I have known Charlie since about 1979. He was, and always remained, a brilliant, witty and very gentle man. His weaknesses were of the gregarious kind, one of many things we had in common. We first met on the universities debating circuit and in student politics. He became President of Glasgow University Union and I of Dundee University Students Association. As we both ran as Liberal Democrats that was uncommon. By one of life’s quirks, a generation later he was Rector of Glasgow University and I was Rector of Dundee University. We both shared a horror of the marketization of universities and an urgent desire to return to the old Scottish tradition of democratic governance, and we worked together with other Rectors to institute regular Rectors’ meetings and try to make the office of Rector relevant.
Charlie had come under the most enormous pressure not to oppose the Iraq war. The entire force of the British establishment bore down on him, including from former party leaders and from Ming Campbell, though he denies it now. Charlie showed tremendous courage and spirit in resisting the pressures to which almost everybody in authority in the Westminster power structure caved in.
Charlie told me the story of how, as party leader, he was invited by Blair to Downing Street to be shown the original key evidence on Iraqi WMD. Charlie was really worried as he walked there, that there really would be compelling evidence as Blair said, and he would then be unable to maintain the party line against the war. When he saw the actual intelligence on which the dodgy dossier was based, he was astounded. It was incredibly weak and “totally unconvincing”. Blair was not present while Charlie saw the reports, but he saw him afterwards and told Blair he was quite astonished by the paucity of the evidence. Blair went white and looked really rattled, and resorted to a plea for patriotic solidarity. He then reminded Charlie he was not allowed to reveal what he had seen. Charlie felt bound by good faith – he had been shown the intelligence in confidence – not to publish this. Not I think his best moral judgement.
Charlie was very definitely not an enthusiastic supporter of the coalition and, though a federalist not a nationalist, generally kept his distance from the Better Together campaign. He seemed to me to have lost self-confidence through the exposure of his struggles with alcohol, and probably underrated his influence. Charlie was consistent in both his faults and his principles. As President of Glasgow University Union, he was inclined to hands off sybaritism; his expenses and use of taxis became an issue, and that epicurean streak never left him. In his presence I always felt an inferior talent, and those of us who knew him 35 years ago I think all expected him to rise even higher than he did. But he never had the sociopathic streak that makes a dominant political career, and he was at base a very decent and kind man. That is how I shall remember him.
Ishmael,
The sole purpose of this blog is to help people to think more profoundly about societal issues than they would do if they attend solely to mainstream news and comment. It promotes causes in which I believe, like liberty, internationalism and Scottish independence, but I have no illusions at all that a blog or I can change the world. “The people have the power” you say. Err, no, they most definitely don’t.
The purpose of this blog is not to be something that Ishmael wants. Go start your own blog.
Was it blinkered and prejudiced to judge people on the basis of their attitude towards Nazi Germany?
“I remember well Iain Duncan Smith saying that he had seen the evidence against Iraq and that it was compelling,but that he was not at liberty to divulge it. I have always wondered whether he was a liar,and was participating in Blair’s lie or whether Blair lied to him.
From what Charles Robertson said to you it seems that IDS lied of his own free will on behalf of Blair,and can not claim to have been misled by Blair.
It’s surprisng he is still active in politics.”
Of course both IDS and Blair are liars. As a layman, I knew with 100 per cent certainty – as early as 1999 – that Saddam didn’t have WMDs. So its absolutely inconceivable that the political establishment didn’t. Not only were UNSCOM telling us that he didn’t have them during this time, but public on the record comments by both Powell and Rice in 2001 and 2002 were saying the same. The propaganda only started to happen in earnest after the attacks on the twin towers.
“From a person who thinks of herself as a pro-Palestiniain supporter !”
Macky, you know a big fat zero about what I do to support the Palestinians. You have never even laid eyes on my Twitter account, and you know nothing about what I do to support BDS.
You would do well to shut your mouth and stop demonstrating how thick and ignorant you are.
I’m going to have to be careful here, because Craig obviously has a lot of affection for Charles Kennedy (and by the way, although I never met Kennedy I did like him as a politician).
Firstly, although it hasn’t yet been officially stated, it appears that Kennedy committed suicide. I can’t remember the last time such a high profile politician topped themself; certainly not in my lifetime.
Secondly, Kennedy was apparently a quite tough cookie. Losing his seat, when it was on the cards that the Liberal Democrats would be decimated in the 2015 General Election, does not come across as a strong reason for Kennedy’s apparent suicide.
Thirdly, Kennedy had well-known personal problems (not least, of course, the booze), which I believe included the recent death of his father. Maybe this tipped him over the edge, but who knows?
Fourthly, a certain news organisation broke a story at the weekend about an unnamed ex Lib Dem MP who was embroiled in the CSA scandal. The story still stands and at the time of writing the news organisation hasn’t made any comment about the sad death of Charles Kennedy.
Amid the outpouring of grief for Charles Kennedy I will no doubt be criticised; but I should add that I’m only stating facts.
Ishmael, I have not been arguing for putting anyone in a privileged position. I have constantly been advocating adopting the Athenian system of giving office to average citizens through random selection. It may seem counterintuitive, but it did work in Athens, and are average citizens, whatever their limitations, really a worse choice than professional politicians?
He was only against it because it hadn’t been approved by the UNSC. I heard him myself say that if the UN approved it, he would support the war.
“Hypocrite.”
Retard.
“the troll and the troll’s moll”
___________________
Sounds like a Mr Goss attempt at poetry 🙂
“Mary’s only criterion for judging anyone is that person’s view on Israel.”
Now you mention it, It does says a lot about someone. Even if they have no views. Myself I wish Israel wasn’t playing such a role in so many places. And the ignorance of those who actively support them. If this is not critical to focus on then little is. In context the amount Mary posts is a thimble of the proportion that should be considered in the mainstream. I hear Harry Fear is back in the Uk, all the better.
Maybe I find it in myself to make this the last time I address your work. I think it backs a reality totally Unconscionable in the extremist imaginable sense…..
Just install a personal block this user button to the blog. Would be something.
“The purpose of this blog is not to be something that Ishmael wants. Go start your own blog.”
No, I’m trying to hold you to your stated purpose more effectually. But no wonder you’d think that of me. On “your own” blog…
We always see in others.
RobG, if you are right, a question arises: does the establishment have a policy of seeking to discover politicians’ weaknesses, and then putting them in situations where they are all too likely to succumb to those weaknesses? Do they only put people in positions of real power over whom they have control that such knowledge gives them? (See the recent revelations about Denny Hastert.)
By the way, the Daily Mail article on Kennedy has a non-denial denial about suicide:
“Firstly, although it hasn’t yet been officially stated, it appears that Kennedy committed suicide.” — RobG
Where did you get that? Doesn’t a heart attack sound likely?
RobG
“Firstly, although it hasn’t yet been officially stated, it appears that Kennedy committed suicide….Fourthly, a certain news organisation broke a story at the weekend about an unnamed ex Lib Dem MP who was embroiled in the CSA scandal. The story still stands and at the time of writing the news organisation hasn’t made any comment about the sad death of Charles Kennedy.”
____________________________
And you are saying….?
Dreoilin; “you know nothing about what I do to support BDS”
Indeed, I can only judged on your postings here, and either you let your animosity towards Mary override all other considerations, or you’re one of those dopey “does more harm then good” supporters, or you are a combination of both, which I suspect is really the case.
In John Smith’s case, the diagnosis was heart attack. In Robin Cook’s case, the diagnosis was heart attack.
It’s beginning to look like the Daily Mail has replaced Neues Deutschland as someone’s favourite reading.
12 Health Risks of Chronic Heavy Drinking:
Someone with Kennedy’s history could choose to drink himself to death. Or the death could be semivoluntary. Or it could be totally unwilled. There is a spectrum of possibilities.
“Mary’s only criterion for judging anyone is that person’s view on Israel.”
___________________________
Habbintaclue.
A rather hypocritical statement coming from the likes of you.
When you constantly judge other posters comments day in and day out.
You really are the original Lago from Shakespeare’s Othello
“does the establishment have a policy of seeking to discover politicians’ weaknesses, and then putting them in situations where they are all too likely to succumb to those weaknesses? Do they only put people in positions of real power over whom they have control that such knowledge gives them?”
____________________
For which read “a small,select group of individuals – the “Establishment” – are the puppet-masters running the world”.
I forgive those on here who think like this for there are (dis)honourable precedents : the Vatican, the Illuminati, the Lizards, the Masons, the Rothschilds…..
“When you constantly judge other posters comments day in and day out”
___________________
But not on the basis of those posters’ nationality or religion, RobG.
And yes they do have the power. They just don’t use it sometimes, it’s all that changes anything. Though undermined at every step by people treating them like with less regard, because it’s YOUR ideas that are the important ones. Clearly.
The last thing I want is my own blog, that you wold consider that’s what my input is for says it all.
It’s the people out there pushing, supporting in great numbers. They change stuff, not you. Protesting the detention centers, petitioning the government, pressuring the press. Changing the narrative on a mass scale.
How can you not know having worked for government? I though it was obvious when Chomsky mentioned it, the government know people have the power. It’s why they are always trying to sideline movements and protests.
Except when they’re Irish-Americans.
“In John Smith’s case, the diagnosis was heart attack. In Robin Cook’s case, the diagnosis was heart attack.”
__________________________
Here you Lysais..a what if scenario,and of course it’s just speculation to a degree.
A hefty dose of digitalis or one of the extracts from it (digoxin or digitoxin) might work. But with a caveat: your poisoner would have no control over when it did its dastardly deed.
That would depend on the individual (size and weight) and overall health. If your victim has a compromised heart, it would work faster, a healthy heart, slower,it’s also odourless and colourless.
“For which read “a small,select group of individuals – the “Establishment” – are the puppet-masters running the world”.
I forgive those on here who think like this for there are (dis)honourable precedents : the Vatican, the Illuminati, the Lizards, the Masons, the Rothschilds…..”
____________________________
HABBnoidea.
Oh dear, why the need to poison the well,if in your opinion,it’s all just tosh.
You give yourself away far to easily.
“But not on the basis of those posters’ nationality or religion, RobG.”
___________________________
Oh I’m not so sure, you constantly slight Lysais,as our Irish-American,as though he were some sort of second class citizen.
@lysias
2 Jun, 2015 – 6:38 pm (and others)
To repeat, I didn’t know Kennedy or any of his family personally. I’m only trying to look at what’s between the lines in today’s press coverage (which might radically change tomorrow). If it was a heart attack it would have been a massive one that killed him almost instantly, because so far there’s no record of any intervention from ambulance staff. As far as I’m aware, Kennedy had no history of heart problems (?). Alcofrolics usually die from liver related disease and/or cancer, and very rarely from massive heart attacks (that’s reserved for people who use speed, et al).
It might be interesting to see what the press come out with over the coming days.
“the troll and the troll’s moll”
___________________
Sounds like a Mr Goss attempt at poetry
__________________
Poetry? I think that was an attempt from Mary to be witty. She doesn’t seem to realise how she dates herself with her vocabulary. “Not as green as I’m cabbage-looking” was traced (in print) back to 1822 – probably dates from much earlier. The slug bait metaldehyde was used a lot “between the wars”, according to Wikipedia. And now she’s talking about a “moll”:
“Moll” derives from “Molly”, used as a euphemism for “whore” or “prostitute”. The Oxford English Dictionary lists the earliest usage in a 1604 quote by Thomas Middleton: “None of these common Molls neither, but discontented and unfortunate gentlewomen.”[1]
Thank you Mary.
Craig’s clique. No I don’t think it’s a good healthy example no matter how much freedom of speech you allow in this unnoticed corner of the web. Who you allow to post on ‘your blog’…
But you all fucking think like that more or less. Yet your all just good people worthy of each-others praise… It’s not even a circle jerk, more like king jack off and co.
O yea, that’s just want I want. Freedom and social justice. Come to my blog. Read my high flung opinions.
Yea, i’v had enough trashing this clique. Maybe on day you’ll see the value in it.