This story related to Bush's trip to London this week is really very disturbing (via Steve Gilliard's Weblog):
<< Home Secretary David Blunkett has refused to grant diplomatic immunity to armed American special agents and snipers travelling to Britain as part of President Bush's entourage this week.
<< In the case of the accidental shooting of a protester, the Americans in Bush's protection squad will face justice in a British court as would any other visitor, the Home Office has confirmed.
<< The issue of immunity is one of a series of extraordinary US demands turned down by Ministers and Downing Street during preparations for the Bush visit.
<< These included the closure of the Tube network, the use of US air force planes and helicopters and the shipping in of battlefield weaponry to use against rioters. >>
Steve Gilliard has been commenting on this story. And his appalled comments are on the mark (Bush and His Security 10/16/03):
<< There is something deeply troubling about the level of security needed for the Bush trip to the UK. The request to abrogate UK sovregnity to protect the president by having US helicopters and fighters patrol over London, something which didn't happen in either World War, btw, because of a short visit, should be seen as offensive. And not just to the Brits. ...
<< Immunity from shooting protesters? That's a new power they don't have in the US. Ask the FBI agents who were at Ruby Ridge. When do police in a free society get a pass on killing civilians? Certainly not in a democracy. Especially in a society where police usually do their work without guns. >>
2 comments:
OHMYGODOHMYGODOHMYGOD. this is truly scary business.
i suggest you also read tomdispatch on this very subject today. do you get his daily dispatch via email?
Post a Comment