SYRIA: PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL OVER BREACH OF UNDERTAKING OVER ARMED GROUPS.  (16.05.2014)

 

 

The British government knew they had no legal grounds to support military intervention in Syria, which is why the British Parliament publicly voted against it, last year.

 

 

 

However, the British public have been misled and lied to, by the British government, quietly working away behind the scenes. 

 

 

 

Clearly, contrary to the latest weasel words of the British Foreign Office, the British public have not agreed to fund any armed groups in Syria, nor give them political immunity at a British 'Mission", in the U.K.

 

 


From: babs tucker

 

To: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.;This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

cc: neil kerslake; steve jago

 

Subject: SYRIA: PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL OVER BREACH OF UNDERTAKING OVER ARMED GROUPS.

 

Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 12:24:11 +0100

 

SYRIA: PRE- ACTION PROTOCOL OVER BREACH OF UNDERTAKING OVER ARMED GROUPS. 

 

I note with concern, the statement by the Foreign Office dated May 15th 2014, on Syria, that does not have the authority of the British Parliament, and goes against the undertaking given by the British government last year.

 

15.05.2014:

 

“We have also agreed unanimously to take further steps together, through a co-ordinated strategy, to increase our support for the moderate opposition, the National Coalition and for its Supreme Military Council and associated moderate armed groups...The United Kingdom, for its part, adding to that, will provide an additional £30 million ($50 million) in practical support to help the opposition. 

 

We have also decided to upgrade the status of the National Coalition’s Representative Office here in London to a “Mission” in recognition of the strength of our partnership.”

 

Kindly explain:

 

1. How support for armed groups in Syria, complies with the undertaking last year by the British government, not to militarily intervene in Syria, that the Crown Prosecution Service has in any event confirmed would be unlawful.

 

Clearly the statement from the Foreign Office circumvents in practise the undertaking given by the British government, last year.

 

2. In addition confirm what the upgraded status to Mission means in practice. 

 

Clearly the British public have not agreed to fund any armed groups in Syria, nor give them political immunity at a British 'Mission".

 

Babs Tucker

Parliament Square Peace Campaign

www.brianhaw.tv 

 

Blowjob