This entry was posted on
Friday, March 18th, 2005 at
5:17 pm and is filed
under UK General Election 2005.
Scotsman – Rebel Spy to Stand Against Blair in Election: Renegade spy David Shayler is to stand against the Prime Minister in the forthcoming general election, it was confirmed today. Mr Shayler, jailed for six months in 2002 for revealing official secrets, will run in Mr Blair’s Sedgefield constituency. The ex-MI5 officer said he would campaign on two anti-war issues and on Mr Blair’s “attacks on democratic rights over the last eight years”. Mr Shayler, a former counter-terrorism specialist, claimed the Prime Minister’s backing for the Iraq war had put Britons at greater risk from terrorism.
BBC – Shayler to stand against Blair: The former counter-terrorism officer, who is originally from nearby Middlesbrough, said: “Our democracy is in crisis and unless we act now, there will be no democracy left fighting for. If we can encourage a large protest vote in Sedgefield, it would send a clear message to the politicians of this country that the people have had enough of autocratic leaders who fail to represent their constituents.”
This was the bit I wasn’t able to tell you about on the 9th. Work is still being done on the back-end for Craig Murray’s website, but as soon as that’s done, we begin to build a blog for David Shayler.
I’m likely to go quiet for long periods next week, but you can check out the sites under ‘associates’ for bits and bobs I would normally be blogging myself.
PS – Don’t forget: Panorama, Sunday 20th March, 10:15pm
Watch it. Tape it. Share it.
Also, the Bring The Troops Home demonstration is tomorrow (Saturday, gathering at 12 noon at Speakers Corner). You may want to take some posters.
UPDATE – Backing Blair – Keys to stand against Blair
By Tom Flynn March 19, 2005 - 1:51 am
Shayler! ha ha. What a role model for the anti-blair campaign.keep the ‘high quality’ anti-government candidates coming.He came to a stop the war meeting in southampton last year at which my question was ignored because i was a labour activist. Apparently respect etc. who were using him as a figurehead at that time believe they have a monopoly on opposing the war.I look forward to seeing how many votes he scrapes in sedgefield.p.s. before I am misunderstood, I am making no judgement on the decision to stand, only on the hilarious choice of anti-blair candidatetony must be terrified
By Manic March 19, 2005 - 9:39 am
Thanks for the comment, Tom.It’s refreshing to see *someone* benefiting from the new late licensing laws.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/manchester/4346473.stm
By Tom Flynn March 19, 2005 - 12:19 pm
Manic,from his trial:”Mr Justice Moses, the trial judge, accused Shayler, 36, of “blinkered arrogance” and of breaking undertakings he had given before leaving MI5.”Your actions demonstrate a lack of any real insight into what you were doing or any intelligent foresight into its consequences,” he told Shayler.However, the judge accepted Shayler’s motivation was “not greed or financial gain”. In part, he added, Shayler had disclosed the information because he “wished to expose alleged illegality and inefficiency”.The judge also accepted that Shayler was “unaware” of all the avenues he could have explored to make his complaints without going to the press.”i.e honourable motives, but absolutely no clue what he is doing
By balders March 19, 2005 - 9:50 pm
Tom,”i.e. honourable motives, but absolutely no clue what he is doing” seems to me to be a better option than either ‘downright incompetant, but misguided motives’ or ‘massively duplicitous, but moderately effective’, either of which could be used to label Tony Blair
By Larry O'Hara March 20, 2005 - 11:42 pm
I notice that the editorial view here seems to be that Shayler has honourable motives. As a life-long Leftist and opponent of MI5/the secret state generally I doubt Shayler’s motives very much. I, and colleagues, have repeatedly tried to get Shayler & Machon to answer numerous questions for the last 8 years–to no avail. Thankfully, some on the Left are now wise to him (see debate on Urban 75 for example). His career has been covered in issues 2 3 4 5 & 6 of my magazine Notes From the Borderland, and the questions multiply.In any case, he has now, surely, been superceded by genuine anti-war candidate Reg Keys in Sedgefield, hasn’t he?Larry O’Hara
By irritant March 22, 2005 - 3:55 am
Larry, you have a point but IMHO, disinformation and partisanship from so-called serious journalists is generally speaking more of a threat to democracy than than the occasional intelligence bod.It’s taken as a given that you need to make an income from your newsletters. With all due respect, subscriber-only information is virtually worthless to the blogosphere as it can’t be freely distributed.
By irritant March 22, 2005 - 3:57 am
Tom, Balders is right.
By Carl March 22, 2005 - 10:53 am
Ah, but there’s a new chap standing against Tony….And this man’s pedigree is impeccable.It won’t dent Tony’s majority.But it will fuck with his credibility something awful for the bullshit he’s dished out regarding the war, the decisions during and after the war and how Blair will send letters of condolences to contractors murdered in Iraq (Bigley), and old rockers who fall off their quad bikes (Ozzy), but won’t send condolences to soldiers killed in Iraq (particularly those who had their ammo, grenades, morphine, satellite phones, radio masts, smoke grenades taken off them before they were attacked by around 500 Iraqis…)
By Jonathan Cockburn March 26, 2005 - 12:39 am
I’m afraid I don’t entirely agree with Manic on David Shayler.Tom Flynn’s reaction seems to be more in keeping with what I ‘ve heard about Shayler. The latest is that he is not going to stand after all (according to the Gazette) But either way David Shayler,like me, has every right to stand against Blair; but what sort of politician will he make for Sedgefield? A person who has such an intensely personal loathing of the Blair Government (well, haven’t we all, I hear you say?) can hardly be expected to be that an objective MP in Parliament. He joined MI5 of his own volition, signed the Official Secrets Act and then allegedly,when things did not work out, split on the Government (about things like the existence of old files on Mandleson, Harman and Straw etc).So what? I agree with loads of things he is saying about the war in Iraq, but I really wonder if he will get that many votes. Sadly, although Reg Keys may appear to be the better candidate, once again, I’m not sure how the poor man will manage in the longer run. With the death of his son, he must be in a terrible state of turmoil and grief. But will such an experience make him the best choice for the Anti-war lobby? He deserves everyone’s sympathy, but I think Sedgefield’s next politician needs to be committed for a whole host of different reasons, not just because of a horrible twist of fate. I don’t blame him for standing though, indeed, he should stand, for the sake of his dead son. I just wonder if either of these two are the best people to tackle Blair. As the leader of ‘The Blair Must Go Party’, and someone who is also standing in Sedgefield, I would say that though wouldn’t I? But at least I came to the decision over two yeares ago after alot of thought and careful reflection and not because of some deeply bitter experience or tradegy. Also, as I started my campaign last September, I’m hardly jumping on any bandwagons. Check out my website on http://www.blairmustgo.org and let me know what you think! It’s difficult to make my case here, but basically, I’m trying to get every anti Blair person to vote for Blair Must Go, and to appeal right across the political spectrum. There’s a Sedgefield Against War meeting next Tuesday at the Golden Lion at 7.00pm in Sedgefield, so (if it’s okay with SAW) why don’t you come along and give me the third degree? I’ll probably be shit and you can have a laugh at my expense! CheersJonathan Cockburnwww.blairmustgo.orgPS If coming please drop me a line so that I can tell the relevant people in Sedgefield.
By Stodge May 4, 2005 - 8:43 pm
“blairmustgo” stensil graffito on a bus-shelter, Hornsey London
According to The Highway Code “Signs with red circles are mostly prohibitive.”, a fact that Tony Blair would no doubt be aware of if he were to drive past this bus-shelter in Hornsey, North London. The text reads “blairmustgo”, a message a message Tony…