POLITICS: Impeachment Motion Against Tony Blair Filed, page 1

posted on Nov, 24 2004 @ 02:59 PM

link

It seems that the objective of the motion by 20+ MPs through Bristish Parliament to impeach Tony Blair is geared towards embarrassing the Prime Minister. The motion is that he be impeached for gross misconduct in supporting the US-led war on Iraq, which may be cheered on by many, but which will not succeed as it is not supported by opposing parties. Just how the motion proceeds remains to be seen.

news.yahoo.com
MPs file motion to impeach Blair over Iraq invasion

Wed Nov 24, 7:37 AM ET

LONDON (AFP) - Twenty-three members of parliament filed a motion to impeach Prime Minister Tony Blair (news - web sites) on charges of "gross misconduct" over the US-led invasion of Iraq (news - web sites).

However, the first such bid to impeach a prime minister in 198 years has no chance of passing as it lacks the official backing of the two main opposition parties, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats...

The MPs say Blair misled parliament and the country over the case for war, destroying "the fundamental principle of parliamentary democracy" that the government must tell the truth to MPs. The group wants a select committee to be set up to examine the prime minister's conduct in relation to the war. They want it to consider if there are sufficient grounds to impeach him on charges of "gross misconduct."

It says it should consider the conclusion of the Iraq Survey Group that Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) did not have weapons of mass destruction and UN Secretary General Kofi Annan (news - web sites)'s declaration that the war was illegal... (contd.)

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Impeachment is not about removal from office, it is about charging the subject with misconduct and qualifying the misconduct. US President Clinton was impeached for lying under oath about sexual activity.

The leaders of the foreign incursion into Iraq, predicated knowingly on false and fabricated intelligence, are responsible for the loss of more vital body fluids of hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

Whether the British MPs do this symbolically or whether they truly expect to raise the stakes in looking at the actual nature of misconduct in foreign affairs, this is a historical motion, the first in nearly 200 years.

[edit on 11-24-2004 by William One Sac]

Seekerof

posted on Nov, 24 2004 @ 03:25 PM

link

With elections coming in (May), and as "historical" as this may seem or even be, I don't see this action going anywhere.

Question:
Do the 23 members, speaking on the fundamental principle of parliamentary democracy, amount to a majority, in that I believe there are 659 total members?

IMHO, I'm sensing that this is more for 'humiliation' purposes than anything else.

seekerof

rustiswordz

posted on Nov, 25 2004 @ 08:55 AM

link

The fact that they have taken this step shows a level of dissent not seen for many years.

You dont impeach someone unless there is something fundementally wrong.

I agree it wont go anywhere but to take such an action...

infinite

posted on Nov, 25 2004 @ 09:04 AM

link

Nothing will happen to be honest, seeings both Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have not back this (Lib Dems publicly said that they will not be backing this).

Most of the members are what you call "back benchers" in parliament.

But if the Conservatives do support this, they can call for a "motion of confidence" and force a general election now or the government be removed. I did make a thead about "motion of confidence" afew months back.