Assassination of Tony Blair morally justified?

It seems Respect MP George Galloway has, yet again, put himself in a bind. This time for a GQ magazine interview where he… well… I’ll just let you read an excerpt:

In an interview with GQ magazine, the reporter asked (Respect MP George Galloway): “Would the assassination of, say, Tony Blair by a suicide bomber – if there were no other casualties – be justified as revenge for the war on Iraq?”

Mr Galloway replied: “Yes, it would be morally justified. I am not calling for it – but if it happened it would be of a wholly different moral order to the events of 7/7. It would be entirely logical and explicable. And morally equivalent to ordering the deaths of thousands of innocent people in Iraq – as Blair did.” (Independent)

Mr. Galloway’s words are “entirely logical and explicable” considering his history, but isn’t it hypocritical to claim that reciprocal murder is morally justified? And, how do you determine a morally equivalent punishment?

Does anyone agree with Mr. Galloway’s response? If so, would you apply that logic to anyone that supports this “war?” Remember, ALL of us are supporting this war (TAXES) whether we want to or not…

posted by mikehorn
  • Benzino Foppollini

    What “reporter” would as such an asinie question?
    Obviously, the “reporter” and Mr. Galloway are suffering from a sever case of cranial rectal inversion!

  • http://UnCivilDefence.blogspot.com MRJarrell

    I know few people who “pay” taxes. Most have them seized before they are allowed to take whatever is left over. As for the moral righteousness of assassination…going after the leader of your enemy in wartime has a long history and is justifiable on most levels. Tont Blair and his cohorts initiated a war in Iraq. While the Coalition of the Willing has planes, missiles and bombs their foe has small arms and suicide bombers as primary weapons in their arsenal. Whether we like it or not such an action would be legitimate, while morality is not even a factor.
    What’s moral about any war? Galloway is correct in what he said, given the circumstances.

  • http://www.MetropolisTimes.com Adam

    Only if it was part of some coordinated, realistic revolution and Blair had the chance to abdicate. Otherwise you work within the system.

  • Stuart Richards

    From a logical perspective, it makes sense considering that Blair is the leader of a nation.

    Probably not a smart thing for a British politician to say, however.

  • http://www.freefreedomtoldhere.blogspot.com Fawkesian

    “…work within the system.”

    That’s hilarious.

  • http://www.boortz.com Quisling

    I agree with you, Mike. Toady Blair is a straight up kinda guy. It’s not like anything he’s done has resulted in the deaths, wounding or displacement of hundreds of thousands of innocent people or the squandering of hundreds of millions of pound sterling that was stolen from the British people (aka taxpayers).

    And even if that were true (mind you, Toady loves all his subjects and even the entire world so this would never, ever happen), the system that produced Toady would make him totally accountable for his crimes.

    And besides Mike, you know as well as I do that only George Bush and Toady Blair can carry out assassinations of foreign leaders. They do it because they love us and want to keep us safe from those nasty terrorists. If anyone else does it, it’s terrorism, pure and simple.

  • Danny

    WTF? Justifiable? Is this a trick question? Hell yes it’s justifiable. Haven’t you bothered to listen to your leaders? If you had you’d know we are at WAR! You know, the war on terrorism and the Iraq War, among others. (The Iraq War was in all the papers after all, at least for a while.) In case you don’t understand in a war each side tries to kill the people on the other side, INCLUDING the leaders. You do remember Bush trying to kill Sadam with missile and air strikes, don’t you? You do remember US Predator drones trying to kill alleged terrorist “leaders,” right? So in a war why is it moral for one side to kill the leaders of the other side but not the other way around? Do you even understand the concept of war?

  • blowmedown

    This topic fits the context of my current lines of thought. Specifically, that it is time to re-examine the potential for implementing the work of Jim, Tim, Carl, and Matt in light of advances in connectivity technology over the past 9 years…

    -bm

  • undercover_anarchist

    “Respectable” conservatives routinely call for the assasination of figures like Hugo Chavez or the Iranian president (not gonna try to spell his name) because they dare to upset the rigged business interests of American investment. I think it is important to call attention to this as well.

  • Stillfumingevennow

    I’m so furious about the human and financial cost of the bombing, invasion and occupation of Iraq that I would love it if Blair was assassinated. In fact, politicians should not be allowed the kind of tank traps and bomb-curtains now seen around Westminster, while ordinary citizens are left vulnerable to revenge attacks mainly caused by the politicians’ (highly unpopular) actions. If only the Iraqis had had the power to bomb us and the USA, we would have thought more carefully about attacking. No like Galloway, but here he is right.