BREAKING NEWS: – Health fears over Gordon Brown’s one good eye. Softening us up for his early retirement? Surely not? Heaven forfend. No reason, is there?
BREAKING NEWS 2: Poland signs up to Lisbon. Only the Czechs remain to sign.
Comment at end
10th October, 2009
OR – What the Archbishop said to the “peace-makers” in the Indy
POWER WITHOUT RESPONSIBILITY
(Failing to render unto Caesar)
Archbishop of Canterbury, St Paul’s Cathedral on the Iraq invasion:
“In a world as complicated as ours has become, it would be a very rash person who would feel able to say without hesitation, this was absolutely the right or the wrong thing to do, the right or the wrong place to be.”
Hiding under an ill-fitting robe of circumspection the seemingly non-judgemental remark by this man of God, this Archbishop of Canterbury revealed his true political position. With a captive audience under the dome of St Paul’s Cathedral, including the Queen, the former and present prime ministers and troops and families of the fallen, this was a shameful day for the Anglican Church and for the Archbishop in particular.
Jesus never called on his followers to attack the integrity, honour and responsibility of others. And yet Rowan Williams, the man who said Sharia Law is inevitable in Britain, did just that.
Then Jesus said to them, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” (Matthew 22:17-21 RSV)
Can I tell you what irritates me intensely about the high-minded Archbishop and his allies The Independent? Their naivety. Combined with their hijacking of the cause of peace as theirs and theirs alone, they are bumptious and presumptuous, and worst of all plain WRONG.
Increasingly ignominiously they are invariably and consistently WRONG, WRONG, WRONG over both Iraq AND Tony Blair.
MY MESSAGE TO ‘IGNOBILITY UNITED’
The self-appointed ones – the Archbishop, the Independent and the Nobel Peace Prize Committee are NOT joint-custodians of the truth, the way and the light.
With NO, repeat NO political nous, accountability or wider understanding, the problems of this world are NOT theirs to solve. Yesterday we saw the backlash against the Ignoble Nobel Prize-givers who tried the same trick.
And yesterday the Bumptious One in St Paul’s prattled on with his thinly veiled message – “It would be a very rash person (aka Tony Blair?) who would say without hesitation ….” etc… etc…
Well – get this message, Your Grace, loud and clear. No subtlety intended.
YOUR position in life is NOT to opine, judge or make snide remarks on those with elected responsibility.
It is nothing less than DISGRACEFUL that someone in your position campaigns from a pulpit whilst claiming to be commemorating the dead and saving the souls of the living.
We saw through that circumspection robe and the view did not please.
A picture paints a thousand words we are told. So we can surely expect, for the sake of its own equilibrium and that of its fellow-travellers, The Independent to lead with this front page – any century soon.
DISGRACEFUL COMMENTS FROM THE ARCHBISHOP
More gems of ‘wisdom’ from Williams at his speech at a gathering purportedly to commemorate the dead NOT criticise the living. Especially when the subject(s) of that ever-so-polite scorn is/are unable or unwilling to respond.
There is SO much, so VERY much to castigate in his ‘sermon’. Here is a closer look at the remarks this man made from on high just as he plummeted to the depths of infamy:
1. “There were those among both policymakers and commentators who were able to talk about [the conflict] without really measuring the price, the cost of justice.” (Source: London Evening Standard)
How does HE know that politicians failed to measure or consider the human costs of the war in Iraq? How does HE know anything about the decision-making process? He knows nothing. This kind of proclamation if carried to its logical conclusion would mean only one thing: that there is NEVER an occasion when any leader or country is entitled to go to war, because there will be a human cost. PACIFISM. A fine principle for those who do not have to decide, and a shameful cop-out clause for the weak and politically challenged.
2. “The invisible enemy may be hiding in the temptation to look for short cuts in the search for justice – letting ends justify means, letting others rather than oneself carry the cost, denying the difficulties or the failures so as to present a good public face.”
Was he referring to terrorists here? Those who hold up “justice” as theirs to mete out to all, acting in the name of a deity? Clearly not. Terrorists have NO compunctions as to presenting “a good public face”.
No, these words were directed at – and ONLY at – western politicians, and at one British politician in particular.
They were unforgivable accusations!
The invisible enemy is not in others’ motivation, tactics, presentation or perceived shared responsibility or lack of. From 2003 to this day I have not heard Tony Blair ONCE cast “blame” or responsibility for what he often describes as “my decision”.
The invisible enemy is YOU and your ilk, Archbishop, and your accusations regarding the integrity and intent of those faced with a thankless task.
Why in the name of all that’s supposed to be holy did this man talk about political decisions, when he was there to lead a service of commemoration and thanks to our troops ? A touch of honesty in his motives would be refreshing at this time of supposed national, unbridled “honesty”.
Tony Blair meets a member of the RAF regiment after the memorial service. He was later snubbed by the father of a dead soldier. Photograph: Jonathan Brady/EPA
VERY RASH. VERY, VERY RASH
It would be a VERY rash bystander, such as the Archbishop and most of us non-politicians with incomplete access to all the available facts, who could claim to be sure of the rightness or otherwise of this conflict. In that he is correct.
In democracies some (un)fortunate individual and/or government HAS to take responsibility and be up to defending that decision. For that we have leaders and governments. THAT is why we elect them, Archbishop.
The previous prime minister was the only leader in recent times to put the question of war to parliament AND to get its approval. NEVER forget that, Archbishop.
“It was not the practice of governments to seek parliamentary approval for decisions on the use of armed force, but in 2003, before embarking on
military intervention in Iraq, the Government thought it right, or expedient, to obtain the support of the House of Commons.” (source)
This unusual, if not unique parliamentary support is a FACT which is often forgotten by those who like to accuse Blair of breaking international law. If HE did, so did the rest of parliament. So they’re ALL ‘war criminals’. Still, you have to hand it to Blair. He’s atypical of your average everyday despotic tyrant – the sort who never asks political colleagues to agree to anything – isn’t he?
Democracy, for those who fail to understand, is government by the people through its elected representatives. In 2005 the same government which represented this country going into the Iraq war was re-elected. BY THE PEOPLE.
We did NOT elect the Archbishop to run our country!
Kindly keep your opining between you and your Maker, Your Grace.
Did he finish his sermon with this? He might as well have:
“Let there be peace and love to all mankind, and let our enemies blast us all to hell. For we will not turn the other cheek and reward violence with violence, hate with hate.”
The Archbishop of the Confused has in one fell swoop proved that he is NOT fit for purpose (to coin a phrase.)
MORE GEMS OF WILLIAMS WISDOM
The Independent – Blair listens as Archbishop condemns (him.)
Excerpts:
Dr Williams suggested that a lesson from the build-up to the Iraq war was the importance of avoiding exaggerated rhetoric.
He said: “Perhaps we have learnt something, if only that there is a time to keep silence, a time to let go of the satisfyingly overblown language that is so tempting to human beings when war is in the air.”
Mr Blair looked solemn as he listened intently to the Archbishop’s address.
Seething inside perhaps? As I would have been in his position.
(John Stillwell/PA) Tony Blair arrives for the service at St Paul's Cathedral, Friday 9th October 2009, where he heard the Archbishop of Canterbury criticise the Government
‘On no fewer than three occasions in his address the Archbishop, who has previously described the decisions that led to the war as flawed, questioned the decision-making process that led to a conflict in which 179 Britons lost their lives.
And there, in the second row, was Tony Blair, who was responsible for that decision, and his expression — gaunt, solemn, unchanging — gave no indication of what he felt.
[...]
While the Archbishop chose to question the war, the rest of the congregation by their very presence emphasised the sense of national unity. As well as former heads of the Army, Sir Mike Jackson and Sir Richard Dannatt; the former Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon; and President Talalbani of Iraq, no fewer than 12 members of the Royal Family attended the service, including the Prince of Wales, the Duchess of Cornwall and Prince William.’
Williams is blessed with a sonorous lilt and a subtle prose style that can sometimes make his words, at first, seem more emollient than they are. This was no soothing homily from a man who has previously described decisions leading to Britain’s involvement in the war as being morally and practically flawed.
“Reflecting on the Iraq campaign, we cannot say that no mistakes were ever made – when has that ever been the case?” Williams said. “But we can be grateful for the courage and honesty shown in facing them. Justice does not come without cost. In the most obvious sense, it is the cost of life and safety. But there is another sort of cost involved in holding back the easy instinctive response and checking that you are genuinely doing something for the sake of long-term building or healing.”
MY FINAL THOUGHTS ON THIS
The service will not draw a line under the Iraq conflict, as pointed out here. In July, a new inquiry into the war began under the chairmanship of Sir John Chilcot, who also attended the Iraq “commemoration” service. Far from drawing a line the Archbishop’s words could even stoke up the fires of those who seek “justice”.
Let us hope, pray… that as the Inquiry proceeds and eventually concludes, Your Grace’s conscience remains clear.
RELATED
- Well said “The Sun”. Unusually for me I have to say this paper got it right. Their headline “A Disgrace Your Grace” was spot on
- Julie at Puschii: “Jus Ad Bellum”
- This is London: “Archbishop blasts Tony Blair’s war spin”
- Independent: Blair told – “You have blood on your hands”
- Archbishop criticises policy-makers for failing to properly consider the human cost
- Guardian: Blair snubbed
- Telegraph, Jonathan Wynne Jones: Archbishop was wrong to condemn Iraq war
- E-Church Websites
- This Is London: Nobel choice of Obama is praised
- Malcolm Rifkind: If I were Bush or Blair I’d be miffed over Obama’s Award
If his reading age is up to it he might find he has manipulative accomplices in this ambition, named and shamed here. He may yet come to realise that he is being used by such accomplices.
This site has pictures from the commemoration service, including this one.
Tony Blair's signature adorns a programme he signed for an Iraq veteran during the reception at London's Guildhall.
The father of the man who reportedly said to Mr Blair as he extended his hand – “Don’t you dare, you’ve got my son’s blood on your hands” also says this:
‘But there were so many fundamental problems with the operation and had they been addressed, this accident would not have happened.
‘The truth is that we went to war on the lies of Blair and his weapons of mass destruction.
‘He sent our fine men and women to fight without proper transport, kit or arms. And as a result of that decision, I have lost my son.
As I noted here yesterday, others there in mourning were not so judgemental, personal or so quick to perpetuate myths on “lies” or kit.
A soldier signatory at the Ban Blair-Baiting petition takes a different view entirely. Sgt A Browne (at #13) says:
As a Sgt with the Army, The Rifles Regiment (Infantry), i have nothing but praise for the man [Blair]. After two CON-servative governments giving us servicemen & Women poor funding and poor kit, he changed things. Today thanks to him we have some of the best kit out there. Despite what some high ranking officers have said in the British Gutter press. Ask any soldier ON THE FRONTLINE (i.e not these high ranking Tory supporting officers) if they are happy with the kit and the answer is a resounding “YES”.
Tags: A disgrace your grace, Archbishop of Canterbury, Barack Obama, british army, Iraq war commemoration, man of God, man of peace, man of peace image, Nobel Peace Prize, rowan williams, St Paul's Cathedral, The Independent, The Sun, Tony Blair
October 10, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
Fine piece KTBFPM.
You have rightly chided the Archbishop. His comments should have been saved for the Guardianistos. What a disgrace. His speech should have been all about the troops, the fallen heroes and their families. Apparently he has forgotten his PURPOSE. This event was supposed to be about comfort and honor. That was the reason Tony Blair, the Royals and most others attended.
I feel bad for Tony Blair, having to listen to the Archbishop and then the heart-breaking comment from the father of the fallen soldier. I’m sure we will not see the positive comments he surely must have recieved.
He had and still has a great respect for the troops and as the Sargeant pointed out, he made sure the kits were efficient.
October 10, 2009 at 7:53 pm |
Hi Arlene,
According to his detractors, Mr Blair feels nothing. We know he hurts like the rest of us and it must have been at the very least uncomfortable to have his integrity and motives questioned so openly in front of that congregation. I am SO glad he did not show his feelings at the service. Give such as the Archbishop nothing to write home about.
As for the father of the soldier – he would have been expected – or one or two of them would have been expected to react like this given the opportunity. There is a political ant-Iraq war group of parents, small, but noisy, who will NEVER forgive or believe Mr Blair. They are outnumbered hugely by the rest. But the press never mentions this ratio. At a guess, I’d say 95% to 5% from the small number of names that I see constantly coming up in the press.
It’s Mental Health Day today, I just heard on the radio. And one in four of us will get some form of mental illness in our lives. Sounds like cancer figures. I wonder, without meaning to insult anyone – perhaps even one of we four commenting here right now – I wonder if they’re all gathered at The Independent/ The Guardian etc.
Shouldn’t have said that, I know, it seems insensitive. But I really DO have concerns over the OTT reaction of some to political decisions.
Perhaps we need to bear this in mind when we read ranters like the fool at the end of the post.
In Yorkshire they have a saying. Something like “they’re all mad except me and thou, and I’m not too sure about thou.”
(Nothing personal – this quote is typical of the cute British sense of humour, Arlene! The obverse conclusion is – if you’re OK, then perhaps it’s me!)
October 10, 2009 at 6:22 pm |
Well said, KTBFPM. My press headline would be
WHAT A DISGRACE, YOUR GRACE!
As you say, how dare he presume to question whether the costs of the war were considered by those who had responsibility for this decision, particularly at a gathering like this.
October 10, 2009 at 8:13 pm |
Hi Stan,
Great headline for a new post! I’ll tuck it away for next time, perhaps.
He may have got away with it at the time because of his emollient, considered, sometimes dense style. But with hindsight and with a little encouragement from such as us TO THINK about what he actually said, people may really start to ask if he is “fit for purpose”.
It was SUCH an insult. If the carelessness over consequences was remotely true, as Williams suggested, we were being invited to conclude that behind this lack of consideration lay all sorts of attitudes to human life that are just SO antipathetic to Blair or frankly to any British leader that I can recall over decades.
Some might even describe this kind of innuendo as libellous. It was certainly scandalous behaviour.
Such an idiot, this Williams person.
Just as well I am not a member of his Church. I’d be sort of ‘ex-communicated’ as it were for that kind of criticism! (Not an Anglican ‘thing’ to be thrown out, though. Some of them just get around to leaving all by themselves for some reason or other. Can’t imagine why.)
;0)
October 10, 2009 at 6:22 pm |
[...] Jus ad bellum By Julie Related:Leran here what the Archbishop, the Nobel Peace Committee & The Independent have in common [...]
October 10, 2009 at 8:42 pm |
Brilliant post B.
I love your version of the Indie front page.
What a disgrace from his HOLLOWness.
I feel genuinely sorry for Tony.Nobody should ever be exposed to such a gruesome thing ://
To suggest he doesn’t feel hurt by that is hubristic and out of touch with reality.In the end,politicians are human,too!!!
October 10, 2009 at 10:02 pm |
Thanks, Julie.
“His Hollowness”. Lovely.
Since the Indy doesn’t know much about balanced reporting I thought I’d show them how.
October 11, 2009 at 12:11 am |
i think your piece about Rowan Williams is spot on disgraceful shameful Tony does care i watched a interview once when he said totally sincerely that not a day goes past when he does not think about the soldiers who have lost there lives. I watched the service on tv i felt so sorry him and the troops. i hope he knows there are people who don’t hate him in the uk.havent been here for a while i felt so strongly i had to comment.
October 11, 2009 at 11:29 am |
Hi Karen,
Thanks for your comment. I really DO think the Archbishop talked above his pay grade there. He was out of his depth and out of his field of expertise. Although quite what he IS expert at these days, I’m not so sure, given some of the things he has said recently about society, religion and even law.
It was disrespectful and contrary to traditions of separating Church and State, too. The Queen was in attendance and the present and former prime ministers and this man has the audacity to preach to them all about morality etc! In an earlier age, he’d have been executed!
The very least a political leader might have expected at that ceremony was that the emphasis would have been ONLY on remembrance, commemmmoration and thanks to the troops. That didn’t happen in the way that it should have. That message was overshadowed by insults and innuendo.
Rowan Williams had a political agenda on his mind and he may sure we all knew it. Well, we heard, and I for one wasn’t impresssed.
Mr Blair does need to know that there are people who do not hate him, especially with our virulent anti-Blair press. One of the reasons I’ve kept this blog going, when in reality it’s way past its sell-by date.
October 11, 2009 at 6:59 pm |
[...] Tony Blair No more "Keep Tony Blair For PM"; but Blair videos, audios, pictures & thoughts. Please browse through and, perhaps, wonder why exactly Mr Blair is no longer British Prime Minister. Iraq? Pull the other one. « What do the Archbishop, the Nobel Peace Committee & ‘The Independent’ have in c… [...]
October 14, 2009 at 9:27 pm |
[...] From “Archbishop Cranmer’s site comes this: (copied in its entirety as should all words of any good “Archbishop”) [...]
April 9, 2010 at 12:42 am |
[...] Excerpt from my post - “What do the Archbishop, the Nobel Peace Committee & ‘The Independent’ have in common… [...]
July 26, 2010 at 3:00 pm |
[...] What do the Archbishop, the Nobel Peace Committee & ‘The Independent’ have in common? [...]