Asides

REASONABLE OR TREASONABLE?

Something incredible is going on! The wife of the fomer British Prime Minister, Cherie Blair, has agreed to represent elements of British Government (local authorities - voted in under our democratic system) in a financial claim against a British Bank.  If she was asked to do so because of her profile, as wife of the former PM, she is set to profit from his role - apparently that is not entirely lawful.

Now, as it happens, the bank in question is owned by the British Government.  It is therefore owned by the British people. It is being sued by elected representatives of the British people, assisted by the wife of the former Prime Minister of the British People.

At the time that the Bank is alleged to have broken the law, it was operating under the watchful eye of the Financial Services Authority, a self-regulatory organisation which itself is operated under the watchful eye of the British Government.

Now i may be wrong with my chronology, and i would welcome being set right if that is the case, but it appears therefore that Mrs. Blair is guilty of being unreasonable.  If anyone should have known the state of the financial markets, it would be the Prime Minister. Perhaps he never brought his work home with him!

But Mrs. Blair - have you agreed to participate in a legal action initiated by a local authority - formerly managed by your husband - against a bank - currently reporting to your husband’s right hand man - which is alleged to have acted improperly whilst under the management of your husband - in the handling of investments made by government authorities which are lower powers than the office held by Mrs Blair’s husband and his former right hand man? Is your husband not as guilty as anyone else? And if “nobody saw it coming”, then what will you win?

Mrs Cherie Blair - you are going to America to argue in a Court of law that those operating at the level of your husband and his Chancellor could see it coming - which of course they could if they had been in frequent contact with the Governor of the Bank of England to whom these banks report on a monthly basis!

Is it reasonable or treasonable to take this matter and ask an American Court to decide on the various elements? What has it actually got to do with the US courts if the plaintiff is British and the defendant is British? And clearly, while you try to answer these questions legally, we would be most obliged if you would also consider the moral response. This is the UK, this is Britain. These issues are for Britons to resolve in a British way, for the benefit of all of Britain.

On behalf of only myself at this stage - i think your behaviour is disgraceful.

© 2009 GOALLOVER.