So the moment we’ve been holding our breaths for a week finally came. In the end, I am mighty glad that this particular strike seems more like the impotent thrashing of the neocon snake that didn’t dare to attack places where Russian servicemen were likely to be killed, than it does the start of World War III. For the moment, at least, thank God.

But the fact that it was a fairly limited strike — compared to what it might have been — in which the majority of missiles failed to hit their targets, having been eliminated by Soviet-era air defences, does not in anyway absolve those who ordered the strike from the grave and reckless action they have taken and for which they are responsible. Not only did they authorise this action before an investigation had been carried out in Douma, and in fact hours before the OPCW inspectors were due there, they did so without consulting their respective legislative bodies, without knowing how many of their missiles would or would not hit their targets, or — and this is crucial — knowing for sure whether their actions would elicit a response from Russia.

In other words, if you live in Britain, France or America, you now know just how cheaply the leaders of your country hold your life, and the lives of your fellow countrymen. They have taken action which could have resulted — and might still result — in a direct clash with the Russian military, and while you have breath left in you, you must never forget this, and do all you can to hold these people to account for their lawless, reckless and enormously dangerous actions.

You must also remember that they did so not because they cared about ordinary Syrians, but because their diabolical attempts to topple the Syrian Government, by backing Islamic terrorist groups such as Jaysh al-Islam, has been thwarted.

But there is one more thing. Amongst the myriad of mind-boggling and often deceptive remarks made by Theresa May during her statement after the attacks, I was particularly struck by this:

“Together we have hit a specific and limited set of targets. They were a chemical weapons storage and production facility, a key chemical weapons research centre and a military bunker involved in chemical weapons attacks. Hitting these targets with the force that we have deployed will significantly degrade the Syrian Regime’s ability to research, develop and deploy chemical weapons.”

So the response to an alleged and unproven chemical weapons incident was to attempt to blow up alleged stockpiles of chemical weapons. I confess that I am not an expert in blowing up chemical weapons stockpiles, but it does seem to me to be a reckless and insane thing to do. If there really were stockpiles of chemical weapons in those places, exactly what guarantee could Donald and Theresa give that such chemicals would not then be released into the atmosphere? As I say, I’m not an expert in blowing up chemical weapons stockpiles — I doubt that there are many in the world who are — but it does seem to me at least possible that an action such as this is potentially catastrophic.

Of course, in all probability there were no chemical weapons there at all. But if we take her at her word, it seems that Theresa May has this to answer for: Not only did she authorise an attack on a sovereign state based on unproven allegations; not only did she fail to consult Parliament; not only did she risk a confrontation with Russia; she also risked the possibly disastrous release of chemical weapons into the atmosphere.

These are just some of the many reasons why this woman needs to be impeached by Parliament. It has never happened before, but it is possible. In fact, it is absolutely needful, not just in her case, but also to ensure that no Prime Minister ever acts so lawlessly and recklessly with so many lives again.

26 thoughts on “Why Theresa May Must be Impeached

  1. Freenations.net — Website of Rodney Atkinson, ( Mr. Beans’ bro.), is hot on the subject of The British Constitution. Essential reading for You Mr. Slane. ——- I agree with you inasmuch that the cabal be brought to heel.

  2. I don’t think the UK is a puppet to the USA. The UK has been doing this for hundreds of years and has the same powerful people with interests in the UK USA and Europe.
    The main aim of USA, UK and Europe is to cripple any country that challenges the superiority of these countries. Russia and China are challenging big time with 1/ the introduction of the petro- yuan which will likely weaken US and UK financial superiority, 2/ regional control on Africa, Middle East and Asia to control resources and energy, and 3/ creating massive trading blocs such as BRIC and Silk Road etc.
    It’s a big game and we are not invited to play. Unfortunately the Ferguson’s made have nothing to do with the value of human life or working together cooperatively.

    1. I think you have put your finger on the nub of this affair. That is precisely what is going on and has been, in its present form, since the disintegration of the USSR.

      There is indeed an historic change underway that is shaking the world. Or, as the scriptures say, the Heavens and the Earth. From that point of view, the kings of the East, Russia and China, have as it were entered into the Battle of Armageddon, which is the war for dominion over the Earth. On another plane of time it was the Medes and the Persians conquering Babylon and we all know how that turned out.

      The crux of the matter is of course that the piggy bank that pays for all the war materiel, the fiat monetary and fractional reserve banking system, is now threatened with extinction, as you allude to, and the creators and managers of that scheme are desperate to shore it up.

      Once again, going back to the conquest of Babylon, we find that the way the Medes and the Persians finally conquered Babylon was that they diverted the River Euphrates which was the very lifeblood of that great city and entered the city on the river bed. I believe that this pictures the drying up of the currency flow that is the lifeblood of our modern day Babylon.

      Another parallel that I find intriguing is that the priests of Marduk the god of the Babylonians, assisted the invaders. Who are they today? My guess would be that they are the technocrats who serve in the temple of Mammon, the god of the present day Babylonians, the very central bankers who presently manage the monetary flow of the West and most of the rest of the world. They have likely seen the writing on the wall and have decided their most prudent course will be to go with the flow of history as it were. We shall see.

  3. I have also heard that the consent of the monarch is needed to g to war. Was this a war? And what does one do if it was? There is of course a precedent for conducting the trial of a monarch in Parliament and indeed of sentencing them to death. Would this be appropriate? It would certainly give pause for thought before embarking on foolish adventures in the future.

  4. I see the warning, saying this is not for Safe Spaces, after reading the nonsense here, I see it is a place for Hate Spaces.

    1. So new definition of hate: Wanting to hold a Prime Minister to account for authorising bombings against a sovereign state, based on unproven allegations, without Parliamentary authority, when said sovereign state has not attacked us, choosing sites which – by her own account – risked a mass chemical catastrophe, and with the possibility of provoking conflict with a heavily armed nuclear power. Hmm? Interesting definition of hate, but not entirely persuasive.

      Best wishes,

      Rob

  5. What would happen if enough people signed a petition to get Theresa May impeached on change.org
    on the grounds of compromising the safety of the entire UK population and putting us all at risk through her reckless and irresponsible actions, If enough signatures are collected it has to be debated
    We are also in danger of becoming the laughing stock of the world

  6. What would happen if enough people signed a petition to get Theresa May impeached on change.org
    on the grounds of putting the entire UK population at risk through her reckless and irresponsible actions, If enough signatures are collected it has to be debated.
    We are in danger of becoming the laughing stock of the world.

  7. I must admit this article is interesting. I watched a programme on BBC4 staring Michael Moseley about Porton Down. It showed the stock piles of shells from WW1 that had mustard gas etc inside them. It showed the painstaking and meticulous processes they have to undertake to destroy each one so as not to harm the environment or life. So what have we done in Syria. Oh just lob a 100 missiles out the alleged chemical weapons stockpiles to blow them. Jesus Christ who are the real terrorists here! I’m ashamed of my country.

  8. Anyone can go ‘cap in hand’ to their various government officials or so called governing bodies/departments to ask/and or demand justice for blatant international foul play – but you’re never going to get any. Ever. Even when you do get action, but not justice, it’s white-washed because you gave them the power to control the outcome by seeking out their understanding and compassion. But the irony of course, is expecting a narcissistic psychopath to show you understanding and compassion. This is not the way psycho’s operate or the way a psycho-designed system works for them and not you. Ask yourself why any narcissistic/psychopath that is directly or indirectly involved in breaking the law (international or otherwise) would provide anyone with answers or explanations that were anything but devious lies?

    To the OP. If you are confident in this matter have you gone to your local police station and reported the crime and obtained a crime reference number? Have you completed a sworn affidavit and had it notarised and presented it (along with all your evidence) to the courts in a bid to initiate legal action? Just wondering…

    1. No. The very point I was making was that she should be impeached. And this cannot be done by a member of the public. It can only done in Parliament. And given that the actions she took were:

      1. Based on totally unproven allegations
      2. Without Parliamentary approval
      3. Reckless in the extreme, since according to her we were trying to blow up a chemical weapons depot

      …these are reasons why a member of the House ought to propose the motion. Of course I am not so naïve as to think there is a chance of this happening. But I am just setting out the case as to why it ought to happen.

      Best wishes,

      Rob

      1. Rob

        You have a spirited and noble cause but you missed my point.

        Any member of the public can walk into a police station and report a crime against any person(s). If you feel so passionate why haven’t you done so?

        And any member of the public can write a sworn affidavit and have it notarised and then submit it to the courts to serve on an offending person and hold them to account for so called illegal actions. It might not get them removed from office but it would certainly throw a ‘legalised’ stick in the wheel….

        Just saying.

  9. Why get rid of her, she is not a decision maker she is just another well paid, puppet.She goes and another of similar or worse material is put in place. there will be many more of her in the future to take us into war because the masters says so. Place your pair of compasses with the sharp point in Israel and draw a circle encompassing Turkey. Then you will see why. All will be revealed to you.

    1. Because it is the right thing to do.

      It’s not that, immediately upon her impeachment, the world is suddenly a perfect place. It’s that we prevent wrong by actively doing right. The more of us doing that, the better, both logically and intuitively. Of course we must all deliberate carefully on what is right and wrong on a case-by-case basis, but not trying at all because the world won’t change all that much afterwards is poor reasoning, and a tad cowardly.

  10. The Syrian Arab News Agency reports that one of the buildings destroyed in the attack was the Pharmaceutical and Chemical Industries Research Institute, which carried out cancer research. The main story is here and a gallery is here. Perhaps that was May’s ‘chemical weapons research centre’.

  11. And just now it turns out that the chemical agent used on the Skripals is not govichook but one actually made in the UK and USA. The cart upon which May is travelling has just lost a wheel! At leat Thatcher had the sense to ride a tank.

  12. I am the only one that has noticed that none of the military personnel nor firemen inspecting the ruins were wearing gasmasks?

  13. When Teresa May was elected to be PM I kept asking – ‘Who is she? Where has she come from? How did she rise to the point where she was considered as PM material without my ever having heard about her before?’
    I still ask these questions. All I know is TG that Boris didn’t get the job!
    Her name is unfortunate because in one email I chose to refer to her obliquely and rather unkindly, as Mrs Tea Maid. I now think that she would work at her maximum efficiency if employed as such. As PM she is too undistinguished One could never say that about Maggie Thatcher and Tea Maid is certainly not in her class even if that is who she is trying !o emulate. Syria is not another Falklands!
    A censure motion in parliament is perhaps the way to go.

    1. People do not become P.M. by accident, it’s all planned by those who pull the strings. Theresa May was good friends with Benazir Bhutto at university, and we know what happened to her after she stepped out of line. Corbyn needs to be careful about what he says, Robin Cook wasn’t, and look what happened to him. John Smith wasn’t supposed to be elected Labour leader, and look what happened to him.
      Of course I could be wrong.

  14. There is no impeachment procedure in the UK. Because she has not been elected PM but chosen by her party as leader the procedure for getting rid of her is a motion of no confidence in the government in the House of Commons. If successful the monarch by tradition dissolves parliament and there is a general election. I have been saying for weeks that Corbyn should put forward such a motion. Normally misleading Parliament is a good enough reason for a motion. Tony Blair was never subject one over the WMDs because he had a huge majority. Because she lacks an overall majority there is a very good chance the motion would be carried.

  15. Actually, May ought to be prosecuted by the Crown Prosecution Service for war crimes. The Nuremberg Tribunal clearly established that such law applies to all. Until we collectively hold the perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity to account (rather than just the weak and the enemies of the so called west), there is little room for hope of peace.

    By the way, you might wish to edit your penultimate paragraph.

  16. I have just sent an e mail to Mrs may band I hope everyone will do the same condemning the attack on Syria, I reminded her that it was done illegally and without the permission of the UN, and to stop being a puppet to the ru and US and to grow a backbone, I reminded her that she and macaron and trump does not rule the world , and said what she is doing is evil and satanic, and if any of my family are hurt if this war esculates then i will personally blame her and she will have their blood on her hands, also I told her if she had kids and grandchildren she wouldn’t be so quick to start a war.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.