this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2024
48 points (80.8% liked)

UK Politics

3097 readers
84 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Is this straight up misinformation? I've been through 6 articles now and I can't find any other source on this outside of Skwawkbox.

All I can find is stuff about him being a major person behind the Good Friday Agreement and HK + Chagos Islands handovers.

Even the Telegraph and fucking GB News – both of which try to paint Labour/Starmer in the worst light possible – don't say anything about Pinochet. Where does this alleged link come from?

Looking into it, Skwawkbox has been caught lying multiple times, predominantly about the Grenfell Fire. They've also lost a libel case against one Labour MP and breached reporting standards about another. They, and I'm really not joking here, describe themselves as a non-traditional publication aimed at "aunties and uncles on Facebook".

If anybody has any other sources please correct me on this.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Skwawkbox links to this Guardian article, which itself is sourced from a book from the time. It doesn't seem that far-fetched that a renowned negotiator would be involved with a negotiation.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

This article Guardian article, on top of just being an allegation in a book, doesn't accuse Powell of doing what Skwawkbox says he did.

Literally all it says is that the press chief of the 1999 Chilean government (i.e. 10 years and 2 governments after Pinochet stepped down) had meetings with Powell. That's it. Seems normal to me. I imagine the UK government would be chatting to Chile if they arrested David Cameron tomorrow.

Frei and his government, by the way, was anti-Pinochet. During his presidency, he indicted and arrested Pinochet.

I don't know how you could read that and think it's a confirmation that Powell negotiated release for Pinochet.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 7 points 1 week ago

It absolutely argues that:

Frei argued to Blair that neither government would benefit if Pinochet were to die in England and that he could be tried in Chilean courts. […] Blair undertook to do what he could within the law provided the exchanges between the two leaders were kept secret. The authors claim that Blair suggested setting up a 'back channel', with two people appointed to liaise between the leaders' private offices.

[–] FarceOfWill@infosec.pub 5 points 1 week ago

I just assume every skwawkbox link is misinformation.

If not in an absolute sense then always by ommission.

[–] Hagels_Bagels@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 1 week ago

Google gave me an article from The Guardian from 2001.

Secret UK deal freed Pinochet

A new book alleges the former dictator's release from Britain was brokered between Chile and Downing St.

Augusto Pinochet, the former Chilean dictator, was allowed to escape extradition to Spain on 2 March last year because of plans worked out over many months by Tony Blair and Foreign Secretary Robin Cook in collaboration with Eduardo Frei, then President of Chile, according to leading Chilean sources. José María Aznar, the conservative Prime Minister of Spain and his Foreign Minister Abel Matutes, were involved in the planning.

The Blair-Frei plan was to prevent Pinochet's extradition while observing the law. Instead, the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary relied on Britain's wide discretion on extradition matters.

The plan was conceived in 1999 after it became clear that the Pinochet affair was dragging on far longer than governments expected and came to fruition when British doctors examined the General at Northwick Park Hospital in Harrow, north London, on 5 January last year. Their report allowed Straw to exercise his discretion to release Pinochet on humanitarian grounds even though the former dictator had never said he was too ill to stand trial.

Frei argued to Blair that neither government would benefit if Pinochet were to die in England and that he could be tried in Chilean courts. According to the book, Blair emphasised to Frei that the case was before the courts and the Government could not interfere, adding that any British leader would court grave problems at home if he were seen to interfere with the course of justice. If there were any powers which Government could exercise they would be exercised by a Home Secretary not a Prime Minister, he said. Blair undertook to do what he could within the law provided the exchanges between the two leaders were kept secret. The authors claim that Blair suggested setting up a 'back channel', with two people appointed to liaise between the leaders' private offices.

The contact man between Frei and Blair was Cristian Tolosa, Frei's press chief, who made six visits to London in the second half of 1999, liaising with Blair's aide Jonathan Powell at Number 10. Yesterday, Downing Street said that it did not comment on contacts between officials.

[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Also, those claiming to have no source on Powell being on the team that negotiated Pinochet's release, only prove they've not only not actually gone looking for one, but haven't even read op article, where the source is linked:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/jan/07/chile.pinochet

And it isn't the only contemporary source, either:

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2001/08/chil-a30.html

As well as sources that confirms that Powell promoted deals with Saudi Arabia for a company that also paid £1m to Pinochet:

https://caat.org.uk/news/2005-09-27-2/

You can make as many excuses as you want to make yourselves feel better, but it will never magic these people in to being on our side as citizens.

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Thank you.

The guardian article is also the second result for "Jonathan Powell pinochet" on google.

[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 week ago

Sure thing, the lengths some people will go to to defend their cognitive dissonance is ridiculous..

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

All the article states is that Powell had meetings with the chief of press for President Frei's government... the government that indicted and arrested Pinochet.

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 3 points 1 week ago

The government that engineered his escape from standing trial for genocide, then indicted him for "kidnapping" only to dismiss the case.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

This article Guardian article, on top of just being an allegation in a book, doesn't accuse Powell of doing what Skwawkbox says he did.

Literally all it says is that the press chief of the 1999 Chilean government (i.e. 10 years and two governments after Pinochet stepped down) had meetings with Powell. That's it.

Frei and his government, by the way, was anti-Pinochet. During his presidency, he indicted and arrested Pinochet.

I don't know how you could read that and think it's a confirmation that Powell negotiated release for Pinochet.

Stop spreading misinformation.

[–] ewo@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago

It's the only look he's got.

[–] teamevil@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] 01011@monero.town 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

*11/09/1973

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Germany's ruling coalition falling apart; trump winning; macron caucusing with the far right instead of the election winners; Italy's civil rights regression with its new far right govt; and now this makes me think that we're in for a wild ride in the West for the next few decades and I wonder if I should try to leave now or wait until the shooting starts.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Leave the west and go where? Outside the western world is objectively worse and far less tolerant.

And for what it's worth, this article is a straight up lie. There isn't a link between Powell and Pinochet that I have been able to find.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

... objectively worse and far less tolerant.

True for now; but how much longer?

My ruling class either miscalculated our response to the election choices they gave us or decided that excelerationism was in our best interests. In both cases they're going to have to double down to maintain their control and that means more facism or another distraction war.

Both majority parties have shifted towards the right end of the political spectrum since 2016 and the dnc's unwillingness to accept the reasons why they lost this election like they did after 2016 guarantees that they will continue to follow republicans in their shift rightwards towards facism.

History has plenty examples of calms before storms like this and my existence at the intersection of several vulnerable minorities guarantees that at least one of them will be popularly scape goated. I have no intention of serving that role and one of my identities affords me an easy-ish path outside of this country.

So the question for me isn't to where but which one and I know through experience that they're all already sufficiently tolerant. whether or not there's a link with pinochet doesn't matter much to me since starmers' few controversies so far already suggest that a pinochet link is plausible.

[–] FelixCress@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

If it makes you feel any better, the Pinochet link seems to be an outright fabrication by Skwawkbox. At least I've been unable to find anything so far.

He was indeed an ex-blair adviser though. Involved in the HK handover and the Good Friday Agreement.

[–] 01011@monero.town 2 points 1 week ago

Typical centre-right shenanigans.

[–] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Why would a PM who saved his party from a popular leftist movement have sympathy for Pinochet? It makes no sense.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

There's nothing to suggest he does.

Powell worked on the Good Friday Agreement as well as a handful of other things, so presumably Starmer wants him for his experience.

The thing about him negotiating release for Pinochet has no backing.

[–] steeznson@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

I guess a silver lining here is that he must be good at negotiating if he managed to free that monster.