NationStates Jolt Archive

It's unlikely, as the opposing party leaderships don't support it, but here's the article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4037375.stm

Will never happen, Alex Salmond is just trying to look important.

It's just a political stunt that will fall by the wayside, as long as the Mail doesn't make a big thing about it!

'Bout time too!

More BBC rubbish.

There is no "impeachment" mechanism in the so-called British "Constitution".

I suspect they are refering to a vote of censure.

On the other hand I support any effort to remove Blair, because as I have stated before, I beleive he is a fascist. So do these folks apparently.

More BBC rubbish.

There is no "impeachment" mechanism in the so-called British "Constitution".

I suspect they are refering to a vote of censure.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/3682266.stm

There are some lawyers who seem to disagree with you there.

More BBC rubbish.

There is no "impeachment" mechanism in the so-called British "Constitution".

I suspect they are refering to a vote of censure.

On the other hand I support any effort to remove Blair, because as I have stated before, I beleive he is a fascist. So do these folks apparently.
Yes there is, they just don't tend to use it! And Blair isn't exactly fascist now is he? I just had an arguement with someone saying he was Marxist, its all in the eyes of the beholder it seems.

Its also one of the top stories on Yahoo at the mo...www.yahoo.co.uk

I thought it was rendered nugatory by the parliament and judicature acts, leaving only censure and attiander as options for removing a sitting PM (other than leadership contest of course).

Edit: And he most certainly is a fascist. The man doesn't believe in democracy or due process of law.

BBC = Boring Baseless Crap

This may be a little off topic, but when are the elections for Prime Minister going to take place? And do you think that Blair will get re-elected?

This may be a little off topic, but when are the elections for Prime Minister going to take place? And do you think that Blair will get re-elected?

They don't actually elect the Prime Minister… the General Election is next year though. I think Blair will probably be returned to power, I don't see any reason why not.

JRV
Also
BBC= Buggers Broadcasting Communism

Don't worry. President Bush will not abandon his governor.

"Tony Blair may be impeached."

Yeah. Right. :rolleyes:

This may be a little off topic, but when are the elections for Prime Minister going to take place?

Elections are most likely going to be held in May 2005.

Elections are most likely going to be held in May 2005.

There will be no elections. Tony Blair will outlaw them :).

A few points here:

1) There is a British Constitution, it's not formalised and written as one document but has developed out of years of legal precedents and Acts of Parliament.

2) Yes, you can impeach a Prime Minister. That's where the US got their impeachment ideas from, I think. It's just not very likely :)

3) Lay off the BBC. It's nigh on impossible to be unbiased on news but the poor bastards do their best. Their charter states they must aim to be impartial in home broadcasting, or they wouldn't be a corporation no more. In practice though, they broadcast what is percieved to be the majority view of the British population. So, US people moaning about the filthy Commie BBC - to steal an idea of yours - since when did we want YOUR opinion on our media? ;) (sorry, couldnt resist)

There will be no elections. Tony Blair will outlaw them :).
Only if Bush approves. But he will.

Only if Bush approves. But he will.

*sigh*

How many times do I have to go through this. Tony Blair is the one running the show. Look at the evidence:

1. Blair was in power for a long time before Bush, this let him set things up and jigger the 2000 election in Florida. It was also in 97 that the US set up it's concentration camp legislation at the behest of Blair.

2. In the coalition of the willing only the UK is a net exporter of oil. Who do you think has benefited from middle east turmoil the most. The UK of course.

3. Blair controls all the British media, this lets him make it out like he is a poodle to Bush, therby avoiding all the blame for the mess, and at the same time making him safe in the event Bush is ditched.

4. Blair knows that he can control Bush through manipulating international opinion because, for some reason, the rest of the world seems to listen to Blair. The same can't be said for Bush.

5. Blair recently ordered a $4.5 billion dollar development programme for "surveillance" technology. Why? To maintain his fascist grip on the unspecting populace.

6. Blair had david kelly killed before he could expose the whole scandal.

7. Blair supplied "faulty" intelligence to the US to goad it into war with Iraq.

8. Bush very dumb. Blair very intelligent. Who do you think scams who.

You see, Bush is firmly under Blair's control. He doesn't relize it yet, but he will soon. Look at the evidence.

bloody hell who let the conspiracy theorists out,

Blair will stay in power for another term, as unfortunate as it may be, but thankfully it will be his last, as he will not be able to handle that long in power, plus he's stated that he won't run for a fourth term.

Impeachment, censure whatever, it all comes down to the same thing.

as for blair being a marxist, thats about as far from the trust as your likely to get. The mans so close to the right he should be sat next to Howard not opposite him.

but lets look at our other options, in the labour party gordon brown will take over from blair, thus the labour party will go out of government.

Tories back in, maybe by then with Portillo as leader.

finally the lib dems have got more chance of forming a government coalition with the BNP than they have of getting into power.

as to the BBC, why would they want to biased in their news reading? they are a non-profit organisation, true they are funded by the government, but I havne noticed them changing their policies every four years.

bloody hell who let the conspiracy theorists out
This is the Internet. This is the conspiracy theorist's natural environment. We're just on safari here.

There will be no elections. Tony Blair will outlaw them :).

No need: if voting changed anything they would make it illegal.

No need: if voting changed anything they would make it illegal.


Good point. I hadn't thought of that.

*sigh*

How many times do I have to go through this. Tony Blair is the one running the show. Look at the evidence:

1. Blair was in power for a long time before Bush, this let him set things up and jigger the 2000 election in Florida. It was also in 97 that the US set up it's concentration camp legislation at the behest of Blair.

2. In the coalition of the willing only the UK is a net exporter of oil. Who do you think has benefited from middle east turmoil the most. The UK of course.

3. Blair controls all the British media, this lets him make it out like he is a poodle to Bush, therby avoiding all the blame for the mess, and at the same time making him safe in the event Bush is ditched.

4. Blair knows that he can control Bush through manipulating international opinion because, for some reason, the rest of the world seems to listen to Blair. The same can't be said for Bush.

5. Blair recently ordered a $4.5 billion dollar development programme for "surveillance" technology. Why? To maintain his fascist grip on the unspecting populace.

6. Blair had david kelly killed before he could expose the whole scandal.

7. Blair supplied "faulty" intelligence to the US to goad it into war with Iraq.

8. Bush very dumb. Blair very intelligent. Who do you think scams who.

You see, Bush is firmly under Blair's control. He doesn't relize it yet, but he will soon. Look at the evidence.
Thats what Bush wants Blair and the rest of us to think.

Thats what Bush wants Blair and the rest of us to think.

See he's got you too.

The man's a genius. (Albeit a fascist one).

See he's got you too.

The man's a genius. (Albeit a fascist one).
No. I look right through it. They are both Kerry's puppets.

How many times do I have to go through this. Tony Blair is the one running the show. Look at the evidence:

1. Blair was in power for a long time before Bush, this let him set things up and jigger the 2000 election in Florida. It was also in 97 that the US set up it's concentration camp legislation at the behest of Blair.

2. In the coalition of the willing only the UK is a net exporter of oil. Who do you think has benefited from middle east turmoil the most. The UK of course.

3. Blair controls all the British media, this lets him make it out like he is a poodle to Bush, therby avoiding all the blame for the mess, and at the same time making him safe in the event Bush is ditched.

4. Blair knows that he can control Bush through manipulating international opinion because, for some reason, the rest of the world seems to listen to Blair. The same can't be said for Bush.

5. Blair recently ordered a $4.5 billion dollar development programme for "surveillance" technology. Why? To maintain his fascist grip on the unspecting populace.

6. Blair had david kelly killed before he could expose the whole scandal.

7. Blair supplied "faulty" intelligence to the US to goad it into war with Iraq.

8. Bush very dumb. Blair very intelligent. Who do you think scams who.

You see, Bush is firmly under Blair's control. He doesn't relize it yet, but he will soon. Look at the evidence.
1. I really doubt that Blair interfered in the 2000 US Presidential election. Even if he did, he would prefer Gore to win. Why? Because Blair was a great friend of, and idealogical clone of, Bill Clinton. Concentration camps? Are you referring to the 1996 US anti-terrorism legislation?

2. I don't doubt that the UK has oil interests in Iraq, but so does the US. What is the country of most foreign companies working in Iraq? That's right, America.

3. He doesn't control the British media. The BBC is government owned, but not controlled. There are also several major privately-owned media companies including ITV, Channel 4, Sky News and hundreds of newspapers and magazines.

4. At this stage Blair doesn't have much more credibility than Bush. What credibility he does have, he has because he is more diplomatic than Bush.

5. Agreed here, but don't forget that America is doing the same thing through the Patriot Act.

6. David Kelly committed suicide, but I believe he would not have if it were not for Blair's war. You claim that Blair diretly had him killed, which is not true.

7. Funny, I thought the American neocons were the ones who supplied the fake intelligence to drag Blair into the war.

8. Bush is a good bit more intelligent and manipulative than he sounds.

No. I look right through it. They are both Kerry's puppets.


I though kerry was controlled by pym fortuyn.

2. I don't doubt that the UK has oil interests in Iraq, but so does the US. What is the country of most foreign companies working in Iraq? That's right, America.


The UK produces oil domestically. The spike in oil has increased the UKs share from $160 bn to almost $400 bn. The increase is more than the entire cost of Iraq to the US. So who is the smart one here?

That's right, the UK.

It's all Blair.

BTW, Blair didn't want Gore to win because he knew Gore would be on to him.

BTW, Blair didn't want Gore to win because he knew Gore would be on to him.

I thought all zombies wanted gore?

I thought all zombies wanted gore?

No, and in any case, Gore smokes a lot of weed which ticks Tony off, because he doesn't believe in that sort of thing.

They are all puppets of the Spanish Inquisition!
Why? Because Nobody suspects the Spanish Inquisition!
Not until now at least.

They are all puppets of the Spanish Inquisition!
Why? Because Nobody suspects the Spanish Inquisition!
Not until now at least.


Hmmm, I like where you are going with this.

I though kerry was controlled by pym fortuyn.
No. Kerry is controlled by an unamed Haitian vodoo priest.

No. Kerry is controlled by an unamed Haitian vodoo priest.

Obviously the voodoo priest controls pym fortuyn who then controlls kerry.

HAH! Fat Chance he'll be impeached!

Why? Last i looked, Tony Blair hasnt stolen money, commited genocide, commited illegal acts, OR done a number of other nasty things!

HAH! Fat Chance he'll be impeached!

Why? Last i looked, Tony Blair hasnt stolen money, commited genocide, commited illegal acts, OR done a number of other nasty things!

Exactly what he wants you to think. Just the other day he stole my parking space.

Exactly what he wants you to think. Just the other day he stole my parking space.

E-GADS!

Forget what i said before, he stole a parking place!

*jumps on a plane from Panama City, Panama to London, U.K.(there actually is no plane, but meh) and goes to outside Tony Blairs house.*

"Impeach Tony, Impeach Tony, Impeach Tony!:

What are the impeachment procedings in the UK like? And can imprisonment be a punishment resulting from impeachment there? I'm just curious to know.

What are the impeachment procedings in the UK like? And can imprisonment be a punishment resulting from impeachment there? I'm just curious to know.

Impeachment in the UK is like impeachment in the US.

(Even though the parliament and judicature acts probably got rid of it sub silento - think about it.)

In any event, articles of impeachment are passed by the commons (mps), upon motion. Each article describes the purported High crimes and misdemenours of the individual in question. (NB, impeachment can be drawn against any serving member of the government not just the PM, although at one time it was limited only to peers).

At any rate, once the articles have passed by a majority of the house, (I'm not sure if they require a super-majority or not, but I can't see why they would given parliamentary soveriegnty), then custody of the impeached individual is given to the house of lords.

A full trial on each of the articles is then conducted in the upper house, with witnesses, evidence etc. After each article has been "tried" the Lords then get to vote guilty or not guilty on each seperate charge or article.

I think that a guilty vote requires a 2/3 vote of the lords.

That said, if the individual is found guilty they are removed from office. And may face seperate charges later in the "normal" courts, i.e. the Kings bench or whatever.

The "advantage" of impeachment over attainder is that it does not require consent of the king or queen. Thus it was favored by parliamentarians in the run up to the english civil war.

Impeachment in the UK is like impeachment in the US.

(Even though the parliament and judicature acts probably got rid of it sub silento - think about it.)

In any event, articles of impeachment are passed by the commons (mps), upon motion. Each article describes the purported High crimes and misdemenours of the individual in question. (NB, impeachment can be drawn against any serving member of the government not just the PM, although at one time it was limited only to peers).

At any rate, once the articles have passed by a majority of the house, (I'm not sure if they require a super-majority or not, but I can't see why they would given parliamentary soveriegnty), then custody of the impeached individual is given to the house of lords.

A full trial on each of the articles is then conducted in the upper house, with witnesses, evidence etc. After each article has been "tried" the Lords then get to vote guilty or not guilty on each seperate charge or article.

I think that a guilty vote requires a 2/3 vote of the lords.

That said, if the individual is found guilty they are removed from office. And may face seperate charges later in the "normal" courts, i.e. the Kings bench or whatever.

The "advantage" of impeachment over attainder is that it does not require consent of the king or queen. Thus it was favored by parliamentarians in the run up to the english civil war.

But what if Tony declares civil war? What happens then?

HHHHHMMMMMM???

But what if Tony declares civil war? What happens then?

HHHHHMMMMMM???

On who?

On who?

Britain.

Becuase Tony will think he was wrongly impeached, SO he would declare he was still PM. Then it would cause a rift between pro-Tony and pro-Queen, and thered be a war. London would be burned to the ground, and the Capital would be moved to Machester. The Scottish, Welsh, and Northern Irish will all rebel(again), and Greak Britain shall cease to exist.

OR

Everyone will think Tony's a loon and lock him up tight.

I prefer the first one.

Britain.

Becuase Tony will think he was wrongly impeached, SO he would declare he was still PM. Then it would cause a rift between pro-Tony and pro-Queen, and thered be a war. London would be burned to the ground, and the Capital would be moved to Machester. The Scottish, Welsh, and Northern Irish will all rebel(again), and Greak Britain shall cease to exist.

OR

Everyone will think Tony's a loon and lock him up tight.

I prefer the first one.


The armed forces are loyal to the queen though.

Tony would have to rely on his blackshirted police officers. (And the real army would go through them like crap through a goose).

No, the time is not yet right for his facist take over.

The armed forces are loyal to the queen though.

Tony would have to rely on his blackshirted police officers. (And the real army would go through them like crap through a goose).

No, the time is not yet right for his facist take over.

Mmmmmyes...


*TLS huddles in a corner and talks to his sock-puppet of Tony Blair.*

We must wait my precious, just a little more precious...

Mmmmmyes...


*TLS huddles in a corner and talks to his sock-puppet of Tony Blair.*

We must wait my precious, just a little more precious...


Dude, don't even joke about it.

*looks around*

You never know when he is listening. He is everywhere. Just like the glimmerman.

*sobs*

Dude, don't even joke about it.

*looks around*

You never know when he is listening. He is everywhere. Just like the glimmerman.

*sobs*

He's coming for you...






















BOO!

AAARRRGHHHHHHH!

Oh thank god, it's only you.

You scared the shit out of me.

I thought it was him.

*shivers*

AAARRRGHHHHHHH!

Oh thank god, it's only you.

You scared the shit out of me.

I thought it was him.

*shivers*

*Covers head in black mask. On one side of the mask there's a picutre of Tony Blairs head, on the other one of Michael Jackson. Turns the Michael Jackson head towards dave.*

"Hello Davie. Why dont you come to Neverland, little boys get in free!"

*wink wink*

*turns the T. Blair head towards dave*

"Thats right! Do as he says! I COMMAND THEE!"

Aint a hope in hell of him being kicked out.

Deacon Dave you have spouted some absolute nonsense on here.

Primarilly the oil wells are operated by international companies, they are not state owned, the Government gets tax off the sales, not the full load by any means.
The BBC is one of the best news agencies on the whole, look at America, FOX News anyone?
Blair a fascist? How is this exactly? Bush is far more right wing.
Labour will win the next election, the only thing that will stop Blair being PM again is if he stands down for another candidate, which he has said he wont.
Americans complained long and hard about other nationalities passing judgement on their political system etc so stay out of ours!

*Covers head in black mask. On one side of the mask there's a picutre of Tony Blairs head, on the other one of Michael Jackson. Turns the Michael Jackson head towards dave.*

"Hello Davie. Why dont you come to Neverland, little boys get in free!"

*wink wink*

*turns the T. Blair head towards dave*

"Thats right! Do as he says! I COMMAND THEE!"
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!