The shaving foam protester who "pied" Murdoch was jailed for disrupting parliament, which, said the judge, "conducts itself with dignity and in a civilised fashion". Even when it votes for illegal wars?
Stop the War Coalition>
4 August 2011
On 19 July 2011, Jonathan May-Bowles, also known as Jonni Marbles, attempted to throw a paper plate of shaving foam at Rupert Murdoch, as he was giving evidence to a parliamentary committee about the phone hacking scandal engulfing his media empire.
May-Bowles says he was using slapstick to express what he felt about Murdoch's gutter press and what he thought the British public were feeling.
Throwing pies dates back to the 1990's as a form of protest, but Murdoch's bodyguard and wife were too quick for May-Bowles's attack and only a little foam reached its target, brushing Murdoch's face and suit.
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.
But if a failed shaving foam protest warrants a jail sentence, what would be appropriate for Tony Blair, who lied to his own cabinet, to parliament and the British public to take Britain into a war he knew to be illegal?
The Iraq Inquiry it seems may be about to catch up with public opinion, which saw through the lies from the start, but while it may point a tiny finger of criticism at Blair, it has already ruled out any apportioning of blame or holding to account.
So, does this mean that Tony Blair will remain free to roam the world accumulating huge wealth -- earning over £100,000 for 20 minute speeches and paid grotesque sums by banks and companies for a few days work a year -- pontificating piously on every imaginable issue, urging the world to launch an attack on Iran, and still ludicrously holding the position of "peace envoy" to the Middle East?
Not quite. However much Blair thinks he is immune from justice, the memory of his monumental war crimes means that wherever he goes he is haunted by the prospect that peace activists will attempt a citizen's arrest, as happened when he appeared at the Iraq Inquiry in January 2010, and as was attempted again recently.
Tony Blair has to duck and dive whenever he tries to appear in public, as was shown in September 2010, when he was promoting his memoirs, and in Dublin was pelted with shoes and eggs, while in London the fear of planned anti-war protests made him cancel book-signing events.
Blair will spend his life running scared of such protests, just as former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger is unable to travel freely for fear of arrest for his war crimes that resulted in millions killed in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos.
For, unlike the shaving foam protester, where Tony Blair should be now -- without "dignity" or "civilised manner" -- is behind bars.
Tony Blair will not be at the Antiwar Mass Assembly in Trafalgar Square on 8 October. But Will you? Read more... Sign the Pledge...
