• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

Families of dead soldiers plan to sue Blair

#1
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/050503/325/fhzai.html

News that families will be looking to sue Billy Liar over Iraq.

Its good and bad.

Good that it reminds the electorate about Iraq and the lies this government has spun.

...........Bad that so many have had to pay for one man's ambitions.

Question I would ask is .."where next Mr Blair? Iran? Korea?"
 
#2
and between them and Blair is Goldsmith.

No chance.
 

Zoid

Old-Salt
#3
Tooldtodieyoung said:
Question I would ask is .."where next Mr Blair? Iran? Korea?"
Question you should really ask is where next Mr Bush? Blair sadly only does what he is told as to keep friendly with Dubbya. Who is the biggest fcuking cnut ever to walk the earth :)
 
#4
This is interesting....

The government will have 14 days to respond to a formal request for an independent inquiry.

After that it goes to the High Court.

After that, conceivably the House of Lords and European Court.

This could be unpredictable and interesting. There are many damaging outcomes short of a verdict of "war criminal" Bliar.
 
#5
Yes, despite the minute chance that it goes all the way to 'war-crimes' court, it could be potentially very damaging for blair et al, and may in fact be the chance to seize power that greedy gordon was waiting for. :?
 
#6
Is it not a fact, that the whole of the British parliament voted on the decision, whether to go to war or not?
Therefore, is it not also a fact, that all MPs who voted for war should be indited on the same ticket?
Shame so many good people have to die for politicians vanity.
 
#7
Is it not a fact, that the whole of the British parliament voted on the decision, whether to go to war or not?
Therefore, is it not also a fact, that all MPs who voted for war should be indited on the same ticket?
Shame so many good people have to die for politicians vanity.
They voted on the basis of misleading information. Cabinet did not see the entire advice. That is a breach of the Ministerial Code of Conduct, and maladministration. An independent inquiry may well reach such a conclusion!
 
#8
"Families plan to sue Tony Blair"

Wot a load of bollox!

I am sorry for their loss but those lads were not conscripted, they volunteered to join the army, they knew the dangers.

If anything they are making their deaths dishonourable and shaming them.

They died heros not political tit for tat material or a way of making a quick buck!
 
#9
taffcraven said:
"Families plan to sue Tony Blair"

Wot a load of bollox!

I am sorry for their loss but those lads were not conscripted, they volunteered to join the army, they knew the dangers.

If anything they are making their deaths dishonourable and shaming them.

They died heros not political tit for tat material or a way of making a quick buck!
Not quite the way I would have put it but I see what he is saying. The resources available to B Liar are such that any legal campaign would be worn down by time wasting and expense.
 
#10
MrPVRd said:
This is interesting....

The government will have 14 days to respond to a formal request for an independent inquiry.

After that it goes to the High Court.

After that, conceivably the House of Lords and European Court.

This could be unpredictable and interesting. There are many damaging outcomes short of a verdict of "war criminal" Bliar.
Could I ask - whilst I agree with you that this needs to be addressed - What about those serving and the ICC - if Blair is found guilty - what about the Officers and Soldiers who followed orders
 
#11
Tooldtodieyoung said:
...........Bad that so many have had to pay for one man's ambitions.
Because the war in Iraq has just about secured Tony's tenure at the top for all time hasn't it?
 
#12
It galls me to see this in the press. These are a few very upset and grieving relatives who need something to help them come to terms with their grief (the septics use that horrible phrase 'closure'). My unit lost guys on TELIC and I have also have friends who have lost guys in their units as well. It is deeply sad but the vast majority of those relatives who have been unlucky enough to have lost loved ones have not been turned into political pawns but choose to grieve and remember.

You ask any mother (including my mum who had both myself and my brother on TELIC 1 and my dad, brother and me on Grapple 6) about war and she will make some pretty cutting remarks about a politician trying to take her son away. However, the vast majority of relatives understand that it is our job and what we get paid for. This fact has been mentioned very rarely if at all (although it got a small mention on R4 this morning).

The idea that Blair is guilty of war crimes (and by association my brother and I) is an insult both to me (I would not carry out what I considered an illegal order) and those who have truely suffered war crimes in the Balkans, Nazi Germany Rawanda etc. It simply cheapens the term.
 
#13
Short-fuse, I know exactly where you are coming from but you have to separate the Army from the political arm of government. By implying Blair committed a crime in taking the country to war on false testimony in no way takes away the achievement and honour of every single solder that served on Telic. There is no, and cannot be any comparison between soldiers following what they understood at the time to be the legal orders of their government and Nazi war crimes. Simply not in the same ballpark.

BTW well done mate you guys did a great job. 8) I sat this one out on the side lines with the fat weazy boys with a note from matron. :oops:
 
#14
Could I ask - whilst I agree with you that this needs to be addressed - What about those serving and the ICC - if Blair is found guilty - what about the Officers and Soldiers who followed orders
The ICC has no jurisdiction over "crimes of aggression". If military action in Iraq was contrary to international law, the invasion itself would fall under that category. Therefore, the ICC would not be able to prosecute political leaders or armed forces personnel.

It should be of the greatest concern that this war did not have a cast-iron copper-bottom legal case. The only legally fireproof option was a war supported by a specific resolution. Anything else is open to legal challenge. It is a disgrace that Parliament, the cabinet and CDS were not made aware of the uncertainty. As those organs of state were kept in the dark, the buck stops with Bliar for misleading Parliament, maladministration and any breaches of international law. The liar should be impeached, but it is more likely that an independent inquiry ordered by the High Court or House of Lords will find his conduct wanting, and this should be the kiss of death for the greatest liar that UK public life has ever seen.
 
#15
I think hackle summarised it well when he said that (and im paraphrasing here)

The CGS asked the PM and AG for a written guarantee that the war was legal, and in doing so removed any blame from himself, the armed forces and all those that served in iraq. After all they were following what was deemed to be a legal order from up above, and as such they cannot be held responsible for the legality of the action taken.
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#16
http://newsbox.msn.co.uk/article.as...ortlive&ks=0&mc=5&ml=ma&lc=en&ae=windows-1252

Reuters said:
SEDGEFIELD - The father of a young soldier killed in Iraq delivered a cutting rebuke to Tony Blair after standing against him in Thursday's election and said he hoped the prime minister would one day apologise.

Reg Keys, who won 4,252 votes against the 24,421 secured by Blair in Sedgefield, said he felt a duty to his son killed shortly before his 21st birthday.

"Fighting this campaign has not been an easy task for me but I had to do it for my son," said Keys as Blair stood expressionless on the returning platform.

"Tonight there are lessons to be learnt and I hope in my heart that the prime minister one day will say sorry."

Keys said that had the war in Iraq been legal, he would have "grieved" and not "campaigned".

He went on to say he hoped Blair would find time to visit wounded soldiers in hospital and dedicated his campaign to the 88 British servicemen killed in the conflict so far.

Iraq dominated the final stages of the campaign, with Conservative leader Michael Howard labelling Blair a "liar" over the reasons for taking the country into war.

Blair who earlier spoke after being re-elected acknowledged the impact of his support for war in Iraq.

"I know Iraq has been a divisive issue in this country but I hope we can unite again in the future," he said.

Although the former lawyer, who celebrates* his 52nd birthday on Friday, has apologised for incorrect intelligence used to take Britain into the conflict, he has consistently refused to apologise for the decision to join the U.S.-led invasion.

* Not many will be celebrating with him.
 
#17
It amazes me that the Politics of Personality drive so many posters to such bitter and vitriolic attack on the government. MrPVRd always argues his case most coherently and persuasively. However, I side with Taff, Shortfuze and others on this one. Relatives will naturally seek someone to blame for the loss of their loved ones and, when grieving, are vulnerable to exploitation, politically motivated or otherwise. A legal or civil action in respects to our casualties suffered in Iraq will do no-one any good at all. If anything it will undermine the chances of a successful outcome in Iraq. It will certainly cost the British Public a considerable amount of money and will drain political effort from other more worthwhile issues. I doubt that it would even have any significant impact on TBs position, and if it did, would you rather have GB in his place?!

Strapping on the body armour and helmet and hunkering down to await the inevitable incoming caustic barrage!

QFEGD
 
#18
Your probabbly quite right that it wont come to anything and that the greif of the relatives is being used to score political points by certain members of the political establishment.

However, should we not try and hold Blair acountable for his blatant misuse of the parlimentary system (by not allowing them to make an informed decision whether to go to war) and for seeking to use HMforces to secure his position in the history books (which thankfully looks like backfiring on him)
 
#20
Well, there seems to be a growing number of people that do.

I guess it's just down to personal opinion
 

Top