Report of Anti-War Meeting at Bristol Council House. Because of the huge audience, the were two meetings in two seperate halls. This report is from the overflow hall and mainly covers Caroline Lucas's (Green Party) speech.
Anti-War Meeting at Bristol Council House.
Arrived at the Council House to find Tony Benn speaking to a crowd of some 100+ people outside the Council House. The booked hall was full and this was the overflow. Full marks to the Council employees that opened up a second hall which which also filled quickly. There were about 700 people filling 2 halls.
Tony Benn, speaking outside the Council House mentioned the link between the pensions crisis and the cost of pursuing the Iraq war. Benn discussed Fallujah advising that it is the size of Cardiff and that the allied attack on Fallujah should be considered an atrocity.
In the overflow hall, Caroline Lucas of the Green Party spoke first. She said that we must refuse to allow political leaders (referring to Blair) to get away with what amounts to a war crime. "Never before has a Prime Minister lied consistently ... no wmd ... no weapons programmes ... no threat." The message from this meeting should be "no more lies, ... end the occupation ... Blair must go." Since Blair has not resigned and refused to take responsibility for his lies then we should support calls to have him impeached.
Caroline Lucas continued - demand Blair's impeachment for war crimes, end of occupation of Iraq, a full public inquiry, an end to the illegal detention of prisoners at Guantanamo and Belmarsh. She went on to warn Home Secretary Charles Clarke "don't even think about home detention". We're not having it.
Caroline Lucas discussed Fallujah stating that she had visited shortly before the war. She discussed Paul Bremmer's order no. 81 which prohibits Iraqi farmers that they must not save seed and must buy GM seed. It should be recognised that the military and corporate invasion of Iraq has taken place togrther.
Caroline Lucas said that she discussed health with Iraqi doctors and nurses. Should be recognised that future generations are poisoned. They told her of a 700% increase in cancer and leukemia since the first gulf war, women are afraid to get pregnant due to the huge incidence of still births and deformities. Discussed depleted uranium and cluster bombs.
Caroline Lucas also called for an end to the illegal occupation of Palestine.
(paraphrased Lucas). Need to show Blair and the Neo-Cons that yoy cannot uphold international law by breaking it, that you cannot bomb your way to peace.
Ed Cherry, a former soldier representing Families for peace spoke. John Ress of STW Coaliition nationally spoke emphasising need to attend the rally on 19th March.
Lou of Bristol STW spoke emphasing need to attend on 19th March.
Bristol activist Margaret Jones invited people to the camp at R.A.F. Brize Norton 21 April (for the Queen's birthday). RAF Brize Norton is the base that soldiers leave from to Iraq. Intention is gentle persuasion and contact.
Arrived at the Council House to find Tony Benn speaking to a crowd of some 100+ people outside the Council House. The booked hall was full and this was the overflow. Full marks to the Council employees that opened up a second hall which which also filled quickly. There were about 700 people filling 2 halls.
Tony Benn, speaking outside the Council House mentioned the link between the pensions crisis and the cost of pursuing the Iraq war. Benn discussed Fallujah advising that it is the size of Cardiff and that the allied attack on Fallujah should be considered an atrocity.
In the overflow hall, Caroline Lucas of the Green Party spoke first. She said that we must refuse to allow political leaders (referring to Blair) to get away with what amounts to a war crime. "Never before has a Prime Minister lied consistently ... no wmd ... no weapons programmes ... no threat." The message from this meeting should be "no more lies, ... end the occupation ... Blair must go." Since Blair has not resigned and refused to take responsibility for his lies then we should support calls to have him impeached.
Caroline Lucas continued - demand Blair's impeachment for war crimes, end of occupation of Iraq, a full public inquiry, an end to the illegal detention of prisoners at Guantanamo and Belmarsh. She went on to warn Home Secretary Charles Clarke "don't even think about home detention". We're not having it.
Caroline Lucas discussed Fallujah stating that she had visited shortly before the war. She discussed Paul Bremmer's order no. 81 which prohibits Iraqi farmers that they must not save seed and must buy GM seed. It should be recognised that the military and corporate invasion of Iraq has taken place togrther.
Caroline Lucas said that she discussed health with Iraqi doctors and nurses. Should be recognised that future generations are poisoned. They told her of a 700% increase in cancer and leukemia since the first gulf war, women are afraid to get pregnant due to the huge incidence of still births and deformities. Discussed depleted uranium and cluster bombs.
Caroline Lucas also called for an end to the illegal occupation of Palestine.
(paraphrased Lucas). Need to show Blair and the Neo-Cons that yoy cannot uphold international law by breaking it, that you cannot bomb your way to peace.
Ed Cherry, a former soldier representing Families for peace spoke. John Ress of STW Coaliition nationally spoke emphasising need to attend the rally on 19th March.
Lou of Bristol STW spoke emphasing need to attend on 19th March.
Bristol activist Margaret Jones invited people to the camp at R.A.F. Brize Norton 21 April (for the Queen's birthday). RAF Brize Norton is the base that soldiers leave from to Iraq. Intention is gentle persuasion and contact.
Comments
Hide the following 5 comments
Reportage
09.02.2005 12:14
Or was this left out...
Memory Hole Catchers Mitt
Tedious
10.02.2005 00:03
reply on the other thread about this public meeting, and are clearly trying to do down
one of this country's best progressive politicians. I'm not entirely sure what your
motivation is, although I could hazard a guess.
For the record, the Green Party's policy on this issue is that while we would prefer
to see a UN peace-keeping force in the country, we believe that the US/UK occupation is
wholly negative and part of the problem, not the solution. As a result, should a UN
peace keeping force be unable to be mustered or (as is clearly likely) should the US
refuse to withdraw in favour of the UN, the Green Party would withdraw UK troops from
Iraq. IN other words, we would withdraw UK troops, and that withdrawal would not be
conditional on a UN involvement.
Matt
Matt S
Uncomfortable facts
10.02.2005 10:16
I said your preference is for UN troops in Iraq. And you agreed. “We would prefer to see a UN peace-keeping force in the country.”
This means;
1. The same UN that murdered 500,000 Iraq children in the 1990s with sanctions.
2. A UN force in which US troops would form a major component and over which the US would exercise decisive influence as has always been always the case with UN forces. If this is not the case please point to a single example in history (anywhere) to the contrary.
3. A continued refusal by your party to call for all troops out of Iraq regardless of what happens.
This position might win your support from Prince Charles but in the eyes of the rest of us you and your party should hang your heads in shame.
And we won’t forget.
Memory Hole Catchers Mitt
Irresponsible
10.02.2005 13:34
The UN have already said, explicitly, that any peacekeeping force could not under any circumstances be under the command of either the US or UK military. Indeed, that was a condition placed by Kofi Annan early in 2004 on any such endeavour.
Many of those involved in the Iraqi resistance have welcomed the idea of a UN peacekeeping force to replace the occupying countries and to help ensure stability in Iraq. For example, in late 2004, Sheikh Ahmed al-Shaibani (spokesperson for Moqtada al-Sadr) said "We prefer the UN to the (US-led) occupation forces...There is a big difference between the blue helmets (of UN troops) and the occupation troops."
The majority of Greens believe that the best option for Iraq would be to provide an
independent peace-keeping force to ensure stability and help support a sovereign Iraqi
state. In the (as I said before, unfortunately very likely) situation that such an
independently commanded force was unable to be assembled due to US intransigence, we
would withdraw UK troops from Iraq anyway, recognising that they are part of the problem
and not part of the solution.
Another large part of Green Party policy on Iraq (which I don't believe is shared by
any other political party) is the payment of reparations from the UK to Iraq - as well
as the reversal of the privatising laws currently imposed by the occupation. Iraq
needs our supportive and humble engagement, not abandonment.
On a personal note, I find it sad (and I have been guilty of this in the past, and am
trying to reign in the impulse) that the automatic reaction of many in the anti-war
movement to any form of disagreement on policy is to brand the other side as 'warmongers'
'imperalists' or any other nasty sounding word they can dream up. Caroline Lucas, and
the other thousands of Green Party members working against the UK's current policy
in Iraq, are not warmongers, and to suggest otherwise is just silly.
I doubt there's any point in continuing this, as we are unlikely to agree - I just
wanted to clarify what the Green Party's actual position is. Readers of the newswire
can, I'm sure, make up their own mind about their view on it.
Cheers,
Matt
Matt S
The White Man's Burden
12.02.2005 23:33
The Green Party refuses to call for all troops out of Iraq.
I don't want this history being airbrushed in the future by them.
Memory Hole Catchers Mitt