Friday, April 20, 2012

Warsi blames Royal Family for inviting King of Bahrain to Jubilee celebrations

Bahrain is presently experiencing the kind of anti-government protests which have been incrementally spreading over the Arab world. By day, men, women, children and toddlers can be seen dressed in black, chanting and calling for peace. By night, these gatherings degenerate into violent clashes with security forces as the Shi’ite majority seek to break the power of the Sunni monarchy and political governance. Thousands have been arrested, hundreds have died, including dozens from torture, and hundreds more have been horrifically maimed as Bahrain’s King Hamad declares martial law and states of emergency in an attempt to cling to power.

Such violations of human rights have tended to elicit the unequivocal condemnation of HM Government. Certainly, President Assad will not be attending the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee luncheon at Windsor Castle. But the forthcoming presence of King Hamad at Windsor Castle became an issue on this week’s Question Time, and David Dimbleby asked Baroness Warsi about the matter (scroll to 53.00):
Warsi: Well, the decision, err, for the King to attend the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee...

Galloway: He’s invited.

Warsi:, err, a decision taken by the Royal Family.

Galloway: It’s not and you know that’s not true. The Prime Minister advises on these matters.

Warsi: Of course there is advice, of course, of course the Prime Minister advises on these matters, I accept that. But it is a decision that ultimately had to be taken by, err, by, err, the Royal Family. If it’s a decision that the Queen had decided that on her Diamond Jubilee, err, she would like certain people present at that celebration, then I really think we can stop being mean about it...

Galloway: You shouldn’t blame the Queen.

Warsi: ...and allow her...

Galloway: It’s not the Queen’s fault.

Warsi: ...and allow the Queen to have her Diamond Jubilee and allow...

Galloway: It’s not her fault.

George Galloway is quite right, and Baroness Warsi quite wrong. The Syrian ambassador to London Dr Sami Khiami was notoriously dramatically un-invited to last year’s Royal Wedding at the 11th hour, amid mounting international concern at political unrest in his country. The decision was taken by the Foreign Office, which informed the Ambassador that his government's use of force against pro-democracy protestors was ‘unacceptable’. As Syrian civilians were slaughtered, maimed, imprisoned and tortured, no-one appealed for Dr Khiami to attend with 'we can stop being mean about it'.

The Queen routinely meets with all manner of tyrants and other undesirables on behalf of her Government, which constitutionally may require her to do so. For Baroness Warsi to blame ‘the Royal Family’ for inviting King Hamad to the Diamond Jubilee luncheon is not merely constitutional ignorance; it is an astonishingly evasive breach of faith, seeking to shift the blame for the invitation from the Government to the Queen, who may neither challenge nor refute the allegation.

If the Syrian government's use of force against pro-democracy protestors was ‘unacceptable’, then so must it be for Bahrain’s king. If Syria’s ambassador can be uninvited to the Royal Wedding, then Bahrain’s king should be uninvited to the Diamond Jubilee luncheon. The last thing we need is for the Queen's glory to be overshadowed by the presence of a murderous autocrat. And the assurance of that, Baroness Warsi, is the task of HM Government. If it isn't being too mean.


Blogger Chris Gillibrand said...

You might say that she has been over-promoted, but I could not possibly agree.

20 April 2012 at 09:44  
Blogger no longer anonymous said...

Interesting, I know he's very left-wing but is Galloway actually a republican?

20 April 2012 at 09:47  
Blogger _ said...

Like something out of the Twilight Zone. When a socialist republican firebrand is having to defend the Royal Family from dishonest allegations by the Chairman of the Conservative Party, the latter's position is untenable. Warsi must go.

20 April 2012 at 09:54  
Blogger Mrs Proudie of Barchester said...

Warsi stance is that of the political class irrespective of party - she should go (but then,so should a good many of them...)

20 April 2012 at 10:41  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Your Grace,
This may be another issue of which I am guilty of ignorance but if Republican protestors came violently on the streets of GB, would not our security forces seek to retain control and would not we be condemned for not letting them walk all over us? We had this situation with the IRA and we received condemnation from around the world and they received arms and explosives from the Middle East and many innocent civilians were maimed and killed by the insurgents. (Dodo, don’t you dare reply).
Just how much of a King is he? If he is anything like Her Majesty, then he would have little say and security would be handled by his ministers.

20 April 2012 at 10:41  
Blogger Little Black Sambo said...

She's toast (Warsi, I mean).

20 April 2012 at 10:49  
Blogger The Way of Fais Dodo the Dude said...

Do not insult me. I hated the Provisional IRA and their methods with a passion.

20 April 2012 at 11:24  
Blogger Sheumais said...

There is a lot of smugly ignorant comment circulating about Bahrain, with political posturing as nauseating as it has ever been. Why wait until everyone is in Bahrain for the race before suggesting it is unwise? The race has been on the calendar since it was released. It's also sickening to see such as Galloway leant credibility when casually taking sides on an issue which is far from as cut and dried as you would have us believe from this article. Do you really know much about this issue at all? If you did, why would there be a problem with the King's attendance now and there hasn't been before. As with too many feckless commentators, you'll happily move on to condemn something else you know too little about and Bahrain will be quickly forgotten. Speak to some ex-pats who live in Bahrain or used to and you might begin to get a true picture. Warsi did herself no favours, but you hardly shine as a beacon of integrity yourself.

20 April 2012 at 11:24  
Blogger Atlas Shrugged said...

They are both right, as well as both wrong.

The Queen has the power to do anything she wishes in theory.

British Prime ministers would rather eat their own children then upset Her Royal Highness.

It is the Foreign Office who really decide upon these things, and therefore the people who control the Foreign Office.

British Prime ministers do what they are told to do. Foreign Office ministers even more so.

Politicians are employed simply to head up the actions of The Establishment. Little is more under establishment control then The Foreign Office.

The Queen also only heads up the actions of our own Establishment, and so also has little effective power to control British Foreign policy, or much of her personal role in it. However I can assure you all that if her Majesty really did not want to do something, she would not do it, and absolutely no one would seriously try to make her.

Her Majesty obediently and possibly wisely leaves the details to her most favored bank manager, who presides over ALL government/Foreign Office advisory bodies, like for example The RIIA.

Prime Ministers in common with all other democratically selected politicians are busy kissing babies, and generally making a fool of themselves in public. They are not as a general rule notably smart, independently minded, or ideologically driven.

PM's are only informed on a strictly 'need to know' basis. Which means that they know little more then the likes of you or me about what is really going on in the world.

They ALL rely on advice from so called experts. Many of these foreign policy experts are members of The RIIA at Chatham House London. The rest time serving civil-servants who are conditioned to seek no other interests but their own personal ones.

The RIIA is the sister organization of The Council on Foreign Relations ( CFR ) in Washington District of Colombia, situated near the East coast of The United States of America. This connection is what is really meant by The Special Relationship.

20 April 2012 at 11:46  
Blogger David B said...

Life is full of little surprises.

I never expected to agree on an issue with both HG and George Galloway.

I don't like Galloway, nor do I like Warsi.

If I may be permitted a little indulgence, though, I might suggest that the head of an autocratic state which exists as a result of an accord with Mussolini, the leader of which promotes policies which have lead to countless deaths in Africa, among other evils, should also have been uninvited.

David B

20 April 2012 at 11:56  
Blogger george.smiley said...

Are oil and arms deals involved?

20 April 2012 at 11:57  
Blogger Hereward said...

Warsi's pathetic buck-passing is symptomatic of general decay and confusion afflicting the so called Conservative party.

Everything the Kid and his Cameroons propose is ill defined and falls apart, exposing them as a bunch of bungling incompetents that have lost their political touch, if indeed they ever had it.

20 April 2012 at 12:04  
Blogger Jon said...

Could it be? Has Galloway finally met a middle- eastern despot he doesn't like??!

Also - does anyone else find it a suspicious coincidence that ex- big brother cat George Galloway has been elected to Parliament and Dairycrest has to close two dairies?!

20 April 2012 at 13:35  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Sorry, never too sure about you and your Irish connections.

Never liked Warsi, thought her recent promotions on faith were quistionable.

20 April 2012 at 13:44  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

There is something of false outrage in all this. An important large country is not going to be snubbed regardless of its behavior. Little countries like Bahrain allow points to be made without cost. But that is just Realpolitik.

Why do you ally yourself with Stalin? Because Stalin's Russia is necessary to defeat Hitler. And what of the Gulags and the show trials and the man-made famines and the millions of bodies scattered across the perma-frost?

Yes, well ... [cough] ...


20 April 2012 at 14:42  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Your Grace. Warsi just isn’t it, is she. No ingrained respect present. These sub continent types do their best, but they fall short of the standards we have always been used to. Lacking the breeding and the dignity if you will. No class at all. A type used to arguing in the street with the other little women, don’t you think…

Hmmm. Sunni and Shiite eh. Nasty business being the wrong sort of muslim. A bit like matter and anti matter; wipe each other out on contact. Not that the Inspector is complaining - far from it. Keeps the numbers down, a bit like malaria don’t you know, and a good thing too, what !

By the by, can we take it Warsi is Shiite ?

20 April 2012 at 17:54  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

In the surgery…

“hmmm. Any dietary problems ?”

“Yes, I’m Catholic intolerant”

“Ah, best avoid fellatio with those three then and that rash will soon clear up.”

20 April 2012 at 17:58  
Blogger bluedog said...

Your Grace, it is frankly bizarre that the Conservative Party chair is occupied by an individual who identifies herself as Pakistani.

If the Conservative Party chair was occupied by a Briton of French descent, would they walk around wearing a beret and smoking Gitanes? Or if of German descent, wear lederhosen or a dirndl, as the case may be?

It is surely time for Dave to appoint a leader who is unapologetically British and without divided loyalty.

20 April 2012 at 21:58  
Blogger Longinquus Via of Fais Dodo the Dude said...

David B
Oh how clever you are. Go to the top of the class.

21 April 2012 at 01:20  
Blogger pAmELa said...

If this was Queen Elizabeth 1's England she would have sent her to the Tower the moment she uttered it.... how time has changed.... it just me... or a good deal of elected naturalized English do not really respect the royal heritage of the country.... making statements that are embarassing for the country.... and should be taken to task for it

21 April 2012 at 12:02  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Bavid B. Ah yes. Africa. That haven of death, war, famine and disease. (...You don’t see that on the holiday brochures, do you you...). Was under the impression that the countless early deaths happening there were mainly the responsibility of nature, fecklessness and the black man’s hate for his neighbour. We’re trying to Christianise them to make their lot better, and to improve their stone age mentality. Fancy helping ?

21 April 2012 at 12:11  
Blogger Atlas Shrugged said...

Dear Inspector

With 'friends' like the Christian Church, ( almost exclusively in the form of The RCC )and other forms of western influence, or interference, the common people of Africa do not need anymore enemies.

This record has been shameful at best, and often genocidal at worse.

We cannot possibly know what Africa would have become by now if the rest of the world had simply butted out, or not existed at all in the first place. Neither can we know same, if outside influence had been far more beneficent to the interests of Africa's people, and also intended to be so.

IMO on balance Africa would be better off if it had never seen anyone or anything from outside of Africa. It would be silly to suggest that some benefits have not filtered down to the masses of Africa, however everything has a cost. The question we should ask from an Africans perspective is, has the cost been worth it?

The truth is, often genocidally murderous divide and rule is the Global legacy of The Empire of Rome, no less then that of Africa.

Socialism is the invention of The Vatican. Therefore democratic and/or dictatorial socialism are the antithesis of the thesis known as the constitutional free-market capitalist system that has long since been ultimately controlled by The Vatican, and was also invented, financed and facilitated by same.

Him, it, or they which control the thesis, and the antithesis most surely control the synthesis.

21 April 2012 at 14:14  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Atlas Full consideration of your latest literary gift later. Inspector has been called to the tea rooms. One of the old gals has twisted her knickers or something. He’ll leave you with this...

“Your most excellent tinpot excellency. Magnificent news. Enough water below Africa to keep us self sufficient for 70 years”

“You damn fool, this is terrible. They’ll expect us stand on our own two black feet now. They’re cutting next years aid as we speak. It’s so not right. We couldn’t organise a bleeding raffle, let alone run a continent for the benefit of its people.”

“Yes, most wise one. We’d better announce another famine. And I’ll check to see how the AIDs program is coming alone. It was 40% of the population wasn’t it”

{AHEM} “45% was agreed. We’ll be wading through foreign aid money on that happy day. How about those locusts from ebay, have they arrived yet. Let’s hope some of the bastards survive the transit this time”

21 April 2012 at 15:14  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Atlas. The Inspector did give a detailed reply to your latest ‘lucky bag’ but regrets he has managed to lose the lot. Another time, eh...

21 April 2012 at 17:49  
Blogger Dodo the Dude said...

Atlas said ...

"Him, it, or they which control the thesis, and the antithesis most surely control the synthesis."

Wow, very deep. And all to do with the Vatican. Tem ter Jesuits sure do get about!

21 April 2012 at 18:26  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

I was waiting for Atlas to suggest that we Alpha Draconis controlled the Vatican via the Zeta Reticulians!

Which is utter rubbish as the Draconis and Reticulia are constantly fighting border wars with each other... but I understand it is a common 'conspiracy theory' in the time period.

21 April 2012 at 22:26  
Blogger len said...

I am sure that you are not one of the 'powers and principalities' that control the Vatican Alpha Draconis!.

I believe you are on a' different Planet' from Earth altogether. Perhaps you should check your GPS?.

22 April 2012 at 07:52  
Blogger Nowhere man said...

Further proof, if it were needed, that Warsi is nothing more than a token muslim/female appointment.

Nothing I see nowadays makes me ever wish to support the Tories again.

22 April 2012 at 08:15  
Blogger David Lindsay said...

Respect’s founding conference rejected a motion that, "The R should stand for Republic".

Bahrain has least eight indigenous ethnic groups, including a small but very ancient and entrenched Jewish community which maintains the Gulf’s only synagogue and Jewish cemetery, and also including a community of black African descent, part of the East African diaspora in the East hardly known about by those very used to the West African diaspora in the West.

Around one fifth of the inhabitants of Bahrain is non-Muslim, and around half of that is Christian. The women’s headscarf is strictly optional. No one disputes that Bahraini Muslims are two-thirds Shi’ite. Correspondingly, no one disputes that Bahraini Muslims are one-third Sunni.

All legislation requires the approval of both Houses of Parliament, and, while one of those Houses is entirely appointed by the monarch (as in Britain or Canada), the other is entirely elected by universal suffrage. The Upper House, to which women are regularly appointed to make up for their dearth in the elected Lower House, includes a Jewish man and a Christian woman; the latter was the first woman ever to chair a Parliament in the Arab world.

The Ambassador to the United States is a Jewish woman, the first Jewish ambassador of any modern Arab state, although the third woman to be an Ambassador of Bahrain. She was previously an elected parliamentarian. Notably, she describes her Jewish identity as unconnected, either to the State of Israel, which Bahrain does not recognise, or to the Holocaust, of which she knew nothing until she was 14.

Her British higher education and British husband, as well as the fact that the synagogue brings in its rabbis from Britain, point to the very close ties indeed between that country and this. We installed the Al Khalifa in 1783, and they have done everything to keep up the link ever since. From Bahrain, via Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, to Oman is Britain’s natural and longstanding sphere of influence, as their rulers would and do tell you. It is beyond me why they are not in the Commonwealth.

I do not welcome the Saudi intervention in Bahrain, which, as the base of the United States Fifth Fleet, has not been subjected to any such incursion without at least American approval, if not American instruction. I have no wish to see a Wahhabisation of Bahraini Sunnism, since at present all of the above is perfectly acceptable even to the Salafi Members of Parliament.

But which part of it do the demonstrators wish to conserve? Do they wish to conserve any of it? Or do they wish to overthrow it in order to replace it with something else entirely? We have not asked. We never do. It is very high time that we did.

22 April 2012 at 18:28  
Blogger gbuk01 said...

The problem here is that we actually do not know the views of our British Royal Family as such areas are considered 'no go'. We only have the 'Disney land' image which, for whatever reasons, much of the UK population wish to live under the influence of. We do not have any idea how our Royal Family would react if they were presented with such a situation. The only time, in recent decades, when our Royal Family was presented with anything similar was the problems that Princes Diana and her association with Doddi Al Fayed was causing and that was resolved in a tragic way, but convenient for some.

29 April 2012 at 07:50  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older