Should Tony Blair stand trial?

Ought Tony Blair to be tried as an alleged War Criminal?

  • Yes

    Votes: 142 85.0%
  • No

    Votes: 25 15.0%

  • Total voters
    167
#1
For War Crimes that is, for allegedly faking the evidence for the invasion of Iraq. I have a fairly austere opinion of him but the evidence is obscure, or perhaps has been obscured. I think that a trial - absolutely not in the UK - would enable documents to be unearthed, persons to be interviewed under oath etc. If he were found guilty he could be punished, if found not guilty it would benefit him as he would be able to wave the verdict in the face of his detractors.

I'm not stupid enough to think that would ever be allowed to happen, but there have been a lot of statements on here about him and it would be interesting to know whether people feel that there is a case to answer.
 
Last edited:
#4
Definitely not.


Kim il Kunt has the right idea, feed him and his wife to rabid pigs, for treason against the "what a ****ing state they left us in."


Then shoot every twat with any Blair DNA, confiscate all their ill- gotten assets, to encourage all the dishonest ****s who think "politics" beats working for a living.
 
#5
I have voted yes and am not afraid of Hill Walking....

RIP David Kelly a true Patriot who tried to do the right thing.
 
#6
Definitely not.


Kim il Kunt has the right idea, feed him and his wife to rabid pigs, for treason against the "what a ****ing state they left us in."


Then shoot every twat with any Blair DNA, confiscate all their ill- gotten assets, to encourage all the dishonest ****s who think "politics" beats working for a living.
Your idea's have much merit....Have a like!!
 
#7
Yes, why not. It would provide us with a little entertainment.
 
#8
Definitely not.


Kim il Kunt has the right idea, feed him and his wife to rabid pigs, for treason against the "what a ****ing state they left us in."

Then shoot every twat with any Blair DNA, confiscate all their ill- gotten assets, to encourage all the dishonest ****s who think "politics" beats working for a living.
Much to fast and painless!
 
#9
Oi, this is the Serious Bit you know. Not that I'd necessarily disagree with many of the sentiments expressed above, but even now the 'wake from regeneration cycle' is kicking in on one of the Moderators.
 
#11
For War Crimes that is, for allegedly faking the evidence for the invasion of Iraq. I have a fairly austere opinion of him but the evidence is obscure, or perhaps has been obscured. I think that a trial - absolutely not in the UK - would enable documents to be unearthed, persons to be interviewed under oath etc. If he were found guilty he could be punished, if found not guilty it would benefit him as he would be able to wave the verdict in the face of his detractors.

I'm not stupid enough to think that would ever be allowed to happen, but there have been a lot of statements on here about him and it would be interesting to know whether people feel that there is a case to answer.
You need to get a life
 
#12
We were being serious, the damage Blair and his henchmen have done this country, seems to be irrepairable without almost Nazi extremes to put right the wrongs, and dicks like Smegg and camoron aren't prepared to do it.
 
S

syledis

Guest
#14
I dont care if he got convicted or not, i just want to see him spend his fortune on defending himself over a period of years as Money is his real God.
 
#15
And most, if not all of us who joined him in TELIC (especially TELIC 1), could be in the dock with him. Saying you believed you were following a "lawful order" may not be grounds to avoid prosecution.

Against that, what "War Crime" would they be trying him under, and can it be proved that beyond all reasonable doubt that, at the time, the intelligence regarding WMD* was known to be utterly false. I also doubt any Government, let along the UK one, for reasons of precedent, allow something like the ICC to rule on an issue like this.

tl;dr - no ****ing chance.


*Which, by the way, David Kelly believed existed.
 
#16
And most, if not all of us who joined him in TELIC (especially TELIC 1), could be in the dock with him. Saying you believed you were following a "lawful order" may not be grounds to avoid prosecution.
Well they could argue that Blair, Campbell and John Scarlett had faked the evidence so well that they had genuinely believed that there were indeed WMD in Iraq capable of hitting 'British interests' within 45 minutes.

Against that, what "War Crime" would they be trying him under
War of aggression - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
#17
I got the lowest mark in my 2nd year at Uni for law and I reckon I could drive coach and horses through those definitions, especially if you were going for a "beyond reasonable doubt" standard.

Face it, at the end of the day, people don't like Tony Blair, in part because it became fashionable not like Tony Blair, but most likely that doesn't mean he's a war criminal. Indeed, the first group of people to use the "war criminal" tag for him were people like the SWP and George Galloway - I'm not sure I'm comfortable on taking on their cloak.
 
#18
I got the lowest mark in my 2nd year at Uni for law and I reckon I could drive coach and horses through those definitions, especially if you were going for a "beyond reasonable doubt" standard.
Then he would be found not guilty and leave with his head held high, and defy anyone who called him a war criminal. If you are right, putting him on trial would do him a favour.

I wasn't asking if people thought him guilty, I was asking people if they thought there was a case to answer.
 

Grumblegrunt

LE
Book Reviewer
#19
he should be stripped of his profiteering, the houses sold and the cash distributed amongst those he had killed. IMO. along with him and all those associated with his seed banned from public office so we don't get the son raping the public purse.
 
#20
Then he would be found not guilty and leave with his head held high, and defy anyone who called him a war criminal. If you are right, putting him on trial would do him a favour.

I wasn't asking if people thought him guilty, I was asking people if they thought there was a case to answer.
In that case, no, I don't think there is a case to answer.
 

Latest Threads

Top