“Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.” Abraham Lincoln

Arresting Politicians – British Hypocrisy.

with 5 comments

The media is full of stories concerning Tzipi Livni and a potential arrest warrant issued against her in the British courts.

That is, I think, a little bit unusual?

I can’t remember of any other nationality, or nation, being subject to these ad hoc arrest warrants, from British courts.

Even when General Pinochet, the murdering ex-dictator of Chile, was in Britain, he was only held under house arrest on a Spanish warrant, not a British one.

Further if we think of the variety and intensity of dictators, potentates and other assorted politicians who have graced Britain with their presence in the past 30 years it is hard to remember which of them were subject to warrants issued by British courts, or even the threat of arrest.

Was Vladimir Putin indicted for Russian barbarism in Chechnya ? Certainly not.

Was Robert Mugabe chastised for brutalising, starving and murdering Zimbabweans? No, not really.

Were King Fahd or his successor, King Abdullah II ever prosecuted for having the worst human rights record in the Middle East? Not at all.

You could go through the list of state visits from 1955 onwards and find any number of rogues, villains and the culpable, but what is surprising is that no one in Britain has seen fit to even **attempt** to acquire a warrant or two in the British courts, except when it comes to Israelis.

Moreover there are people in Britain who consider that Tony Blair is a war criminal for his advocacy of the invasion of Iraq and the subsequent bloodshed which ensued.

But as far as I know, not one single Brit has taken the trouble to apply for warrant arresting Tony Blair, even though some of them consider him a war criminal, which seems to suggest that their indignation is rather selective.

I can only suppose that if Tony Blair were an Israeli that there would be a stampede to the Law Courts, pleading for an arrest warrant at great haste.

Yet none of the political windbags that attack Blair would even dare to venture near the Law Courts where he is concerned, or they would have long since done it.

My bet is none of this top twenty worst human rights offenders have anything to fear in visiting Britain, Amnesty reports:

Congo, Rwanda, Burundi, Algeria, Sierra Leone, Egypt, North Korea, Sudan, Indonesia, Yugoslavia, Pakistan, China, Libya, Burma, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Yemen, Chad and Congo (Republic).

However, should their leaders decide to visit Britain then, no matter how much blood is dripping from their fingers, they will probably receive a warm welcome in Blighty, and be patted on the back in true imperial fashion.

As long as they are not Israelis.

Countries may come and go, but there is one constant in history, good old British hypocrisy.

Written by modernityblog

16/12/2009 at 23:05

5 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. This whole incident (and the one before) makes my blood boil and makes me feel embarrassed to be British.


    18/12/2009 at 10:27

  2. “Was Robert Mugabe chastised for brutalising, starving and murdering Zimbabweans?”

    You obviously only read the Daily Mugabe is great, because every other newpaper and the TV media use any excuse to criticise him.

    As for war crimes only an international court can be the answer, if only the likes of Israel would sign up.


    18/12/2009 at 21:21

  3. So SteveH, you don’t think that Mugabe can be criticised for starving and murdering Zimbabweans ? Well?

    How many other countries haven’t signed up in the ICC?

    Oh yeah, China, India, Russia and the United States, but to you Israel not signing up was the real important issue? Why is that?

    And what other countries in the Middle east haven’t signed up either? eh? Most of them, as shown here


    18/12/2009 at 22:21

  4. Modernity,

    This article dealt with an ‘injustice’ against Israel so I thought it appropriate to point out their refusal to sign up. Just to put the article in context you understand.

    Your Mugabe comment makes no sense, you claimed Mugabe wasn’t being chastised when he clearly is, and rightly so.


    19/12/2009 at 12:43

  5. SteveH,

    I am asking you a direct question:

    do you think that Mugabe can be criticised for starving and murdering Zimbabweans ? Well?

    PS: My post did not deal with an “injustice” to Israel, if that had been the case I would have said so.

    I was pointing out how hypercritical the Brits are, a not too subtle difference.


    19/12/2009 at 13:55

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: