The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum

=> Blair VS Blair

Blair VS Blair

Posted by Maggie (Guest) anngeorgegallery@earthlink.net - Friday, July 29 2005, 22:56:05 (CEST) from 69.225.61.190 - adsl-69-225-61-190.dsl.skt2ca.pacbell.net Network - Windows XP - Internet Explorer Website: Website title:

Blair v Blair in the War Against Terror GERRI PEEV POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT AND FRASER NELSON POLITICAL EDITOR Key points • Prime Minister Tony Blair calls for tougher terrorism laws • Cherie Blair said Judges should uphold human rights • Mr Blair wants to lengthen the time a suspect can be detained without charge Key quote "I may offend people when I say this, but 11 September for me was a wake-up call. Do you know what I think the problem is? That a lot of the world woke up for a short time and then turned over and went back to sleep again." – Tony Blair Story in full CHERIE Blair yesterday made an extraordinary criticism of her husband's government as she called for the judiciary to stand up to the "hurly-burly of majoritarian politics" in the war on terror. Judges, she said, should resist political pressure over the conviction of suspected extremists and uphold human rights legislation. She spoke as Mr Blair was making the opposite case, recounting how judges had thwarted his attempts to throw out extremists and complaining that "we still have not woken up to what this thing is about". Whereas Mr Blair was striking consensus with Michael Howard and Charles Kennedy in Downing Street over new terror laws, his wife was becoming a voice of opposition as she gave a lecture in Malaysia. She stressed she did not want to make light of the bomb blasts in London or the challenges being faced by British police and intelligence services. But she added: "At the same time, it is all too easy for us to respond to such terror in a way which undermines commitment to our most deeply held values and convictions and which cheapens our right to call ourselves a civilised nation." An independent judiciary, she said, had "the important task of reviewing executive action against the benchmark of human rights". She made clear that the pressure to convict on the proposed new laws of inciting or glorifying terrorism should be guarded by regard for British civil liberties. "In our troubled times where terrorism, division and suspicion of others are the order of the day, this role for judges is perhaps more vital than ever before," she told 1,000 lawyers, diplomats and academics in Kuala Lumpur. She also appeared to endorse the law lords' decision in December last year to overturn the government's right to detain foreign terror suspects without trial or access to the evidence held against them. Mrs Blair cited this as an example of how the judiciary had tried to curb rights abuses. She added that courts had to "act as guardians of the weakest, poorest and most marginalised members of society against the hurly-burly of majoritarian politics". Her call for the rule of law to be upheld made a striking contrast with what Mr Blair said at a press conference in Downing Street just hours later, where he vowed to confront the terrorists at every step. Mr Blair said he had repeatedly been thwarted by such judges in trying to remove extremists. "We have been trying to get rid of these people," he said at his monthly press conference. "Now I am afraid occasionally what has happened is we have tried to get rid of them, and we have been blocked." When asked how he was blocked, he said only: "You can go back over the court cases and read them." But judges may yield in the aftermath of the London attacks, he suggested, saying: "I think it is important we recognise that there is a different mood today." He added that it was "perfectly reasonable" to have greater powers to detain and interrogate suspects in light of the terror attacks, and made it clear he expected the judiciary to uphold the new laws. "The independence of the judiciary is a principle of our democracy and we have to uphold it, but I hope that recent events have created a situation where people understand that it is important that we do protect ourselves," he said. The arguments put forward by the House of Lords when it rejected measures to detain foreign suspects indefinitely would fail if they were put forward today, he argued. "I doubt those words would be uttered now," he said. Mr Blair was twice challenged over what critics call "Londonistan" - the capital's reputation as Europe's capital of Islamic extremism, because judges are so reluctant to convict. Mr Blair seemed to have his wife's target audience in mind when he said that the problem was that too few people have accepted the new security dynamics. "I may offend people when I say this," he said, "but 11 September for me was a wake-up call. Do you know what I think the problem is? That a lot of the world woke up for a short time and then turned over and went back to sleep again." He would not say whether he was referring to judges who have thwarted 19 of the Metropolitan Police's 20 cases where they tried to prosecute on terror charges. Mrs Blair - a QC and one of Britain's leading human rights lawyers - is known to be on the left of her husband politically, and has frequently made statements which seem to contradict his policy. She caused a furore three years ago when she seemed to sympathise with Palestinian suicide bombers on the day that one had struck a Jerusalem bus killing 40 people. "As long as young people feel they have got no hope but to blow themselves up, you are never going to make progress," she said then. Yesterday, Mr Blair acted angrily to suggestions that Palestinians were acting because they believed their bodies were their only weapon. "It is just a lie when they say that people have got no option but to engage in terrorism," he said. "They do have an option. That is why I have fought hard to get the road map adopted, to try and get a process under way." Mr Blair delivered a feisty 90-minute performance, in which he claimed he had never meant to suggest that the London attacks were entirely unconnected with the Iraq war. Extremists "will use Iraq to try and recruit and motivate people," he said. While the parties broadly backed the creation of three new offences - outlawing inciting terrorism, preparing an attack and giving or receiving terror training - agreement on more controversial proposals remained outstanding. Both Mr Howard and Mr Kennedy had concerns over proposals to detain suspects for up to 90 days without charge. They also failed to sign up to the use of intercept evidence, such as bugged telephone calls and e-mails. Other measures under consideration include dealing with extremist publications and bookshops and the use of the internet to promote terrorism. Mr Blair will continue to push for the extension of detention without charge as he said police had reported "operational difficulties" with the 14-day limit. Mr Blair said: "I think it perfectly reasonable for us in circumstances of great difficulty to have a greater detention in order that there can be the interrogation of people who are suspected of doing this." In contrast to his wife's warning about "majoritarian politics", Mr Blair said: "I am very pleased that the cross-party consensus on the way forward is continuing. I think when the main political parties present a united front then you send an important signal to the terrorists of our strength, our determination, our unity to defeat them." Yesterday, No10 said it did not know the contents of Mrs Blair's speech and would not comment as it had been made in her professional capacity. But Bob Marshall-Andrews, QC, Labour MP for Medway, said: "Good for Cherie Blair. I'm very pleased she's said it. As well as being the Prime Minister's wife, she's a highly-qualified lawyer, and she has every right to speak out at times like these. "Now the consequences of the Iraq war are here, we must be sure we don't destroy our civil liberties." Discord at Downing Street She says An independent judiciary has the important task of executive action against the benchmark of human rights He says The independence of the judiciary is a principle of our democracy, but I hope that recent events have created a situation where people understand that it is important that we do protect ourselves She says It is all too easy for us to respond to such terror in a way which undermines our commitment to our most deeply held values and convictions He says I think it perfectly reasonable for us in circumstances of great difficulty to have a greater detention, in order that there can be the interrogation of people who are suspected of doing this She says Courts have to act as guardians of the weakest, poorest and most marginalised members of society against the hurly-burly of majoritarian politics He says I think when the main political parties present a united front then you send an important signal to the terrorists of our strength, our determination, our unity to defeat them She says As long as young people feel they have got no hope but to blow themselves up, you are never going to make progress - JUNE 2002 He says It is just a lie when they say that people have got no option but to engage in terrorism. They do have an option --------------------- - BACK TO INDEX - REPLY - QUOTE - EDIT - DELETE -

The full topic: Blair VS Blair Maggie - Friday, July 29 2005, 22:56:05 (CEST) Re: Blair VS Blair beezelbub in hell - 07/30 01:10 Re: Blair VS Blair AirAmericaRadio.com - 07/30 17:37

Content-length: 10187 Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded Accept: image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, application/x-shockwave-flash, application/vnd.ms-excel, applicatio... Accept-encoding: gzip, deflate Accept-language: en-us Cache-control: no-cache Connection: Keep-Alive Cookie: *hidded* Host: www.insideassyria.com Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf3/rkvsf_core.php?.0OQX. User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; sbcydsl 3.12; YPC 3.0.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; yplus 4.1.00b)

Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9