Sir Tony Blair: More than 400,000 people sign petition for former PM to be stripped of knighthood

[KingKhanWC]

ore than 400,000 people have signed a petition calling for Tony Blair to be stripped of his knighthood.

The former prime minister was made a Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, an appointment personally made by the Queen, in the New Year’s Honours list.

The designation, which now means the 68-year-old is formally known as ‘Sir Tony’, is the most senior order of knighthood in the British honours system.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/...on-knighthood-controversy-garter-b974730.html

Thread isnt regarding knighthoods in general but Tony Blair who is an alleged war crminal giving this title.

Surely this man should be held accountable for his role in the Iraq War.

This is a war which includes WMDs being used by the so called 'liberators'. Children are being born with birth defects due to the chemical weapons used by the 'liberators.'

 

[Robert]

Alleged is the key word. No ICC statute that he can be charged with.

If a man who won three general elections and has no criminal record can’t be appointed Knight of the Garter, I don’t know who can be.

 

[Manunited18]

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/...on-knighthood-controversy-garter-b974730.html

Thread isnt regarding knighthoods in general but Tony Blair who is an alleged war crminal giving this title.

Surely this man should be held accountable for his role in the Iraq War.

This is a war which includes WMDs being used by the so called 'liberators'. Children are being born with birth defects due to the chemical weapons used by the 'liberators.'

Agree, this man has blood on his hands

 

[Technics 1210]

Blair is responsible for the death of 100000s innocent lives including British servicemen, yet Corbyn refuses to drop a nuke.

1 is kicked out of the Labour party while the other is knighted. Guess who.

 

[Technics 1210]

Blair is not alleged to have lied, he did lie, the Chilcot report proves this for starters. The UN agrees too and even Bush admits there were no WDMs.

The only reason Blair was elected thrice was because the economy was booming thanks to deregulation of the finance industry - for which UK is still paying the price.

Don't believe the hype folks.

 

[Technics 1210]

Alleged is the key word. No ICC statute that he can be charged with.

If a man who won three general elections and has no criminal record can’t be appointed Knight of the Garter, I don’t know who can be.

No one is interested in process. Where was the UN process which was circumvented by US and UK when illegally invading Iraq? Who followed process then?

This is a matter of public opinion. Anyone who hides behind process is protecting guilt. Blair is a war criminal in the same way you believe Boris should be in jail.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Alleged is the key word. No ICC statute that he can be charged with.

If a man who won three general elections and has no criminal record can’t be appointed Knight of the Garter, I don’t know who can be.

lol of course its alleged as he has never faced trial.

He should have faced trial in the UK but the judges ruled against it. The ICC is a joke, if a man who lied to his parliament taking his nation to war cant be held accountable neither should any other leaders.

You may call him sir, but many here going by the petition and polls are disgusted and see this man as a criminal of the highest order.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Agree, this man has blood on his hands

Sadly its even worse than shedding blood, killings.

His allies used white phosphorus in Fallujah. You are responsible for everything your collation did too.

As a result babies are being born in Fallujah with birth defects. Their crimes are causing pain to those who werent around at the time of the immoral war.

 

[Technics 1210]

Say a word or attack against Isreal and the Geneva convention is cited along with cries of anti-Semitism.

Funny how the Geneva convention is ignored when it comes to Islamic nations.

And yes, Isreal is the Middle East too.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Tony Blair is to be knighted with the highest possible ranking in the new year honours list, Buckingham Palace has said.

Sir Tony, who held the keys to No 10 between 1997 and 2007, will be appointed a Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, the oldest and most senior British Order of Chivalry.

Tony Blair caused irreparable damage to both the constitution of the United Kingdom and to the very fabric of the nation's society. He was personally responsible for causing the death of countless innocent, civilian lives and servicement in various conflicts. For this alone he should be held accountable for war crimes.

Tony Blair is the least deserving person of any public honour, particularly anything awarded by Her Majesty the Queen.

We petition the Prime Minister to petition Her Majesty to have this honour removed.

https://www.change.org/p/the-prime-...-the-most-noble-order-of-the-garter-rescinded

You can sign the petition here. It may not change anything but its important for the Royals, government and the world to know most Brits dont support this and believe he should be tried in a court of law.

 

[Technics 1210]

View attachment 114041



https://www.change.org/p/the-prime-...-the-most-noble-order-of-the-garter-rescinded

You can sign the petition here. It may not change anything but its important for the Royals, government and the world to know most Brits dont support this and believe he should be tried in a court of law.

Already done

Anyone who supports Blair's innocence when it comes to Iraq and Afghanistan, is supporting stealth Zionism and mass scale Islamophobia. Said lot are dictated by the media.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Already done

Anyone who supports Blair's innocence when it comes to Iraq and Afghanistan, is supporting stealth Zionism and mass scale Islamophobia. Said lot are dictated by the media.

I dont think many do in the UK. Its only the racists, Islamaphobes, war mongers, blind patriots who think their governments are the good guys, they are saving the world like paw patrol.

 

[Zaz]

Its disgusting that this was unashamedly awarded to him

Its two fingers to the ordinary english folk and what they think

This must be rescinded immediately

 

[James]

Given that the British honours system is mired in imperialism, bathed in blood, and has a history of colonial violence, then our former Prime Minister Blair is a particularly appropriate recipient for his knighthood in my opinion…

 

[James]

Btw this should be reposted on the UK parliamentary petitions website… change.org is entirely unofficial, whereas 100,000 signatures sent to the House of Commons would trigger a formal debate on this controversial award.

 

[ElRaja]

Btw this should be reposted on the UK parliamentary petitions website… change.org is entirely unofficial, whereas 100,000 signatures sent to the House of Commons would trigger a formal debate on this controversial award.

no one expects anything to come of it. there is no way the house of commons would entertain a debate regarding the issue. the petition is simply a means of registering how many people feel someone culpable for the united kingdom's involvement in a bloody war which killed millions justified using fabricated pretenses at the behest of a foreign power is undeserving of a knighthood.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Have you read what happened in Fallujah? A lot of Brits have no idea, it was on mainstream news a few years ago but most of these war crimes are hidden by the media and government. Ten years after the chemical weapons dropped on this town, cases of birth defects were still a regular occurance. This may continue for generations to come. Hopefully Blair will be a little sweaty in a hot place by then, ie hell.

 

[James]

Well I did write "You are responsible for everything your collation did too."

Have you read what happened in Fallujah? A lot of Brits have no idea, it was on mainstream news a few years ago but most of these war crimes are hidden by the media and government. Ten years after the chemical weapons dropped on this town, cases of birth defects were still a regular occurance. This may continue for generations to come. Hopefully Blair will be a little sweaty in a hot place by then, ie hell.

Yes I am aware of Fallujah.

Anthony Blair will one day have his face to face with the Almighty and will have to answer for every drop of blood that he is responsible for spilling, I have no doubt about that.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Yes I am aware of Fallujah.

Anthony Blair will one day have his face to face with the Almighty and will have to answer for every drop of blood that he is responsible for spilling, I have no doubt about that.

Even Blair agrees , he said 'God will be my judge on Iraq'. When he realises his God is not money, he will change his tune when meeting the creator.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

The British Establishment has just shown two fingers to all the millions that have died as a result of this mans actions.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

They have also shown how little Muslim lives matter.

 

[Pakpak]

Is anyone surprised, the Royals are a complete joke. Even if he's not had a trial he is 100% responsible for pushing UK into the war resulting in countless deaths. Shameful he's even considered never mind gettung it

 

[KingKhanWC]

Is anyone surprised, the Royals are a complete joke. Even if he's not had a trial he is 100% responsible for pushing UK into the war resulting in countless deaths. Shameful he's even considered never mind gettung it

Nothing new from the Royals. Wasnt Jimmy Saville a sir? Also Robert Mugabe.

I wouldnt be surprised if Boris is given a knighthood for the mess he made of the pandemic.

 

[James]

Boris will undoubtedly get a knighthood when he is in his 70s, ex-PMs all seem to end up getting one in the end no matter how bad a job they did.

I read a view yesterday which was agreeable to me: namely the Empire-based honours institution as it stands to be scrapped, and to be replaced with a new civic awards system wherein only normal members of the public — for community involvement, charity work, acts of bravery and heroism, etc — are considered for the award.

I think that politicians, actors, celebrities, sportspeople, etc get enough recognition as it is.

 

[Technics 1210]

Given that the British honours system is mired in imperialism, bathed in blood, and has a history of colonial violence, then our former Prime Minister Blair is a particularly appropriate recipient for his knighthood in my opinion…

Yet when a semi black takes the knee (Hamilton) it’s liberalism.

 

[Technics 1210]

Boris will undoubtedly get a knighthood when he is in his 70s, ex-PMs all seem to end up getting one in the end no matter how bad a job they did.

I read a view yesterday which was agreeable to me: namely the Empire-based honours institution as it stands to be scrapped, and to be replaced with a new civic awards system wherein only normal members of the public — for community involvement, charity work, acts of bravery and heroism, etc — are considered for the award.

I think that politicians, actors, celebrities, sportspeople, etc get enough recognition as it is.

Jimmy Saville says hi. You can call it recognition if you want.

The entire process is rigged.

 

[Pakpak]

Nothing new from the Royals. Wasnt Jimmy Saville a sir? Also Robert Mugabe.

I wouldnt be surprised if Boris is given a knighthood for the mess he made of the pandemic.

If Blair, the man responsible for mass murder and also directly responsible for the mess Iraq is now is given one, you're right....Boris wouldn't be far down the list. This is the same family protecting people like Andrew. But then again look at where the Royals are from, responsible for the worst genocides not even 150 years ago around the globe during colonialism.

 

[KingKhanWC]

If Blair, the man responsible for mass murder and also directly responsible for the mess Iraq is now is given one, you're right....Boris wouldn't be far down the list. This is the same family protecting people like Andrew. But then again look at where the Royals are from, responsible for the worst genocides not even 150 years ago around the globe during colonialism.

Yes such alleged criminals get rewarded by the Royals. It really is something medival. A family born into wealth, with no accountablility, no chance of removal or change. Yet they say we live in a democracy.

 

[Robert]

Yes such alleged criminals get rewarded by the Royals. It really is something medival. A family born into wealth, with no accountablility, no chance of removal or change. Yet they say we live in a democracy.

“Thread isnt regarding knighthoods in general” you wrote in your OP. Do try and stick to your own script.

Tell me this: why do you think Sir Tony Blair KG has not been summonsed by The Hague Court? Or any British Army General? Be specific. Talk about legal process.

 

[Technics 1210]

The United States is not a State Party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Since Iraq and Afghanistan wars were lead by USA with the help of UK, by definition Tony Blair cannot be tried.

This means USA and its allies can wage war, engage in war crimes etc but never be tried for it. Welcome to NATO ladies and gentlemen. A war machine acting with impunity.

Disgusting that liberals support such a regime.

 

[Robert]

The United States is not a State Party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Since Iraq and Afghanistan wars were lead by USA with the help of UK, by definition Tony Blair cannot be tried.

This means USA and its allies can wage war, engage in war crimes etc but never be tried for it. Welcome to NATO ladies and gentlemen. A war machine acting with impunity.

Disgusting that liberals support such a regime.

That’s not correct for several reasons.

Firstly, UK signed the four Geneva Protocols and to the ICC. Doesn’t matter that USA did not sign up to the latter. The UK is a sovereign nation, not subordinate to the Pentagon or POTUS. So an alleged British war criminal is liable to arrest and trial by ICC.

Secondly, Iraq was not a NATO operation. It was a USA and UK operation. All other NATO states stayed out.

Thirdly, the Liberal Democrats voted against invasion as a bloc. All 63 MPs.

African despots were charged by the ICC. Serbian warlords were. Why hasn’t Sir Tony Blair been charged? Let’s have a look:

https://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/pids/publications/uicceng.pdf

Scroll down a bit and you will see the statute of Crimes of Aggression. That might apply to Iraq, but it became law in 2010 and is not retrospective.

So what alleged crime does this thread believe Sir Tony can be charged with?

 

[Robert]

Nothing new from the Royals. Wasnt Jimmy Saville a sir? Also Robert Mugabe.

I wouldnt be surprised if Boris is given a knighthood for the mess he made of the pandemic.

Saville and Mugabe were political appointees by the PMs of the day. Saville for charity work, Mugabe to ease trade relations. The Sovereign cannot refuse to do so, though she might advise against.

Blair has been appointed to the Order of the Garter directly by the Sovereign. There are only 26 of these at any one time. It stems from Plantagenet times. Thirteen Knights for the Sovereign and thirteen for the Black Prince. Thirteen is of course a pagan number.

Johnson will be knighted in time, as all Prime Ministers are.

 

[Technics 1210]

That’s not correct for several reasons.

Firstly, UK signed the four Geneva Protocols and to the ICC. Doesn’t matter that USA did not sign up to the latter. The UK is a sovereign nation, not subordinate to the Pentagon or POTUS. So an alleged British war criminal is liable to arrest and trial by ICC.

Secondly, Iraq was not a NATO operation. It was a USA and UK operation. All other NATO states stayed out.

Thirdly, the Liberal Democrats voted against invasion as a bloc. All 63 MPs.

African despots were charged by the ICC. Serbian warlords were. Why hasn’t Sir Tony Blair been charged? Let’s have a look:

https://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/pids/publications/uicceng.pdf

Scroll down a bit and you will see the statute of Crimes of Aggression. That might apply to Iraq, but it became law in 2010 and is not retrospective.

So what alleged crime does this thread believe Sir Tony can be charged with?

It is 100% correct. USA is not a signatory of the ICC. This is all that matters.

Furthermore you cite Article 5 (an attack on a NATO member etc) as the precursor/justification to the Iraq war. Now you are claiming the Iraq war was not a NATO operation?

You cannot cling to process given USA and UK ignored the UN process. Blair and Bush knew they were immune from prosecution in 2002. No point citing a law from 2010.

Blair lied to parliament and his lies resulted not only in an illegal war but also 100000s loss of lives. Mass Murderer - this is his crime.

 

[Robert]

It is 100% correct. USA is not a signatory of the ICC. This is all that matters.

Furthermore you cite Article 5 (an attack on a NATO member etc) as the precursor/justification to the Iraq war. Now you are claiming the Iraq war was not a NATO operation?

You cannot cling to process given USA and UK ignored the UN process. Blair and Bush knew they were immune from prosecution in 2002. No point citing a law from 2010.

Blair lied to parliament and his lies resulted not only in an illegal war but also 100000s loss of lives. Mass Murderer - this is his crime.

I’m not “claiming”. It’s fact. Article Five was not declared. Where did you get that from? While some forty countries contributed to the Iraq post-invasion stabilising operation, plenty of NATO states did not, and plenty of non-NATO states did, including some from the ME and Gulf.

The 2003 invasion phase was USA, UK, Poland, Australia and Iraqi Kurds.

Ok, so you accept that there is no crime on the statutes that Sir Tony can be charged with. No war crime, no crime against humanity, no crime of aggression.

Lying to Parliament isn’t a crime either - though it should be, in my opinion.

 

[Technics 1210]

I’m not “claiming”. It’s fact. Article Five was not declared. Where did you get that from? While some forty countries contributed to the Iraq post-invasion stabilising operation, plenty of NATO states did not, and plenty of non-NATO states did, including some from the ME and Gulf.

The 2003 invasion phase was USA, UK, Poland, Australia and Iraqi Kurds.

Ok, so you accept that there is no crime on the statutes that Sir Tony can be charged with. No war crime, no crime against humanity, no crime of aggression.

Lying to Parliament isn’t a crime either - though it should be, in my opinion.

You mentioned Article 5 in the past.

Where did I accept there is no crime? I clearly mentioned Blair's lies lead to the mass murder of innocent lives. This is his crime. Mass murder.

Have you read the Chilcot report? Here are the key points : https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/06/iraq-inquiry-key-points-from-the-chilcot-report

An international court decides if the war is illegal or not but since USA is not a signatory of the ICC and since USA lead the war, USA cannot be 'tried' along with those nations who helped the USA. It would be like passing judgement on the Holocaust without mentioning the Nazis. This is precisly why the Chilcot report was comissioned becauae it was about the closest to an official investigation to Blair's actions and decisions.

Again, there is no point in you citing process when USA and UK ignored the UN process in the first place.

If this was some leader in the ME, Russia, or China, you'd be posting a different opinion.

 

[Technics 1210]

NATO invoked Article 5 on 12 September 2001, 24 hours after the terrorist attacks against the United States.

https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2006/06/01/invoking-article-5/index.html

Anyone who thinks the war in Iraq (a response to 9/11) was not a NATO operation needs to read up a little more. Just because a handful of NATO members joined the war does not mean the Iraq war was not a NATO operation.

 

[Robert]

You mentioned Article 5 in the past.

Where did I accept there is no crime? I clearly mentioned Blair's lies lead to the mass murder of innocent lives. This is his crime. Mass murder.

Have you read the Chilcot report? Here are the key points : https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/06/iraq-inquiry-key-points-from-the-chilcot-report

An international court decides if the war is illegal or not but since USA is not a signatory of the ICC and since USA lead the war, USA cannot be 'tried' along with those nations who helped the USA. It would be like passing judgement on the Holocaust without mentioning the Nazis. This is precisly why the Chilcot report was comissioned becauae it was about the closest to an official investigation to Blair's actions and decisions.

Again, there is no point in you citing process when USA and UK ignored the UN process in the first place.

If this was some leader in the ME, Russia, or China, you'd be posting a different opinion.

Article 5 was declared in relation to 9/11, not Iraq.

Of course nations cannot be tried. Individual politicians can be, though.

If you want Sir Tony charged with something related to Iraq, then legal process will have to be followed. Else you are merely screaming into the void.

 

[Robert]

NATO invoked Article 5 on 12 September 2001, 24 hours after the terrorist attacks against the United States.

https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2006/06/01/invoking-article-5/index.html

Anyone who thinks the war in Iraq (a response to 9/11) was not a NATO operation needs to read up a little more. Just because a handful of NATO members joined the war does not mean the Iraq war was not a NATO operation.

Of course it means just that. Reading up a little more doesn’t change facts. Bush 43 was always going to invade Iraq. 9/11 was just the excuse he used to advance his plans and change public opinion.

Afghanistan was NATO-led and UN-sanctioned. Iraq was neither.

 

[Technics 1210]

Article 5 was declared in relation to 9/11, not Iraq.

Of course nations cannot be tried. Individual politicians can be, though.

If you want Sir Tony charged with something related to Iraq, then legal process will have to be followed. Else you are merely screaming into the void.

The Iraq war was a response to 9/11. I really don’t understand where you get your info from.

Blair and Bush are immune from prosecution thus carried out mass murders. They knew this before engaging in war.

ICC cannot put Blair on trial whilst ignoring Bush. Blair’s excuse was and still is, the UK stands with USA.

There is a legal process but Bush and Blair are immune. USA is not a member of ICC, and Blair cannot be tried as an individual without reference to Bush.

Feel free to support and defend these war criminals, remember, they too did not follow process.

This is called white western privilege.

 

[Technics 1210]

Of course it means just that. Reading up a little more doesn’t change facts. Bush 43 was always going to invade Iraq. 9/11 was just the excuse he used to advance his plans and change public opinion.

Afghanistan was NATO-led and UN-sanctioned. Iraq was neither.

The fact is you clearly mentioned Article Five was not declared, this turned out to be false.

Anyway, now you admit Iraq war was going to happen anyway, 9/11 was just an excuse etc. Afghanistan added for giggles.

 

[James]

The relative merit (or not) of most of the wars which have been fought throughout human history can be debated from the perspectives of both a “case for” and a “case against”, and the “just war theory” is a credible area of discussion that can be explored. But surely the Iraq War / Second Gulf is an exception to this rule? It is one of the most grossly awful and immoral violations of international law on record and it dubiously boasts what is essentially a 100% negative legacy. I am really surprised that it could still have any defenders let alone supporters !

 

[Technics 1210]

The relative merit (or not) of most of the wars which have been fought throughout human history can be debated from the perspectives of both a “case for” and a “case against”, and the “just war theory” is a credible area of discussion that can be explored. But surely the Iraq War / Second Gulf is an exception to this rule? It is one of the most grossly awful and immoral violations of international law on record and it dubiously boasts what is essentially a 100% negative legacy. I am really surprised that it could still have any defenders let alone supporters !

100% true.

Blair and Bush not only violated international law, but international process too, and now their supporters/defenders want to follow the legal process. You couldn’t make it up.

 

[IMMY69]

I've just signed the petition.

Disgusting that this man, with so much blood on his hands, can be awarded a knighthood!

 

[Robert]

The Iraq war was a response to 9/11. I really don’t understand where you get your info from.

Blair and Bush are immune from prosecution thus carried out mass murders. They knew this before engaging in war.

ICC cannot put Blair on trial whilst ignoring Bush. Blair’s excuse was and still is, the UK stands with USA.

There is a legal process but Bush and Blair are immune. USA is not a member of ICC, and Blair cannot be tried as an individual without reference to Bush.

Feel free to support and defend these war criminals, remember, they too did not follow process.

This is called white western privilege.

Where I get my information from:

1) I remember talking about it with American neocons right before Bush 43 was elected. They were gunning for Saddam.

2) Have a read of Ken Clarke’s autobio. He said he spoke with Cheney & Rumsfeld at a diplomatic event, who had a plan to democratise the ME. Bush 43 was in their thrall. Iraq was supposedly the first domino before moving to Syria and finally even Saudi Arabia.

Clarke goes on to say that several British staff Officers asked him as a barrister if they could be charged with war crimes if the invasion went ahead.

9/11 happened and the neocons had the opportunity to advance their plans.

I support nobody in that disaster except the 63 Lib Dem MPs and others who voted against the motion to go to war.

Of course Blair could be tried as UK is signed up to the ICC *if* the statue on Crimes of Aggression was extant in 2003, but it wasn’t so he won’t be. That he was allied with a nation not signatory to ICC is irrelevant.

 

[Technics 1210]

Where I get my information from:

1) I remember talking about it with American neocons right before Bush 43 was elected. They were gunning for Saddam.

2) Have a read of Ken Clarke’s autobio. He said he spoke with Cheney & Rumsfeld at a diplomatic event, who had a plan to democratise the ME. Bush 43 was in their thrall. Iraq was supposedly the first domino before moving to Syria and finally even Saudi Arabia.

Clarke goes on to say that several British staff Officers asked him as a barrister if they could be charged with war crimes if the invasion went ahead.

9/11 happened and the neocons had the opportunity to advance their plans.

I support nobody in that disaster except the 63 Lib Dem MPs and others who voted against the motion to go to war.

Of course Blair could be tried as UK is signed up to the ICC *if* the statue on Crimes of Aggression was extant in 2003, but it wasn’t so he won’t be. That he was allied with a nation not signatory to ICC is irrelevant.

The Iraq war and Afghanistan war, and subsequent wars in the ME were promoted in the West under the banner - The War on Terror. To democratise countries means regime change; democracy is just an excuse. There’d be no legal ramifications if Article 5 was declared. The fact a barrister had to be asked whether charges of war crimes could be applied says it all. They knew there was no basis for war in Iraq, it was Bush 43 finishing off his dad’s war along with dancing to The Zionist tune.

The evidence for Iraq war was fabricated, the investigations and findings from the international bodies (weapon’s inspection etc) was ignored. There was no support for the Iraq war from any of the international countries barring USA and UK until USA arm twisted nations and bandied out the line - you are either with us or with terrorists. The fact the UN process was circumvented for Iraq is all anyone needs to realise the Iraq war was illegal. Funny how the Crimes of Aggression was not extant in 2003. What a coincidence.

If you support the 63 LD MPs who voted against the war, how and why you are defending Blair’s knighthood when his legacy is tainted by the Iraq war is beyond me. Especially if you factor in the Chilcot report (not some Autobiography) which says nothing of democratising Iraq.

Just because Blair hasn’t been tried doesn’t mean he is not guilty; Saddam and Ghaddafi were never tried either but found guilty of carrying out crimes against humanity. The world witnessed Blair’s actions and decisions along with Bush. Only Blair defenders use the legal process line to justify the Iraq war. This is a pattern since 2003.

Still you can go ahead and call the mass-murderer, Sir.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

That’s not correct for several reasons.

Firstly, UK signed the four Geneva Protocols and to the ICC. Doesn’t matter that USA did not sign up to the latter. The UK is a sovereign nation, not subordinate to the Pentagon or POTUS. So an alleged British war criminal is liable to arrest and trial by ICC.

Secondly, Iraq was not a NATO operation. It was a USA and UK operation. All other NATO states stayed out.

Thirdly, the Liberal Democrats voted against invasion as a bloc. All 63 MPs.

African despots were charged by the ICC. Serbian warlords were. Why hasn’t Sir Tony Blair been charged? Let’s have a look:

https://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/pids/publications/uicceng.pdf

Scroll down a bit and you will see the statute of Crimes of Aggression. That might apply to Iraq, but it became law in 2010 and is not retrospective.

So what alleged crime does this thread believe Sir Tony can be charged with?

A bit like asking why didn't the Germans stop Nazis from rising to power in the 20th century. The laws aren't made to punish the good guys silly.

 

[Technics 1210]

African despots and Serbian warlords were charged by the ICC because said nations are not members of NATO. It really is this simple. NATO acts like the world police except when it comes to their own.

It's one rule for NATO members, and another rule for rest of the world.

Of course with USA not being a member of the ICC they can wage war when they want and with whom they want. No questions asked. No wait questions were asked in 2002/2003 but they ignored the evidence and legal process and still went ahead murdering 100000s lives. To make matters worse the UK/USA palmed the lives lost as - wait for this - collateral damage.

The Warlords of the West (who sell weapons including chemical to regimes around the world) make the rest of warmongering leaders in the East look like a summer picnic.

 

[Robert]

A bit like asking why didn't the Germans stop Nazis from rising to power in the 20th century. The laws aren't made to punish the good guys silly.

Well, because they got the trains running on time, bread in the shops, got the economy back on its feet. There were no war crimes to punish in 1932. Those came later.

 

[Kroll]

I don’t think it really matters if this guy gets a knighthood or not.

If you think about, its awarded by the same country that undertook this illegal and disgraceful invasion of an innocent people and country killing thousands.

Its not being awarded by an outside entity and no one in their right mind would do that unless it was the US or Israel.

Not only Blair but the people in power at the time should be brought to book.

Blair could actually have come out as one of the greatest prime ministers in British history. But he has a lot of innocent blood on his hands not to mention the terrible atrocities his troops committed.

 

[the Great Khan]

My take has changed over the years. I now expect things like this. If the sovereign awarded this then as the head of state and representative of the uk people it's quite clear that the this is what they want. A few million signatures mean nothing. Unfortunately as we have seen over many years Muslims or in this case dead Muslims get you votes and awards.

But we have an ally that none of them have. Blair is going to get a massive rude awakening when he realises the angel of death has come for him. Every oppressed iraqi will get justice. I have nothing more for those who support him and those who award him. Your time will come too. We will all face judgement. Blair won't. His fate is sealed.

 

[Technics 1210]

I don’t think it really matters if this guy gets a knighthood or not.

If you think about, its awarded by the same country that undertook this illegal and disgraceful invasion of an innocent people and country killing thousands.

Its not being awarded by an outside entity and no one in their right mind would do that unless it was the US or Israel.

Not only Blair but the people in power at the time should be brought to book.

Blair could actually have come out as one of the greatest prime ministers in British history. But he has a lot of innocent blood on his hands not to mention the terrible atrocities his troops committed.

The Knighthood and other various Honours have lost value in the past 20 years. Back in the day the Knighthood had value. Now a days an English team winning the Ashes or Olympic gold medal can earn an Honour. Winning F1 titles can earn one an honour. Heck even Jimmy Saville was awarded a Knighthood. Ian Botham too, and for what? His charity work.

To top this off, a Prime Minister can nominate the Knighthood for individuals when departing office, known as PM resignation honours. Ironically, Blair was the only PM not to nominate anyone given the Iraq war backlash. Conversely, John Bercow (former speaker of the house) was ignored when Theresa May resigned. She blanked Bercow after he’d tried to thwart a democratic result.

 

[Pakpak]

Over 600,000 now. If there was a person least deserving of the knighthood, Blair would be in the top few candidates on that list.

 

[KingKhanWC]

“Thread isnt regarding knighthoods in general” you wrote in your OP. Do try and stick to your own script.

Tell me this: why do you think Sir Tony Blair KG has not been summonsed by The Hague Court? Or any British Army General? Be specific. Talk about legal process.

Osama Bin Laden was never convincted at the Hague or in any court. In fact there is more evidence Blair is a war criminal but you support the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. Another war where Blair and others should be held accountable for war crimes.

I was giving context to a reply but Im correct its a joke a so called demcracy has a monarchy.

Saville and Mugabe were political appointees by the PMs of the day. Saville for charity work, Mugabe to ease trade relations. The Sovereign cannot refuse to do so, though she might advise against.

Blair has been appointed to the Order of the Garter directly by the Sovereign. There are only 26 of these at any one time. It stems from Plantagenet times. Thirteen Knights for the Sovereign and thirteen for the Black Prince. Thirteen is of course a pagan number.

Johnson will be knighted in time, as all Prime Ministers are.

This is medivial. There are no knights, now kids who didnt go to school are sent to wars while the leaders are given such honours but hide like cowards thousands of miles away.

Saville might have been given a reward for all we know.

 

[Technics 1210]

Osama Bin Laden was never convincted at the Hague or in any court. In fact there is more evidence Bliar is a war criminal but you support the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. Another war where Bliar and others should be held accountable for war crimes.

I was giving context to a reply but Im correct its a joke a so called demcracy has a monarchy.



This is medivial. There are no knights, now kids who didnt go to school are sent to wars while the leaders are given such honours but hide like cowards thousands of miles away.

Saville might have been given a reward for all we know.

Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad, were never tried in an international court of law yet Western leaders found them guilty of crimes against humanity thus serving as a precursor for invasion into respective countries.

They add insult to injury by stating invasion is necessary to instill democracy. It doesn't end here, South America is arguably the greatest victim of Western imperialism with USA indulging in regime change in every possible corner of SA. Let's not forget Pinochet, a servant of the UK government.

Is it a coincidence the likes of Mughabe never faced the wrath of Western forces given he was an outright racist, and practically destroyed white lives in Zimbabwe along with killing many innocent black folk.

Screw the Western governments. Their puppets and muppets, brainwashed by Zionist propaganda, tell us that evil dictators and despots outside of NATO membership do not need a trial to prove guilt yet when one of their own white NATO leaders is up for question they come out with the - follow the legal process horsesh1t.

What really irks me is the Zionist propaganda machine has convinced LD supporters in defending a Labour party MP/PM - why? A Jewish life is worth more than others, thus a Muslim life is worthless. These brainwashed sheep do not value human life anymore, they value a Jewish life above all else. The sheeple can no longer think for themselves. Heck you have Athiests defending a divine right. Such is the power of the Zionist controlled media on the West.

Hats off to the Zionists, I really mean this, their mass brainwashing techniques are a sight to behold.

 

[gazza619]

Does anything ever comes out of these petitions? Or is it just a time wasting exercise.

 

[Technics 1210]

Does anything ever comes out of these petitions? Or is it just a time wasting exercise.

Zilch. Nada. Zero.

These petitions provide a democratic illusion to civilians. You have a voice but it will be ignored. Never in the history of protests against the government has resulted in change This is enough to dupe the sheep who believe they have a voice when they do not. Might as well live in China, Russia, or the ME.

Same reason when millions marched on the streets of UK protesting against the illegal war in Iraq, the government was silent and ignored the voices of the people. Though the Government did listen when trying to thwart a democratic result, aka Brexit.

We do not live in a democracy in the West, we only live an illusion.

The last man to walk into UK parliament with honest intentions was Guy Fawkes.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad, were never tried in an international court of law yet Western leaders found them guilty of crimes against humanity thus serving as a precursor for invasion into respective countries.

They add insult to injury by stating invasion is necessary to instill democracy. It doesn't end here, South America is arguably the greatest victim of Western imperialism with USA indulging in regime change in every possible corner of SA. Let's not forget Pinochet, a servant of the UK government.

Is it a coincidence the likes of Mughabe never faced the wrath of Western forces given he was an outright racist, and practically destroyed white lives in Zimbabwe along with killing many innocent black folk.

Screw the Western governments. Their puppets and muppets, brainwashed by Zionist propaganda, tell us that evil dictators and despots outside of NATO membership do not need a trial to prove guilt yet when one of their own white NATO leaders is up for question they come out with the - follow the legal process horsesh1t.

What really irks me is the Zionist propaganda machine has convinced LD supporters in defending a Labour party MP/PM - why? A Jewish life is worth more than others, thus a Muslim life is worthless. These brainwashed sheep do not value human life anymore, they value a Jewish life above all else. The sheeple can no longer think for themselves. Heck you have Athiests defending a divine right. Such is the power of the Zionist controlled media on the West.

Hats off to the Zionists, I really mean this, their mass brainwashing techniques are a sight to behold.

Its astonishing people are ok to support destorying nations, bombing civillians , which they call collateral damage without any conviction in any court but as soon as a person who is one of their own is accused they want a legal process.

The rest is spot on too. Remember Bliar was made middle east peace envoy lol. This wasnt because he wanted peace in the holy land esp but because he is a lapdog of Zionists. In fact the whole western system based is set up in support of Zionism The war of terror was to destory Muslim nations in order to protect the outpost known as Israel.

I wouldnt be surprised if Bliar's knighthood was a prize from Zionists for killing so many Muslims.

Btw Bliar is a rich man now , he wasnt when he came into politics and yet people think only Asian or African nations are corrupt.

 

[Technics 1210]

Its astonishing people are ok to support destorying nations, bombing civillians , which they call collateral damage without any conviction in any court but as soon as a person who is one of their own is accused they want a legal process.

The rest is spot on too. Remember Bliar was made middle east peace envoy lol. This wasnt because he wanted peace in the holy land esp but because he is a lapdog of Zionists. In fact the whole western system based is set up in support of Zionism The war of terror was to destory Muslim nations in order to protect the outpost known as Israel.

I wouldnt be surprised if Bliar's knighthood was a prize from Zionists for killing so many Muslims.

Btw Bliar is a rich man now , he wasnt when he came into politics and yet people think only Asian or African nations are corrupt.

100% Blair's knighthood was the result of Zionists. Zionist who fund and dictate UK politicians, as they have for over 100 years, along with the royal family, threatened the UK Royals to call in their debt. Hey presto, now their lapdog has a collar.

The sheeple will refer to this lapdog as 'sir'. Yes sir yes sir three bags full sir.

 

[shortbread]

Being answerable to public opinion is not something that the Westminster political elite are comfortable with. They are worried if today it's Blair, tomorrow it could be one of them. Irrespective of which side of the political divide they sit on, English politics will not stand in the way of a war criminal being honoured.

This is also a signal to Hollywood, the need to urgently push for independence. Imagine the ruckus Westminster crooks would have created if this had been the predator Alex Salmons?!

 

[KingKhanWC]

100% Blair's knighthood was the result of Zionists. Zionist who fund and dictate UK politicians, as they have for over 100 years, along with the royal family, threatened the UK Royals to call in their debt. Hey presto, now their lapdog has a collar.

The sheeple will refer to this lapdog as 'sir'. Yes sir yes sir three bags full sir.

The guys who support his knighthood also support Andrew in his defence. I would say there is a large proportion of British people who dont support such evil. Lets not tar all white and coconut Brits with the same brush.

 

[PakLFC]

He should not have been knighted in the first place. Now that he has it will not be removed. Surely the government knew about the impending protests before they knighted him.

 

[Technics 1210]

The guys who support his knighthood also support Andrew in his defence. I would say there is a large proportion of British people who dont support such evil. Lets not tar all white and coconut Brits with the same brush.

Doesn't surprise me.

The biggest peado ring is in Westminster. 'Lord' Janner says hi. Oh wait, how convinent, he is dead.

I feely pity for these so called liberal democratic self proclaimed free thinking brits (and Amreekans), they are anything but. The reality is they dance and sing to the Zionist hymn sheet. Kum-by-ya - can I get a baa baa black sheep!?

 

[KingKhanWC]

Doesn't surprise me.

The biggest peado ring is in Westminster. 'Lord' Janner says hi. Oh wait, how convinent, he is dead.

I feely pity for these so called liberal democratic self proclaimed free thinking brits (and Amreekans), they are anything but. The reality is they dance and sing to the Zionist hymn sheet. Kum-by-ya - can I get a baa baa black sheep!?

The mainstream press are quick to point out the faith/race of some criminals. Surely its also fair to say 'White elitist peado ring' biggest in modern history. Or Christian terrorist leaders as Blair did say God told him to bomb people in Iraq.

 

[James]

He should not have been knighted in the first place. Now that he has it will not be removed. Surely the government knew about the impending protests before they knighted him.

I think some controversy and disagreement was expected, but not this level of pushback, which is proving difficult for them to manage/ignore. The truth is that a significant number of everyday Brits hold Blair in utter contempt due to Iraq. The strength of this sentiment may well have been underestimated by our rulers.

 

[PakLFC]

I think some controversy and disagreement was expected, but not this level of pushback, which is proving difficult for them to manage/ignore. The truth is that a significant number of everyday Brits hold Blair in utter contempt due to Iraq. The strength of this sentiment may well have been underestimated by our rulers.

Thing is Tony Blair is a satanist. It is very difficult to deal with someone who is so deeply involved with dark forces. I don't think anyone in government has the guts to deal with him. Even Boris must be terrified of what will be done to him if he were to stand up against Blair.

 

[Kroll]

Does anything ever comes out of these petitions? Or is it just a time wasting exercise.

There's a parliament petition site in which the MPs have to debate the petition if there over 100k signatures.

In this case, the Honour's Committee cannot rescind the knighthood cos it's considered a personal gift bestowed by the Queen and not the govt. in the New Years Honour's List.

 

[Manunited18]

Blair is the ultimate Zionist lapdog. This knighthood is a recognition for his hideous crimes he's committed in Iraq and the middle East to ensure the zionest lobby continue to manipulate.

 

[MenInG]

All comments on this thread should not be personal attacks on others - you may not be taking specific names of posters but its easy to tell from the text who it is aimed at.

Do not do this.

 

[Kroll]

Blair is the ultimate Zionist lapdog. This knighthood is a recognition for his hideous crimes he's committed in Iraq and the middle East to ensure the zionest lobby continue to manipulate.

Ironically, the only winner to come out of the war is Iran, the zionists biggest enemy.

Now the US and their lapdogs are after Iran lol, you couldn’t make it up.

 

[Robert]

I wonder would those signing the petition also choose to remove Clem Atlee’s peerage?

He followed USA into an Asian war whose civilian casualties dwarfed those in Iraq.

 

[Varun]

He'll get his knighthood on schedule and you popcorn change.org petition will do nothing to stop it.

Try something else next time.

 

[Technics 1210]

I wonder would those signing the petition also choose to remove Clem Atlee’s peerage?

He followed USA into an Asian war whose civilian casualties dwarfed those in Iraq.

I wasn’t alive then, but did he lie to Parliament? Was evidence fabricated? Was the UN even around then? Did he by-pass legal process?

All I know is he created the NHS after inheriting a near bankrupt UK post WW2.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

He'll get his knighthood on schedule and you popcorn change.org petition will do nothing to stop it.

Try something else next time.

What would you suggest? Decent people are less bothered about stopping it than getting their message out there via democratic means.

 

[Varun]

What would you suggest? Decent people are less bothered about stopping it than getting their message out there via democratic means.

Just off the top of my head, how about? :

1. An armada of people holding placards outside the British parliament in session.
2. Writing a strongly worded letter to your local MP who should promise to represent the views inside parliament.
3. Crowdfunding to purchase advertising/hoarding space where the opposition to this person's knighthood is mentioned loud and clear.

Clicking a button online is no skin in the game, and should rightfully deserve zero award.

 

[Robert]

I wasn’t alive then, but did he lie to Parliament? Was evidence fabricated? Was the UN even around then? Did he by-pass legal process?

All I know is he created the NHS after inheriting a near bankrupt UK post WW2.

The UN Charter was signed in late 1945.

Causus belli was to halt the invasion / spread of communism from NK to ROK I believe. The UN Security Council asked NK to withdraw, though Russia abstained and China was not yet recognised by the UN at that time so had no seat. They came in on the NK side later.

The USAF B-29s ranged all over north Korea and burned every city and town to the ground with napalm, killing 10% of the population. Even the hardcase Churchill described their tactics as cruel.

Attlee, Churchill, Eden and Macmillan later applied scorched earth and dumped Agent Orange in Malaya.

I suppose I’m raising a strawman here but my point is that no British PM has clean hands, and they all get knighted or a peerage.

 

[Robert]

Clicking a button online is no skin in the game, and should rightfully deserve zero award.

Agreed, it’s a cop out to make people feel better without doing any work. More people should get involved in politics.

 

[silentkiller187]

Just off the top of my head, how about? :

1. An armada of people holding placards outside the British parliament in session.
2. Writing a strongly worded letter to your local MP who should promise to represent the views inside parliament.
3. Crowdfunding to purchase advertising/hoarding space where the opposition to this person's knighthood is mentioned loud and clear.

Clicking a button online is no skin in the game, and should rightfully deserve zero award.

Petition.org petitions are debated in UK parliament once they reach 100,000 signatures i believe, trust me this is the quickest way to draw attention to a topic, writing letters will probably not even get you a reply.

 

[Technics 1210]

Agreed, it’s a cop out to make people feel better without doing any work. More people should get involved in politics.

Come on dude. Politics is rigged. Plus an honest man never succeeds in politics.

 

[IMMY69]

The UN Charter was signed in late 1945.

Causus belli was to halt the invasion / spread of communism from NK to ROK I believe. The UN Security Council asked NK to withdraw, though Russia abstained and China was not yet recognised by the UN at that time so had no seat. They came in on the NK side later.

The USAF B-29s ranged all over north Korea and burned every city and town to the ground with napalm, killing 10% of the population. Even the hardcase Churchill described their tactics as cruel.

Attlee, Churchill, Eden and Macmillan later applied scorched earth and dumped Agent Orange in Malaya.

I suppose I’m raising a strawman here but my point is that no British PM has clean hands, and they all get knighted or a peerage.

But the whole point of Democracy is to have your voice.
Signing a petition will likely come to nothing but it sends out a message that people will not accept any more phoney wars, being lied to and the killing of tens of thousands of people on the back is misinformation.

 

[Robert]

Petition.org petitions are debated in UK parliament once they reach 100,000 signatures i believe, trust me this is the quickest way to draw attention to a topic, writing letters will probably not even get you a reply.

Writing letters to your MP often gets a reply though it tends to be a generic one.

Ten MPs out of 650 will turn up to Parliament and say “It’s up to The Queen not us” and that will be that.

Change the MPs for ones who will listen.