 

automaticforthepeople

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2012
Messages
4,763
His behaviour after the death of David Kelly was appalling. His inclination was to hide behind spin and undermined Kelly who served his country with diligence.
 

Weevil

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 24, 2013
Messages
1,606
His behaviour after the death of David Kelly was appalling. His inclination was to hide behind spin and undermined Kelly who served his country with diligence.
If I remember correctly, the line that David Kelly was a 'Walter Mitty-type' personality came directly from No.10.
 

dammit_im_mad

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
9,118
The greatest moral failure of Tony Blair's premiership
His complicity in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent men women and children in Iraq by making war on that country under false pretences. Which is the supreme war crime which encapsulates all other war crimes according to the Nuremberg declaration.

Also his firm support for crippling sanctions on that country which killed an estimated 500,000 children and women, but was "worth it" according to Madeline Albright in here L'oreal moment

Fúcking sociopathic murderer who should be locked away to rot in his own filth for the rest of his days instead of being paid huge sums to speak, arranged as payment for helping to do the dirty work of the global financial terrorists, elites, corporations and military industrial complex.

What a joyous world we live in where scum like Blair are never punished for their disgusting war crimes. Just the little people or "unpeople" as John Pilger calls them
 
Last edited:

former wesleyan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
25,809
Jesus , what a nasty bag of sectarian pus that Mr Crowley was.
 
Top