Senator Pinochetís belated release my mind turns to the Pinochet
Legacy, or the idea that political figures can be arrested in
one country for political crimes on the request of a third country.
This is seen as a political victory for the left as left wing
brutes such as Robert Mugabe, Fidel Castro and anyone connected
with the Chinese regime are for the moment safe. As
I have said before this was not a cry for justice but a political
grudge by a set of ex-Marxists who smarted at being on the losing
and repellent side of the Cold War. But pendula swing, and the
New World Order, or whatever, will not always be a left wing one.
Sooner or later avowedly right wing groups and personalities will
take control of the levers of international power and will have
their own grudges borne out. Near the top of that grudge list
must be the
most irritating and sanctimonious man on Earth, Saint Tony
of Kosovo. Of course any politically motivated prosecution would
be wrong, as it was with Senator Pinochet, but as consistency
and honour are out of fashion (and one can not be out of
fashion in these inclusive days) I will try to prepare a charge
sheet for the War Criminal Blair.
Blair is complicit in the kidnapping and house arrest (my
God, this sounds like Burma or Pakistan) of Senator Pinochet.
Welcomed into this country on the invitation of the Government,
he was then arrested in hospital while under anaesthetic. He was
held on a faulty warrant, and instead of being released when the
warrant was found to be void, his legal team where not informed
and he was kept without a warrant. Detaining people without warrant
is the definition of kidnapping, whether it is done by the Government
or by individuals. While it is undisputed that this was done for
political purposes (to take one example among many the Prime Minister
referred to Senator Pinochet as "unspeakable" in his
address to the ruling Party conference) the detention without
charge went on for more than sixteen months. Habeas Corpus was
another casualty at the altar of modernisation.
deaths of 500,000
Iraqi children (thatís 4,000 a month) due to bombing
and sanctions on the Government can not be described as anything
other than genocide. The children are dying on a large scale,
for something (the political composition of their government)
which is beyond their control due to the group to which they were
born into. If this is not genocide then we need to throw out the
dictionary. As Britain is enthusiastic in its participation in
this genocide, this is another reason to take Mr. Blair to the
dock, preferably without having to starve his children first.
OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
am not a person who believes that International Law, with its
undemocratic antecedents, should be taken too seriously. However,
Mr. Blair plainly is. It may pay to look at his actual
record in this area. I am not even going to look at
the way in which civilian Serbs have been plainly targeted by
the NATO bombers, and by the
NATO occupation force in Kosovo. A sovereign nation (Serbia)
was attacked without reference to the UN security council, with
a mandate only connected to its internal policies. Both of these
constitute a breach of the United Nations Charter. The use of
NATO in an operation where none of its members were attacked was
also a breach of the NATO charter. I may believe that we should
withdraw from both of these organisations, but I am not talking
about my standards but those of the model internationalist, St.
Tony the Hypocrite.
THE COURSE OF JUSTICE
thinking of the damage that Mr. Blair did to the peace process
in Chile through his arrest of Senator Pinochet, one has to look
Blairís own peace process in Northern Ireland. Convicted terrorists
have been freed in the hope that they will lead their private
armies away from war (they havenít Ė but this is not the point).
terrorists have been given privileged positions in both the
assembly and the government of the province. The atrocity at Omagh
has not been punished 18 months on, even though both the British
government and IRA/Sinn Fein know the culprits. Justice has been
denied to the victims. Now I may oppose the "Peace Process"
for precisely this reason, but I do recognize that governments
have the right to decide that situations may be so extreme that
justice has to be denied. I would be indignant if another country
decided to interfere (for example America)
in the "Peace Process" which I believe to be so flawed,
simply because it should be up to the British government to, well,
govern. This means it must make its own mistakes. As Mr. Blairís
actions over Senator Pinochet show, this exercise of national
sovereignty is beyond "third world" Chile, as it seems
that only white men can have a peace process. I disagree with
this and so wish to indict Mr. Blair for perverting the course