[SOC] Ambassadors' letter to Blair (???)

[Ian C. Purdie]

JMcAulay wrote:

> That's what I thought.  So why are these representatives of the Monarch
> giving words to the PM?  Isn't that a bit irregular?

Unprecedented in fact. Quite extraordinary, which points to the seriousness of
the situation.

And with all respect to Paul, it isn't a question of retired people expressing
views contrary to their ex-employers. I believe that is exactly what they are
doing. Existing serving foreign office people cannot speak publicly. The
executive simply isn't listening to their advisors. Ditto with your State
Department.

Read this report:

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=515706

We find the same happening in Australia at the moment where every former living
Prime Minister, many retired defence chiefs including Generals, Admirals and
Air Commodores, security analysts etc. hold contrary views to the executive.
Condemns them in fact. Even the past President of his own conservative party
states the Prime Minister should be held accountable for war crimes. That's
really unbelievable stuff.

This is all totally unprecedented.

God if one were a conspiracy theorist you would begin to wonder if their wasn't
some international brotherhood running an entirely different agenda. I don't
understand.

On ABC Radio this morning the issue of "power struggle" within the public
service was raised. We have Naval Captains defending Military Intelligence
Officers and claiming the Defence Department and the Executive is running a
vendetta.

Extremely worrying. And I don't like projecting my thoughts ahead on this.

Ian