There’s a good piece by Robin Beste at Stop the War: If you can be jailed for a shaving foam attack why is war criminal Tony Blair still at large?:
‘Sentencing May-Bowles to six weeks imprisonment, Judge Daphne Wickham said it wasn’t just for the foam attack that he was jailed: it was for disrupting “a parliamentary process, which as you know conducts itself with dignity and in a civilised fashion”.
Now, would that be like the parliamentary process on 10 April 2002, when Tony Blair — just returned from his meeting with George W Bush at which he promised in secret to join the US in a war on Iraq — told the House of Commons, “There is no doubt at all that the development of weapons of mass destruction by Saddam Hussein poses a severe threat not just to the region, but to the wider world. He is a threat to his own people and to the region and, if allowed to develop these weapons, a threat to us also.”
Or would that be like the parliamentary process on 24 September 2002, when Tony Blair presented — no doubt “with dignity and in a civilised fashion” — what became known as the “dodgy dossier”, telling MPs, “It concludes that Iraq has chemical and biological weapons, that Saddam has continued to produce them, that he has existing and active military plans for the use of chemical and biological weapons, which could be activated within 45 minutes … and that he is actively trying to acquire nuclear weapons capability.”
Or was it like the parliamentary process on 18 March 2003, when MPs listened to Tony Blair spin a web of lies and deception and then voted, with their usual “dignity and civilised manner”, for a war in Iraq that was clearly illegal, unjustified and immoral.
There was no “dignity” about the mass slaughter of Iraqis, or “civilised manner” about the destruction of their country, in the votes of parliament that day. How the hundreds of thousands who were killed would have wished they had suffered a shaving foam attack, instead of the “shock and awe” bombardment unleashed on 19 March 2003.’