[Picture: Tony Blair at Davos, World Economic Forum]
I’m ‘fessing up! Sorry. I was wrong. Thought the noon news said FSA! (Have now edited this page.)
It appears it is Zurich, or ZFS, the Swiss Insurance group, Mr Blair has signed up with. Phew! Just as well it wasn’t the FSA! That’s a relief for a lot of us.
It seems he will be advising on climate issues in particular.
Oh yes, that’s another of Mr Blair’s interests, isn’t it?
He really does leave you breathless though, doesn’t he? Just how many hours are in HIS day?
And for how long can he manage on three hours sleep a night? It’s almost as though he knows there is a time limit into which he has to pack a lifetime’s achievements.
Read more here about possible future ambitions of the man the French called the “high speed motorboat” at a Paris conference just a few weeks ago.
BROWN TO ADVISE BLAIR?
According to The Telegraph, the present prime minister will try to thwart the ambitions of the former PM concerning any EU presidency ambitions Blair might harbour. Well, maybe. He’s had plenty of practice in the thwarting Blair business. And as William Hague referred to it so pithily last week in the Europe Treaty debate –
“We can all picture the scene at a European Council sometime next year.
“Picture the face of our poor Prime Minister as the name ‘Blair’ is nominated by one president and prime minister after another – the look of gloom on his face at the nauseating, glutinous praise oozing from every head of government. And then the awful moment when the motorcade of the President of Europe sweeps into Downing Street.
“The gritted teeth and bitten nails: the Prime Minister emerges from his door with a smile of intolerable anguish; the choking sensation as the words, ‘Mr President’, are forced from his mouth. And then, once in the Cabinet room, the melodrama of, ‘When will you hand over to me?’ all over again.”
Amusing indeed. Though something tells me that Mr Blair is too good for the (British premiership) room. But there is no doubt that Mr Blair as EU President might signal a few changes in the British government’s approach to Europe. And although we automatically assume any perceived conflict would be destructive, it might actually be the opposite.
WHY?
For decades now the British have been semi-detached members of the European Union. Despite the occasional pro-Europe prime minister, most notably, the Conservative Edward Heath, nothing has moved the British voter to love being European.
The main reason for that is that the press is largely anti Europe and revels in regurgitating the “bad things”, without mentioning the “good things”.
The second reason is that the Tory party is split down the middle on Europe. It always has been and copes with this position internally by calling a truce and hardly mentioning it. Except, of course, when the Labour party starts to sound more pro Europe than normal. (It is also split, but not, these days, as seriously.)
And then the Conservatives wrap themselves in the Union Jack and scream “treachery” at any leader who tries to move the country nearer the rest of Europe. And the press join in, in full-throated abandonment of any common sense.
The end result of this is that it is horrendously difficult for ANY British premier to move our country emotionally to the heart of Europe. We are semi-detached; a bit like our geographical position.
But Blair’s EU presidency could change all this.
BROWN/BLAIR MODEL FOR 27 COUNTRIES
Would Brown be satisfied to see HIS model of economic/social balance spread across Europe? You bet. In the very near future his ambitions too, if not for a post-PM political existence like Blair, but for a place in history, will naturally come to the fore of his mind.
Were Blair first EU president for two and a half years, the resulting higher profile that EU matters would receive in Britain would mean that at last the British press would be forced to sit up and take notice. At last we might get more balance in press reporting. And at last the sitting Prime Minister might be able to embrace the euro, bringing us and our economic, business deregulation and social models, much respected in the rest of the EU – (and the work of both Blair and Brown) – into the centre of the EU.
The European Union will need to grasp many issues already part of our domestic domain in the medium term, in order to wield real international power in trade, climate, energy, fighting crime, defence and many other areas in a fast changing world. And they have some catching up to do.
Yes, Blair might go down in history as the man who raised Europe’s power and profile in the world, but Brown could equally well be the one whose name will be recalled as taking his country into the single currency and so giving the green light to a prosperous future for all Europeans based on the British economic model.
“New Europe” – headed by Blair & Brown? It’d make “New Labour” look like a dry run.
SAME POLITICAL PATH
Much has been said and written about the relationship of these two men, and the wife of one of them might even have more to say before the Labour conference this September. But their political paths have been taken together and their future political influence might yet be wrought together.
CALL OFF THE BALLSY DOGS!
All Mr Brown needs to do now is to call off the dogs. He must permit no more mistakes as in the missing election debacle, which was largely due to the underlings mouthing off. Ed Balls and co, Lilliputians all, should not be allowed to scupper the country’s or Europe’s future because of their personal thwarted ambitions or misguided and wrong-headed opinions.
Senior allies of Gordon Brown are plotting to wreck Tony Blair’s ambition to become the first permanent President of Europe amid fears that his appointment would reignite old divisions in the Labour Party.
‘The first permanent President of the European Council will be chosen by the leaders of the EU member states. Britain will have no power of veto.
Mr Brown has signalled privately that he will try to halt a powerful Franco-German axis forming behind Mr Blair, who still commands huge influence on the European stage.
One friend of Mr Brown said: “Tony is a big candidate for any big job but we think he has important work to do in the Middle East.”
BLAIR WILL SOON CALL A LIMIT ON TIME FOR MIDDLE EAST NEGOTIATIONS
I give it three months, and then I predict that Mr Blair will be expecting to see some serious progress on the Middle East, and will inform the parties so. That should be the case whether he is keen to get home to his garden and family, like Paddy Ashdown over his recent shunning by Karzai for the Afghanistan envoy post, or ready to take on something else. The parties in the region need to move on this before another major event or outbreak of further or new hostilities puts them into reverse gear.
If they DO make real progress, the fox of the above mentioned “friend of Mr Brown” is truly shot. And Mr Blair will be known to have played a major part in peace-making.
GETTING THE BACKING OF A COOL 14
So, THIS time, are Mr Brown’s hands tied? If he alone tried to talk down Mr Blair amongst the big powers in Europe, it would be seen, rightly, as part of an ongoing power struggle between the two. And in such a struggle, we can be sure which of them holds the stronger hand. Brown has no veto, so presumably Mr Blair only needs the backing of 14 countries to secure the post. A little bit of getting around still to do, then.
Time for compromise, Mr Brown.
There are many unknowns before we get to decision time on the presidency. Or as both of these acutely politically aware men will be aware, “there’s mony a slip twixt cup and lip”.
Seeing how fast ‘the motorboat’ is moving these days, you have to conclude that Mr Blair has a plan, of some sort.
So what is it?
And does it … could it include Gordon?
Others may soon spill the beans on Brown and cohorts and their treatment of Mr Blair while he was PM. We know much of it already, and it should make no difference to strategic planning. At least two books are due for release BEFORE the Labour Party conference in September. So many of the rancour will already be out in the open before the end of this year. And by next Christmas, the furore will be over.
Next sharp political move then?
BROWN – THE NEXT BLAIR?
The Financial Times says we should sit up and take notice. Why? Because there are now two party leaders gone native … I mean Blairite. And their manifestos are being written as we watch, or don’t watch, whichever is your wont.
Yes, David Cameron has always made it clear that he looked up to Mr Blair. He admired his style, so copied it. He also admired his policies, so he copied them too. Temperamentally he seems to be in the Blair mould anyway.
But Mr ‘Not Blair’ Brown was muttering something else under this breath. He’d been persuaded by the press, and perhaps by himself, that style automatically cancels substance. WRONG. In this all-pervasive media age it is my opinion that they are BOTH equally necessary. Yes, equally necessary. In politics you can’t have one without the other if you want to make an impact.
But the ‘ferals’ and anti-Blairites thought otherwise. Dull s*ds all. Brown believed them. Until now.
He realised that since Blairism/Brownism/New Labourism has already saturated the body politic and the country, that there was little point in insisting that HE had something else or better to offer.
He’d flogged the “change” and “moral compass” stuff to death and with the continuing chain of events (“dear boy”) it was getting him nowhere.
The vacuity of his claim to be all change to all men was becoming evident.
Though, sorry to be a know-all, but it’s always been clear to me that ‘change’ was all an empty claim anyway.
If Mr Blair had retired hurt to the country, or had gone ga-ga as a result of the last few years fighting off the various attacks from within, I’d be REALLY upset about this. But, since they haven’t really managed to bury him politically, I’ll do a bit of composing instead. Or decomposing even …
Gordon’s Song
(Note: Make up your own tune; I can’t be bothered. What?! Do you think somebody’s paying me for this!?)
(with Balls backing in parentheses … if you’ll excuse the expression)
VERSE 1
Yes, we’re all Blairites now
Though he got it so wrong (yes he did, yes he did)
But in my fair hands
We can make it stand
And we’re all Blairites now.
***
VERSE 2
Yes, we’re all Blairites now
It’ll turn out just fine (oh it will, yes it will)
When the votes decide
If it’s Dave’s or mine
Number 10 Blairite House.
***
VERSE 3
We were not Blairites then
So we changed when he went (yes we did, yes we did)
Well, I changed my socks
And replaced my r*cks
And they’re all Blairites now.
***
VERSE 4
So we meant Blair no ill
Didn’t mean him to kill (no we didn’t, no we didn’t)
I’m not given to superstition. But I AM just beginning to wonder. Certainly, in comparison, “Teflon” Tony still seems to have a lucky charm secreted about his person. But on Brown’s recent trip to China (see here) my suspicions were raised.
So just in case of the worst scenario, I am advised that this handy kit is just the thing for really deading the undead. A cross, a silver bullet, garlic and a wooden stake.
VAMPIRE KILLING KIT
Now let me think. Who might have these items to hand? The cross shouldn’t be difficult; the bullet … well … will a used one do, still implanted where it landed, but retrievable?; the garlic … anyone been to France recently?; as for the stake … hhmmm … I’ll have to give that some thought.
But Ive just had another thought. You’ll remember that day in September 2006, when push came to shove, and Blair & Brown had a loud conversation in Number 10? You remember? The threats that Blair said emanated from Brown? You don’t think that the “assassination” implement could have bounced back off the teflon? Nah! Sorry, some say I do have a bit of a wild imagination. That would mean that whoever wielded the weapon could well have been undead for the last 16 months! Surely we’d have noticed THAT?
Time for a song. If you were around in the early 1960s, you might remember this little rendition by The Zombies. I must admit I don’t recall it, just found it on my ‘zombie’ search. Its lyrics are … interesting, in the prescient way of songs and poetry.
Oh Gord! NOT ANOTHER ONE!
HEALTH SECRETARY JOHNSON IN TROUBLE OVER DONATIONS
Alan Johnson, the jovial, guitar-playing Health Secretary is now in donations hot water too over his deputy leadership bid. HOW MANY MORE? And this a few hours after Des Browne said, in a pre-recorded message for a Scottish broadcast, that he was sure there would be no more such revelations.
But now, Johnson seems to be another victim of unintended consequences. He was the man standing at Blair’s side on the day he said he would stand down ‘within a year’ following the attempted coup. “I’ve got one (friend)”, quipped Blair.
Mr Johnson will know that he is now on his own, as Mr Brown tries to scrape his party’s credibility off the floor, by doing … who knows!
It seems Mr Johnson received £3,334 from a man who wrote a cheque on behalf of his brother. This is against the law as all donors’ names should be clear and unambiguous. And the proxy donor was an immigrant, though I don’t think illegal, and between April and July last year, four donations were not declared on time. Mr Johnson vehemently denies returning his forms late and says the Electoral Commission have got it wrong.
BROWN IN COURT TOO
And, according to this report the present prime minister forgot a return for the 2005 general election and duly received a court summons. The official court papers seem to be dated January 2006. Interesting that we haven’t heard of this before. It is hardly in the same category as the present predicaments of his colleagues, but it might explain why he did not push Peter Hain. Still, at that time, 2005, the chancellor had been looking after the country’s accounts for 8 years. “Prudence”, now running our country, but then possibly losing his papers under his piles of books and papers … well, many of us can sympathise with THAT.
But it does raise some questions about structure, systems and support mechanisms within Labour, which they need to address.
SO ARE THEY ALL CRIMINALS?
Here are my thoughts on this. Despite my jibes, I don’t actually see any of this stuff as evidence of real criminality, as we understand it. You know, murder, violence, drug dealing, theft, corruption for personal gain.
However, it is probably true that at least in some ways, the individuals who stood for the Deputy Leadership may well have broken the law. Of course, if they’d listened to me and others like me, and not pushed Mr Blair out before he needed to go, none of this untidy mess would have happened. The Abrahams affair, the Scottish Leader being pilloried over less than £1,000, Hain’s resignation, Harman’s pickle, the Johnson mystery, and all the Deputy Leadership candidates spending their weekend searching around for anything ELSE they might have missed.
And many must be wishing the Political Parties, Elections & Referendums Act 2000 had been given greater scrutiny. Meant to catch sleazy Tories after cash-in-brown-envelope misdemeanours, and lying under oath, where at least two Conservatives ended up in prison, it has become a bar too high. If you are by virtue of this Act catching the late form-filler, or highlighting the inadequacies of staff, and then hanging ministers out to dry and landing them with a criminal record for this, there’s clearly something wrong.
FLATLINING IN CHINA
Still, on his recent visit to China Mr Brown was being interviewed when a machine in the background, remarkably like a life-support system, suddenly seemed to flatline.
What?Had GB/PM popped his clogs and none of us had noticed, least of all him? He didn’t physically collapse, so we couldn’t be sure.
But was he now a member of the undead, fated to be around for eternity, or at least until somebody (can’t imagine who) puts the wooden stake in? And to rub it in, (no, not the garlic), the Labour Party’s YouTube site has some idiot dropping a stake … er … piece of wood in the background while Brown talks to camera! Can just imagine his word in the ear afterwards:
‘WHO LET THAT E***NG GUY IN? WHAT DO YOU MEAN HE SAYS HE’S A FRIEND OF MINE?’
[Glad they managed to find the missing stake anyway. I was racking my brains about who’d have one of those. Should have known it would have been Downing Street.]
You’d think they could have afforded to re-do the video. After all, it’s only 76 seconds long. Or were they finally happy with the Gordo-smile, so left the clanging in, as the better option? Well, if that’s the case, imho, they’ve dropped a clanger.
Watch the video and listen out at around 55 seconds.
SMILING GORDON:
Who told Brown he needs to smile more? Well, sack that guy. It doesn’t work for Brown and it never will. He ain’t Tony Blair. Mr Blair knew when to keep the smile off his face. This video is not the place to be struggling with the unnatural false smile just because some voice training/PR person told you that your voice would be less solemn and your face more friendly with a turned up mouth. Honestly, Gordon. It doesn’t work for you, the ‘conviction’ and deadly serious politician.
“I’M THE HEIR TO BLAIR”
You get the clear feeling panic’s setting in when this kind of article appears in the papers. (Goodness, if we’re not careful he’ll be using the words “islamist terrorist” next!)
Perhaps this was the only way he could get the two post-Hain ministerial promotions, Blairites both, to help bail him out! Or perhaps he really meant it. Just wish I knew.
“Gordon Brown will today position himself as the ‘heir to Blair’ on welfare reform by embracing plans to open up back-to-work schemes to private firms and charities.
The Blairite blueprint for reform of the welfare state was dismissed by the Treasury before Mr Brown became Prime Minister.
But Mr Purnell made the extraordinary claim that Mr Brown should now be seen as a true ‘heir to Blair’.
‘Gordon Brown is clearly the heir to Blair,’ he said. ‘They created New Labour together and he is building on the reforms of the last ten years but there is unfinished business.'”
A little clue, Mr GB/PM. You don’t do away with Britannia on the back of the pound coin if you want the voters to believe that you believe in Britain. Yes, I know it’s the Daily Mail, but the poll there today says that less than 10% of those polled think ditching the symbol of our sea-faring past is a good idea.
A GOOD READ, OR TWO?
And meanwhile Lord Levy (of the cash for honours inquiry) and Cherie, (of the TBPAC – Tony Blair Protection & Appreciation Corporation), are due to complete their books by the autumn. Lord Levy, no fan of GB/PM, is promising a warts and all account of his time as a government and party adviser. He might even criticise Mr Blair. Who knows? And Cherie? Well, I wonder how many beans she’ll spill? Neither of them will show their manuscripts to the cabinet office for approval, (as employees would be required to do), as neither was on the government payroll. Can hardly wait.
HAIN’S GONE – BUT SHOULD WE LAUGH OR CRY?
Not sure what to make of this. It does make me wonder if things are right in how we structure and organise politics. All right, some have been wondering that for years.
I have no axe to grind, unlike Guido Fawkes, on whose site the picture below appeared. But there seems little doubt that Peter Hain broke the law.
But if the law is an ass, are we allowed to kick it on this occasion? Or do we ignore it because it’s a nasty scheming corrupt politician who is suffering? And what’s more, hoist on his own petard, since Labour brought in the 2000 law which Hain is said to have broken.
There’s no easy answer. And perhaps I’m too soft in thinking that politicians are people too, and not necessarily corrupt when this kind of thing happens. After all, wasn’t the law brought in to discourage corruption, cash-for-questions, back-pocketing and funding from foreign nationals?
But it raises some questions about the Labour party’s procedures for checking donations/loans at ANY time. You’d think they’d have a roomful of legal beavers checking all the financial ins and outs of any leadership or election campaign especially after the year they had had previously. Or didn’t they notice the discomfiture when Blair was the one under the spotlight – because it was only Blair & friends being pilloried, and not them?
FIRST CABINET MINISTER TO BE QUESTIONED AS A SUSPECT?
I read somewhere that Mr Hain, if questioned by police as seems likely, will be the first cabinet minister to be investigated as a suspect by the Police in a criminal case. Not sure if this is correct; but if so, it could be an ignominious end to what has been a career devoted to causes in which he strongly believed.
We can all be clever and throw dozens of reasons at our computers as to why this come-uppance is deserved. But, all in all, I still feel sorry for Peter Hain.
Meanwhile the other two in the (possible) firing line – Harriet Harman (Deputy PM) and Wendy Alexander (Scotland) have yet to hear if they are to be charged. The News of The World says in an ‘exclusive’, that the Deputy PM WILL be questioned by the police.
A police investigation per se, and being questioned by the Police as a suspect in a criminal matter, are two very different things.
Although the amounts involved are smaller, one of them, can’t recall which, according to a Radio 4 report, could end up in prison for up to 12 months! Surely, THIS cannot be right?
What do others say? The first one to comment here is, as it happens, Alan Johnson.
GAZA – HOLE BLOWN IN ISRAEL’S SANCTIONS:
THOUSANDS STILL ON EGYPT DAY TRIPS:Israel, given no option, has agreed to restore supplies to Gaza, after thousands of Gazans were taking regular day trips to Egypt for the shopping! Quite a way to go for a bottle of milk. The sanctions lasted ten days only, and after five days, the wall was breached. What WERE the Israelis thinking? Didn’t they realise there was another way out of Gaza? A wall in the way! So WHAT? To the terrorists working under the guise or protection of Hamas, blowing up a wall is childsplay. Israel was left today with no choice but to agree to Egyptian demands. They have now agreed to allow fuel in for power stations. I’m not quite sure yet about other supplies … ancillaries like … food! In any case it was the lesser of two evils. Control and restrict imports from Israel OR allow shipments of arms to cross back into Gaza from Egypt. The reason Israel closed their own borders with Gaza was the relentless attacks from within Gaza. But now, the heroes of the hour may well prove to be Hamas. Whoever puts food in the bellies of its people have gone a long way to winning the hearts and minds argument. Will this be a step forward or backwards? We can be sure the situation will not remain static for long.Continuing to stand back from talking to Hamas will likely prove difficult for Israel and Fatah now.
BLAIR SAYS – “NEW STRATEGY NEEDED”
There certainly is!
At Davos, Tony Blair (watch video) said that the international community should not start communicating with Hamas as a result of the present situation. But he said it was clear that a new strategy was needed. He said that he hoped to isolate the leadership from the people and that the present position was extremely dangerous. The Fatah and Israeli leaders would have made their position clear to the envoy.
Whether this line can be held is another matter entirely.
The “new strategy” will be awaited by many.
ASHDOWN WITHDRAWS AFTER ‘NO’ FROM AFGHAN PRESIDENT:
DISASTROUS DECISION FOR AFGHANISTAN!
How daft of President Karzai. Does he really think that Paddy Ashdown is desperate to leave his comfortable English garden to put himself in the firing line, literally as well as metaphorically in Afghanistan? Yesterday, after a few weeks testy negotiations, the Afghan government made it clear that they’d prefer the British General, John McColl as UN envoy. And in Davos President Karzai criticised the allies, in particular the British, for something that happened four years ago!Why criticise now? It must be internal politics pushing him to a position which he must surely know is an unwise one. Our soldiers and envoys are putting their lives at risk for THEM. For the sake of democracy and a settled Middle East. To help rid their land of the Taleban and stabilise the region.
But this move seems to be symptomatic of wider tensions between President Karzai, some within his government and Britain. It is suggested that Ashdown would be considered too strong a figure and even threaten President Karzai’s position. Highly unlikely.
This article described his appointment yesterday as “toast”, quoting unnamed sources.
Excerpt:”Karzai does not want Paddy Ashdown in the job because Ashdown, the international community’s representative in Bosnia from 2002 to 2005, wanted too much power, the paper said, quoting unnamed diplomats.”
That remark proved too much for Lord Ashdown and last night he stood out of the reckoning for this very important position.
That is a great pity. They have lost an honourable man who would have done taken this difficult task VERY seriously. His work in Bosnia for Tony Blair after Kosovo was intense and committed. He cares deeply for people in need and their interests would quickly become his. Karzai has been foolish to turn him down.
Today Mr Ashdown said that it seems to be part of the pressure including remarks made a few days ago on the British role in Afghanistan. He said he did not want to be an instrument used by others to make further trouble for this country’s position in that country. Well said, Lord Ashdown.
So, if Mr Karzai only wants to appoint someone he can manipulate, does that send out the right vibes to those who are still working hard to cleanse his country of terrorists? He should understand that this country’s support for Middle East involvement is on a knife edge.
Much of the time the articulate Afghan leader has seemed a voice of sense and moderation. I wonder quite what’s happened here?
“MINGIN’ PRESS” says Sir Ming Campbell
And talking about former Liberal Democrat leaders, Sir Menzies Campbell has been throwing a well-deserved blow at our press. It seems he blames them for his demise. Their constant remarks about his age was destructive, he believes. He’s right, of course. As I have said here on many occasions, the press will traduce anyone’s reputation for any reason, as they have done with Blair. But he is young and tough enough to survive regardless, even if in another guise. But for Sir Ming, it is now too late. Not that I’d absolve all of his colleagues of at least some responsibility. Nevertheless, the British press are largely run by a bunch of juveniles who make Guido Fawkes’s blog look mature.
I’ve heard Brown called all sorts of things in relation to Blair but never this as on the Norwich University Foreign Policy page (Blogging Davos)
“And many of the usual Davos suspects are returning: Microsoft’s Bill Gates, Larry Page and Sergey Brin of Google, Tony Blair and his protégé, Gordon Brown, not to mention former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, fresh from winning the Nobel Peace Prize.”
Protégé?
Hhmmm …
“THERE IS MUCH TO BE DONE” (on fundamentalism’s future, said Charles!)
I saw this reference to a newly disclosed letter Prince Charles wrote to Mahathir Mohamed, the former prime minister of Malaysia in 1996. As I have found before on the internet, it was of the sort I would initially interpret as a spoof. Or perhaps an April Fools’ Day prank. But since it’s January, and it was September (11 years ago) when he wrote it, it must be for real.
Mahathir Mohamad is famously anti-west, anti Israel, and was pro-remaining in power for as long as possible. Indeed, he was prime minister of Malaysia for 22 years (July 1981 – October 2003), which makes Tony Blair’s ten look like a warm-up (well, perhaps it was). In fact when the former Malaysian PM announced he was going to stand down in June of 2002, it upset him so much he broke down in tears at the realisation that he was going before his time.
Prince Charles said in conversation with this man that he was – “determined to continue the battle to spread the message that proper fundamentalism is in the best interest of the future of our world.”
WHAT?
It was written in September 1996. That was eight months before Tony Blair’s first government was elected. Eleven months before Princess Diana died. And five years prior to 9/11.
Perhaps the passage of time and events since have taught our future king something. We can only hope so.
NO religious/political fundamentalism has a place in today’s world.
By Tim Walker and Richard Eden, excerpt:
Charles’s letter in support of Islamic ‘fundamentalism’
“Demonstrating the extent to which he sees himself as “defender of faith”, the Prince of Wales wrote to Mahathir Mohamad, the former prime minister of Malaysia, saying that he was “determined to continue the battle to spread the message that proper fundamentalism is in the best interest of the future of our world.”
Charles told Mahathir, who later claimed that Jews “rule the world by proxy”, he understood the “frustrations” Muslims experience “as a result of apparent Western misunderstanding and misrepresentation. I have, for a long time, despaired of the ignorant and thoroughly evil ‘role’ of the tabloid media in deliberately misrepresenting Islam and reducing everything to the level of the absurd.”
The hitherto private letter, which Charles wrote in September 1996 after Mahathir had given a lecture to the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies, of which the prince is patron, has just been published in Malaysia in Dr Mahathir’s Selected Letters to World Leaders.
“We now live in a Press State where everything is dominated by the lowest common denominator and by the most ludicrous of ’sound bites’,” Charles also told Mahathir. Relations between countries seem to be decided by tabloid newspapers nowadays and I resent it deeply. Important issues are reduced to the level of farce, as I know to my cost having expressed an interest in the contribution made to this country by ethnic and religious minorities and by my desire to include other faiths, such as Islam, in the celebrations surrounding the forthcoming Millennium. In an attempt to show how much we share in common and how much we can learn from each other, I have discovered how easy it is to be misunderstood and misrepresented. I have even received several letters accusing me of becoming a Muslim!”
Charles said he saw the appeal of “proper fundamentalism” in “a world, in my part of it at any rate, which is increasingly without meaning, without roots, without a spiritual dimension and which worships the God of Technology.” He finished his letter with the rallying cry: “There is much to be done…!”
MEANWHILE – EXPENSES BREAKDOWNS SOUGHT:
The House of Commons has been ordered to release a detailed breakdown of expenses claimed by six MPs including Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Tony Blair. The ruling by Information Commissioner Richard Thomas is likely to set a precedent for all MPs. He said that headline figures for claims under a series of headings, including staffing allowances, incidental expenses and stationery, should be broken down for publication. In a statement, Mr Thomas’s office said: “In the Commissioner’s view the legitimate public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the prejudice to the rights, freedom and legitimate interests of MPs.”The decision, based on the Freedom of Information Act, follows a request for the detailed spending between April 2003 and March 2004 of Mr Blair, Mr Brown, John Prescott, Michael Howard, Charles Kennedy and Jonathan Sayeed. It goes much further than previous rulings by the Information Commissioner for the details of spending on travel and the costs of staying away from home to be released. A source said that while the ruling applied to only six people, it was indicative of how Mr Thomas was likely to treat requests applying to all MPs. His decision is made on the grounds that such expenses arose from MPs’ role as public representatives and were reimbursed by the taxpayer.”The Information Commissioner has ruled that a breakdown of the total amounts claimed by some individual MPs for travel, incidental expenses, staffing, central IT provision, centrally purchased stationery and additional cost allowance should be released under the Freedom of Information Act,” the statement added.Far be it for me to suggest anything politically motivated here, but isn’t this the Richard Thomas who said that the country risks sleepwalking into a surveillance society” because of government plans for identity cards and a population register?He said that there is a growing danger of East German Stasi-style snooping if the State gathers too much information about individual citizens.
The (pdf) report of the original hearing dismissing charges against one of the above named can be read here. Excerpt: “Item 14. If the Committee, too, accepts my analysis of the wider position as set out above, there is no reason why it should not dispose of the matter now.”
14 July 2005 Sir Philip Mawer So why now?
What is it about the 2003/04 year that is of such great interest in this regard? A House of Commons report in October 2007 reported that in the last financial year Tony Blair’s expenses were £97,000
“Then chancellor Gordon Brown, Tory leader David Cameron and then Lib Dem leader Sir Menzies Campbell’s claims were all around the average – at £135,525, £143,385 and £142,810 respectively.
But claims by Tony Blair, who was prime minister at the time, were comparatively low – amounting to £97,084.”
TREATY OF LISBON:
The Lib Dems allied with the Government over the EU vote last week. Landing a blow against those calling for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty (or Constitution as those against describe it) the Liberal Democrats voted with the government so ensuring its passage through the Commons. The House of Lords may be a different matter.Interesting though that the Liberal Democrats, who often scream about civil rights and listening to the people, on this occasion have turned a deaf ear.That may be because, to them, the issue of Europe is strong on their Positive List. Principle before expediency? Is it fine when the Lib Dems are standing on principle, but not always so acceptable when others do? Or am I being just too cynical? Still, I congratulate them on this, if not much else. A referendum as called for by the antis, would be a rag to the rags … bull, in the hands of our newpapers. Of that we can have little doubt.
LIST OF MPs WHO VOTED WITH THE GOVERNMENT
Here is a list of the MPs who voted this week for the Treaty of Lisbon to be taken to the next stage of ratification, so that you can write to congratulate or reprimand them:
Ainger, NickAinsworth, rh Mr. BobAlexander, DannyAlexander, rh Mr. DouglasAllen, Mr. GrahamAnderson, Mr. DavidAnderson, JanetArmstrong, rh HilaryAtkins, CharlotteAustin, Mr. IanAustin, JohnBailey, Mr. AdrianBaird, VeraBaker, NormanBalls, rh EdBanks, GordonBarlow, Ms CeliaBarrett, JohnBarron, rh Mr. KevinBattle, rh JohnBayley, HughBeckett, rh MargaretBegg, Miss AnneBeith, rh Mr. AlanBell, Sir StuartBenn, rh HilaryBenton, Mr. JoeBerry, RogerBetts, Mr. CliveBlackman, LizBlackman-Woods, Dr. RobertaBlears, rh HazelBlizzard, Mr. BobBlunkett, rh Mr. DavidBorrow, Mr. David S.Bradshaw, Mr. BenBrake, TomBreed, Mr. ColinBrennan, KevinBrown, LynBrown, rh Mr. NicholasBrown, Mr. RussellBrowne, rh DesBrowne, Mr. JeremyBruce, rh MalcolmBryant, ChrisBuck, Ms KarenBurden, RichardBurnham, rh AndyBurstow, Mr. PaulButler, Ms DawnByers, rh Mr. StephenByrne, Mr. LiamCable, Dr. VincentCaborn, rh Mr. RichardCairns, DavidCampbell, Mr. AlanCampbell, rh Sir MenziesCaton, Mr. MartinCawsey, Mr. IanChallen, ColinChaytor, Mr. DavidClark, Ms KatyClark, PaulClarke, rh Mr. CharlesClarke, rh Mr. KennethClarke, rh Mr. TomClegg, Mr. NickClelland, Mr. DavidClwyd, rh AnnCoaker, Mr. VernonCoffey, AnnCohen, HarryConnarty, MichaelCook, FrankCooper, RosieCooper, rh YvetteCousins, JimCrausby, Mr. DavidCruddas, JonCunningham, Mr. JimCunningham, TonyCurry, rh Mr. DavidCurtis-Thomas, Mrs. ClaireDarling, rh Mr. AlistairDavey, Mr. EdwardDavid, Mr. WayneDean, Mrs. JanetDenham, rh Mr. JohnDevine, Mr. JimDhanda, Mr. ParmjitDismore, Mr. AndrewDobbin, JimDobson, rh FrankDonohoe, Mr. Brian H.Doran, Mr. FrankDowd, JimDurkan, MarkEagle, AngelaEagle, MariaEfford, CliveEllman, Mrs. LouiseEnnis, JeffEtherington, BillFarrelly, PaulFeatherstone, LynneFisher, MarkFitzpatrick, JimFlello, Mr. RobertFlint, CarolineFollett, BarbaraFoster, Mr. DonFoster, Mr. Michael (Worcester)Foster, Michael Jabez (Hastings and Rye)Francis, Dr. HywelGapes, MikeGeorge, AndrewGeorge, rh Mr. BruceGerrard, Mr. NeilGibson, Dr. IanGidley, SandraGilroy, LindaGoggins, PaulGoldsworthy, JuliaGoodman, HelenGriffith, NiaGriffiths, NigelGrogan, Mr. JohnGwynne, AndrewHain, rh Mr. PeterHall, Mr. MikeHall, PatrickHamilton, Mr. DavidHamilton, Mr. FabianHanson, rh Mr. DavidHarman, rh Ms HarrietHarris, Dr. EvanHarris, Mr. TomHavard, Mr. DaiHealey, JohnHenderson, Mr. DougHendrick, Mr. MarkHepburn, Mr. StephenHeppell, Mr. JohnHesford, StephenHewitt, rh Ms PatriciaHeyes, DavidHill, rh KeithHillier, MegHodge, rh MargaretHodgson, Mrs. SharonHolmes, PaulHood, Mr. JimHoon, rh Mr. GeoffreyHope, PhilHorwood, MartinHowarth, DavidHowarth, rh Mr. GeorgeHowells, Dr. KimHughes, rh BeverleyHughes, SimonHuhne, ChrisHumble, Mrs. JoanHunter, MarkHutton, rh Mr. JohnIddon, Dr. BrianIllsley, Mr. EricIngram, rh Mr. AdamIrranca-Davies, HuwJames, Mrs. Siân C.Jenkins, Mr. BrianJohnson, rh AlanJohnson, Ms Diana R.Jones, HelenJones, Mr. KevanJones, LynneJones, Mr. MartynJoyce, Mr. EricKaufman, rh Sir GeraldKeeble, Ms SallyKeeley, BarbaraKeen, AlanKeen, AnnKeetch, Mr. PaulKelly, rh RuthKemp, Mr. FraserKennedy, rh Mr. CharlesKennedy, rh JaneKhan, Mr. SadiqKidney, Mr. DavidKnight, JimKramer, SusanKumar, Dr. AshokLadyman, Dr. StephenLamb, NormanLammy, Mr. DavidLaws, Mr. DavidLaxton, Mr. BobLazarowicz, MarkLeech, Mr. JohnLepper, DavidLevitt, TomLewis, Mr. IvanLinton, MartinLloyd, TonyLove, Mr. AndrewLucas, IanMackinlay, AndrewMacShane, rh Mr. DenisMactaggart, FionaMalik, Mr. ShahidMallaber, JudyMann, JohnMarris, RobMarsden, Mr. GordonMarshall-Andrews, Mr. RobertMcAvoy, rh Mr. ThomasMcCabe, SteveMcCafferty, ChrisMcCarthy, KerryMcCarthy-Fry, SarahMcCartney, rh Mr. IanMcDonagh, SiobhainMcFadden, Mr. PatMcFall, rh JohnMcGovern, Mr. JimMcGuire, Mrs. AnneMcIsaac, ShonaMcKechin, AnnMcKenna, RosemaryMcNulty, rh Mr. TonyMeacher, rh Mr. MichaelMerron, GillianMichael, rh AlunMilburn, rh Mr. AlanMiliband, rh DavidMiliband, rh EdwardMiller, AndrewMoffat, AnneMoffatt, LauraMole, ChrisMoon, Mrs. MadeleineMoore, Mr. MichaelMoran, MargaretMorden, JessicaMorgan, JulieMorley, rh Mr. ElliotMountford, KaliMudie, Mr. GeorgeMulholland, GregMullin, Mr. ChrisMunn, MegMurphy, Mr. DenisMurphy, Mr. JimMurphy, rh Mr. PaulNaysmith, Dr. DougO’Brien, Mr. MikeO’Hara, Mr. EdwardOlner, Mr. BillÖpik, LembitOsborne, SandraOwen, AlbertPalmer, Dr. NickPearson, IanPlaskitt, Mr. JamesPope, Mr. GregPound, StephenPrentice, BridgetPrentice, Mr. GordonPrescott, rh Mr. JohnPrimarolo, rh DawnProsser, GwynPurchase, Mr. KenPurnell, rh JamesRammell, BillRaynsford, rh Mr. NickReed, Mr. AndyReed, Mr. JamieReid, rh JohnRennie, WillieRiordan, Mrs. LindaRobertson, JohnRobinson, Mr. GeoffreyRogerson, DanRooney, Mr. TerryRuane, ChrisRuddock, JoanRussell, BobRussell, ChristineRyan, rh JoanSalter, MartinSanders, Mr. AdrianSarwar, Mr. MohammadSeabeck, AlisonSharma, Mr. VirendraShaw, JonathanSheerman, Mr. BarrySheridan, JimShort, rh ClareSimon, Mr. SiônSingh, Mr. MarshaSlaughter, Mr. AndySmith, rh Mr. AndrewSmith, Ms Angela C. (Sheffield, Hillsborough)Smith, Angela E. (Basildon)Smith, GeraldineSmith, rh JacquiSmith, JohnSmith, Sir RobertSnelgrove, AnneSoulsby, Sir PeterSouthworth, HelenSpellar, rh Mr. JohnStarkey, Dr. PhyllisStewart, IanStoate, Dr. HowardStrang, rh Dr. GavinStraw, rh Mr. JackStunell, AndrewSutcliffe, Mr. GerrySwinson, JoTami, MarkTaylor, Ms DariTaylor, Mr. IanTaylor, MatthewTeather, SarahThomas, Mr. GarethThornberry, EmilyTimms, rh Mr. StephenTipping, PaddyTodd, Mr. MarkTouhig, rh Mr. DonTurner, Dr. DesmondTurner, Mr. NeilTwigg, DerekVaz, rh KeithWalley, JoanWaltho, LyndaWard, ClaireWatts, Mr. DaveWebb, SteveWhitehead, Dr. AlanWicks, MalcolmWilliams, rh Mr. AlanWilliams, Mrs. BettyWilliams, MarkWilliams, Mr. RogerWilliams, StephenWillis, Mr. PhilWillott, JennyWills, Mr. MichaelWilson, PhilWinnick, Mr. DavidWinterton, rh Ms RosieWoodward, rh Mr. ShaunWoolas, Mr. PhilWright, Mr. AnthonyWright, DavidWright, Mr. IainWright, Dr. TonyWyatt, DerekYounger-Ross, RichardTellers for the Ayes:Mr. Tom Watson andMr. Frank Roy.
PC GONE CRAZY!
And in case you missed it – what’s wrong with our leaders? I mean – what else is wrong with them? The American internet press has grabbed the story of our Home Secretary’s Threat to Islam stuff and run with it. I liked the angle at this one, despite its title, mainly discussing the anti-Islamic Activity tag from the government – “First they came for Piglet”
The Americans despair of us, my compatriates; they really do.
The sliding stock markets worldwide and President Bush’s cash injection into the economy were the issues focusing minds here. It might have put GB/PM’s Northern Rock worries into context and perspective on his visit. And at the end of the week the Hero of France (no, not Blair), the man who messed about with a few euros in his bank’s backroom, had them all talking in Davos.
I tell you – these computers can be dangerous in the wrong hands!
I’ve decided against writing a Davos page. A bit busy right now. Instead I’ll provide links below for you to go and see what they were up to in the Swiss Alps. And perhaps a few snippets of after-thoughts. Later.
‘Speaking to a group of journalists at the Davos Economic Forum on Thursday, Karzai said he shouldn’t have listened to British and U.S. officials who said he should remove the local security forces that were already in place in Helmand province, The Times reported.’
Opening plenary with the co-chairs.
The co-chairs of the Annual Meeting 2008 give their perspectives on the theme of the meeting and the issues at the fore of the agenda.
Tony Blair, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (1997-2007); Member of the Foundation Board; Co-Chair of the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2008
James Dimon, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, JPMorgan Chase & Co., USA; Co-Chair of the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2008
K. V. Kamath, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, ICICI Bank, India; Co-Chair of the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2008
Henry A. Kissinger, Chairman, Kissinger Associates, USA; Co-Chair of the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2008
Indra K. Nooyi, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, PepsiCo, USA; Co-Chair of the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2008
David J. O’Reilly, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Chevron, USA; Co-Chair of the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2008
Wang Jianzhou, Chairman and Chief Executive, China Mobile Communications Corporation, People’s Republic of China; Co-Chair of the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2008
Chaired by
Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman, World Economic Forum
This link takes you to ALL the video webcasts, podcasts and vodcasts for the week’s sessions.
Middle East Peace Process Video
Davos – Forbes video network website covering the World Economic Forum at Davos.
Mr Blair has asked the American presidential candidates to beware protectionism, especially if there is an upcoming recession.
Excerpt:
DAVOS, Switzerland — Tony Blair cautioned U.S. presidential candidates not to lock themselves into damaging protectionist or isolationist policies they could have a tough time walking away from once in office.
In an interview with The Wall Street Journal yesterday at the World Economic Forum here, the former British prime minister expressed concern that a suddenly more gloomy outlook for the global economy could lead the U.S. and other nations to close themselves off.
“I understand all the protectionist pressures in the U.S.,” Mr. Blair said. “On the other hand, I think it would be extremely unfortunate if people bolt themselves in positions that become difficult to extract themselves from, because the reality in the world is that we’re going to have to open up world trade, not close it down.”
This Aug 2007 Congress bill in the US to establish the National Commission on the Prevention of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism.
On Andrew Marr’s Radio 4 programme Start the Week this morning, Martin Amis was discussing his new book The Second Plane, and his thoughts on jihadism, islamicist fundamentalism, the “fraud of multi-culturalism”, and the west’s seeming liberal suicidal tendency (this emboldened last are MY words, not Amis’s, though I understand that he too subscribes to this opinion).It’s good to know that there ARE some journalists out there in this great (dis)United Kingdom who are no longer afraid to use good old common sense.Taken from the Start The Week page:The novelist MARTIN AMIS has been the focus of much controversy over his journalism in the aftermath of 9/11. He is not, he declares, Islamophobic, but is instead “Islamismophobic” or anti-Islamist. He explains his views and argues that Western liberals have given in to ‘moral equivalence’ on the issue of terrorism. The Second Plane: September 11: 2001-2007, a collection of essays and short stories, is published by Jonathan Cape.In the year that marks the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the lawyer, campaigner and UN Special Rapporteur, ASMA JAHANGIR, warns of the attacks on these rights by nations using the pretext of the ‘war against terror.’ Recently released from house arrest in Pakistan, she argues that targeting Muslims in anti-terrorism measures is counter-productive and that intolerance cannot be wiped out by intolerant behaviour by governments. Asma Jahangir will be giving an Oxford Amnesty Lecture on Wednesday 30 January and a talk on the subject of human rights at the University of York on Thursday 31 January.Click to listen.
Watch the full Blair speech(around 30 minutes) to the UMP meeting in Paris, 12th January. Scroll down list on right to “Accueil de Tony Blair” (His welcome and speech).
What a pity. But I am not so sure what to make of this.
[Quel dommage. Mais je ne suis pas sûr ce qui à faire de ceci.]
Time … and politics … will tell. [Le temps… et la politique… indiqueront.]
If Mr Blair is not to lead the EU it will be Europe’s loss, in my humble opinion. And in 36 months, they may well wonder if they got it all wrong. [Si M. Blair ne doit pas mener l’EU que ce sera la perte de l’Europe, à mon avis humble.]
And in 36 months they may wonder if they made the right decision. [Et en 36 mois ils peuvent se demander s’ils prenaient la bonne décision.]
William Hague on this YouTube video on Tony Blair’s EU “Presidency” and Brown’s reaction to the ‘nauseating, glutinous praise oozing from every Head of Government’
It’s about time the other contenders crept out of the woodwork to let us see the colour of their inspirational abilities. Then they can all crawl back in again. I suggest that if Mr Blair wants the job, in four to six months time, he’ll be back as the hot favourite. Those Europeans who were firmly against Iraq and the Bush/Blair alliance will see things differently. A season is a long time in politics. Just wait until Autumn.
26th January, 2008
PREMIER TO PRESIDENT?
Just couldn’t resist adding this. On Radio 4’s “Week in Westminster” this morning, Matthew D’Ancona treated us to some of William Hague’s oratory. Hague, a former Conservative leader, was and still is a masterful parliamentary debater. Not that it did him any good against THE Master, as he himself admitted. This piece of imagery in the Europe debate was brilliantly conjured and delivered.
Go to the Week in Westminster site here, or try clicking directly to it here. (I’m not sure how long it stays available). If you go to their site, use the arrows to click through to the last 3 minutes of the broadcast. At “Listen Again” – put in “Week in Westminster” for the 26th January 2008. Or click here to read it at the end of this page.
19th January, 2008
Note: Just changed the month above. Apologies. Why didn’t any of you tell me I was ahead of myself, (in characteristic Blairite fashion)?
Comment at end
THE ‘HIGH-SPEED MOTORBOAT’ LEAVING US BRITS IN HIS WAKE
Amazing how little coverage there has been in the UK media of Tony Blair’s speech to Sarkozy’s UPM party in Paris last weekend. We really are an island race. As our former prime minister continues on his upward trajectory on the world stage, (to mix metaphors), our press turns the other way, almost as if it doesn’t matter.
They’ll catch up when they’ve caught on to just how much it DOES matter.
It seems he stole “the high-speed motorboat” label (a French saying) from Monsieur le President. M Sarkozy didn’t seem to mind a bit. He is proud to be Blair’s number one cheerleader in continental Europe and for good reason.
“Tony Blair, the former Labour Prime Minister British … succeeded in stealing the high-speed motorboat from Nicolas Sarkozy thanks to a speech, in French, full of humour.”
Note: I’ve searched but failed to find the full Blair transcript online in English or French. So I’ve decided to translate bits of it myself, from the video. Not word-for-word, but enough to provide the gist. I have added some commentary on his speech’s reception by the audience of 2000 – 3000 (estimates vary – probably 2500).
(French – to translate any French page you find, copy the url into Babel Translation )
You can watch the full Blair speech to the UMP meeting in Paris, 12th January 2008. Click here to listen while you read this. It will open in a new window. Here’s some of what was going on:
Speaking to his UMP conservative party, the French president Nicolas Sarkozy, did not overtly propose Tony Blair for the post of the first President of the EU. But his position was quite clear, nonetheless.
Praising Mr Blair as “one of Europe’s greats”, he said this:
“When we appoint this president of the European union, I want us to set the bar high and not aim for the lowest common denominator”.
A Warm Welcome – ALL CHANGE message in French in France
M Sarkozy seemed to be reaching for Mr Blair’s hand a couple of times as they ascended and crossed the stage.
Oui, j’ai appris que M Sarkozy est francais… mais toujours! We Brits still often have trouble with the kissing on both cheeks business, much less hand-holding with fellow leaders; especially of the same sex!
The picture above reminds me of the verbally and charm challenged Glaswegian with attitude trying to pick up a girl in a city dance hall:
He: Are you dancing?; She: Are you asking?; He: I’m asking.; She: I’m dancing.
Ou …
Etes vous dansant ? ; Etes vous demandant ? ; Je demande ; Je danse.
“TONY… TONY… TONY…”
Accompanied by stirring and somewhat heavenly music – “Ah .. ah .. ah .. ah” – as he entered the platform, Mr Blair was warmly welcomed with a resounding standing ovation and welcoming hand clapping from the delegates. That was before he spoke.
It was to get yet more embarrassing for Mr Blair. Echoing the grateful Kosovan refugees whom he had helped release from Milosevic’s tyranny, this was something he probably did NOT expect.
The audience, all on their feet before he’d uttered a word, started chanting “Tony, Tony, Tony…”
Evidently his reputation as a reformer they’d love to emulate, outflanks any other reputation.
Si sensible, les francais, ne sont-ils pas?
The taken aback former PM responded, “Thank you, thank you. I’m not used to that. (Merci … je ne suis pas habitue a cela”.)
I recall he also shared that thought some years ago at the US Congress, when greeted in such a fashion.
He continued, in Paris:
“My dear friends, I’m going to try to make my speech in French.” (Mes chers amis, je vais essayer de faire mon speech en francais.)
[Round of appreciative applause]
With his customary touch of humour, he continued … “My advisors told me that if I did it in English no-one would understand me”.
A few “ooohs and aaahs” followed this remark, as they tried to decide if this was self derision or an insult to their language skills. Blair, the consummate communicator, would have been forgiven ANYTHING here. After all, he WAS speaking in French.
After thanking the dignitaries and referring to continuing “l’entente cordial” he launched into familiar territory to British audiences on “changing the ideas of the Left & the Right.”
Recognising that political parties are naturally proud of their traditions, he said that just as important today as the differences between the Left & the Right, are the differences between politics which look backwards and those which look forward.
“Tomorrow versus yesterday, open versus closed.”
TECHNOLOGY & CHANGE
“Think of things ten years ago – and now – technology – mobile phones”.
He said he got his first mobile phone six months ago, the day he left Downing Street. He then told the story of texting someone who didn’t have his name in their phone’s address book. They texted back saying, “Sorry, but who are you”. He joked to his audience, “Unbelievable. I left yesterday and forgotten already”.
Other points on change:
Our children use today’s technology naturally. Technology has transformed industry, genetics for example. New methods of working; the impact on electronics.
Change demands courage; change and choice. The old methods of working are obsolete.
New methods of working. The impact of tourism, “change, change and more change.”
Mass production is finished, the comfort zone in the public service is finished.
Change in the classroom.
The best service for the public.
Providing the best service FOR the people. The public are demanding change, not the politicans or industrialists.
Change versus stagnation – the differences in politics, whether left or right.
To become a monument or a movement?
Change requires courage, engagement and above all reserves of energy, as ‘has Nicolas Sarkozy your president.’
He expanded, “Another leader, who will remain nameless, said to me one day -“
“Sarkozy, il est tres tonic, non?”
Et j’ai repondu, ” Non, je n’ai pas remarque.”
(“Sarkozy is very energetic, isn’t he?
And I replied, “No, I haven’t noticed'”.)
And then, drawing laughter from delegates, Blair cited Sarkozy’s “energy, in all areas” – a reference to the recently-divorced French leader’s love affair with a former top model and singer.
Click to watch a few seconds of the Blair humour, which went down well with his audience, and even with M Sarkozy.
And then, familiar themes:
NEW VALUES
The sole question for politicians – how are you prepared for modernisation?
We must maximise opportunities, so that everyone profits.
The future or the past?
He teased his audience; “I believe in progressive politics. In France I’d be in …. er… the government … (laughter from audience) … no, no, I’d be … in a socialist party with the heart (courage?) to transform itself.
He also dwelt on education, the family-work balance, the ‘new world’, immigration, relations with other countries.
He said that we need to look forward, not backwards; and, we work better when we work together in Europe.
OTHER POINTS:
We are only effective against crime, terrorism, security, bio-technology etc if in all areas we work together in Europe, united and strong.
Change is never welcomed.
Everyone protests, but once they are made, they always accept them.
He mentioned British progress and reform over the last ten years: the minimum wage, pensions reform, equality for homosexuals.
PERSONAL NHS EXPERIENCE
[Picture: 2nd Oct 2004, Mr Blair leaving hospital after a routine catheter ablation to correct a heart flutter]
He mentioned his own hospitalisation for a ‘minor operation’ (heart), while he was bringing controversial changes into the health service.
“Mr Blair”, said the anaesthetist holding an enormous hypodermic syringe, “I want to tell you something. I’ve never done this before.”
As the audience laughed in empathy, Mr Blair, arms outstretched, unbuttoning his jacket, made the not-so-subtle point that the Blair NHS works. Before them was the physical embodiment of that! With HIS energy, it was fairly inarguable? This man is FIT to be our president.
AND:
ACTIVE WELFARE STATE & PARTY ALLEGIANCE
“In the United States, I would be a Democrat, in the United Kingdom I am Labour. In France I would be … (pause) probably with the government”. He continued over laughter and applause. “No, I joke …. I would be with the socialist Party, and on the side of those who wish in their hearts to transform it”.
He then talked of the “the agenda of a new governorship”: “Education, and not regulation”, an “active and non-passive Welfare state”, “the work/life balance, new boundaries for the Welfare state”, and “trade unions partners of change and not of resistance”.
The way to reform demands leadership and taking decisions, even if you don’t always take people with you.
He ended on this note:
“Perhaps one day we will speak the same language, but which one – that is for another debate.”
He received a standing ovation at the start and the end of the speech. Watching this, it hardly surprises me that he is happier speaking to non-British audiences. Compared to the kind of dreadful treatment he habitually got from those he tried to reform at home, such as some at British Trades Union Congress meetings, it must be heaven. The ‘scars on his back’ are fading now, but it might be a warning for M Sarkozy as to what he is taking on.
Courage mon brave!
REPORTS & THOUGHTS ON THE BLAIR PRESIDENCY PROSPECTS
There’s plenty being said about this in plenty of places. And the prospect is hardly new. (See the American Counter Punch article from 2003 below). It seems that Mr Blair is both the outsider and the favourite in the EU presidency race.
The Economist suggests that M Sarkozy is playing a blinder on the innocent Mr Blair, while secretly backing his own man. Watching your back is a skill early developed in politics. Mr Blair has had plenty of practice and nothing should be dismissed. But if this is really M Sarkozy’s plan, I’d be VERY surprised.
This Brussels site has taken up the Economist’s song:
Many, in Brussels, thinks that the candidate will have to come from a country pertaining to the centre of the Union, i.e. of a Member State of the zone euro. Blair, even if he is internationally known, is too politically marked, as precisely point out it the two wise old men of the French right-hand side. Will Sarkozy hear them? Or does play the Blair chart for better disarming London and finally obtaining the designation of Jean-Claude Juncker, Luxembourg the Prime Minister? A tactic which would be far from being idiot.
PARIS (Reuters) – Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair kindled speculation he was running to be the first president of the European Union by praising the bloc in a speech in Paris as France prepares to oversee the appointment process.
At the invitation of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, Blair told a conference of France’s centre-right ruling UMP party on Saturday that EU countries could achieve more in key policy areas by acting together rather than as individual nation states.
“It is not a question of left or right, but a question of the future or the past, of strength or weakness,” said Blair, speaking in French.
“Terrorism, security, immigration, organized crime, energy, the environment, science, biotechnology and higher education. In all these areas, and others, we are much stronger and able to deliver what our citizens expect from us as individual nations if we are part of a strong and united Europe,” Blair said.
The post of president of the European Council — which meets at head of state and government level usually four times a year — is due to be created by the 27-nation grouping in the second half of 2008, when France will chair EU ministerial meetings.
Sarkozy already said in October that Blair or Luxembourg Prime Minister were obvious candidates. A UMP party grandee, Jean-Pierre Rafarin, wrote in Saturday’s Le Monde newspaper that Blair’s experience in Europe positioned him well for the European institutions of the future.
Speaking to the UMP conference immediately after Blair, Sarkozy described him as “one of Europe’s greats” and praised his role in persuading Britain to sign up to the bloc’s new reform treaty.
But he stopped short of offering Blair public backing for the post, which will not be created until the treaty has been ratified by all EU countries.
“When we appoint this president of the European Union, I want us to set the bar high and not aim for the lowest common denominator,” Sarkozy said.
Sarkozy said he hoped he would be the last person to hold the bloc’s existing six-month rotating presidency before the new president, with a two-and-a-half-year term in office, took over.
Sarkozy said he wanted a political Europe with common energy, immigration and environment policies, but in comments that could create tensions with Blair’s successor in Downing Street Gordon Brown, also pleaded for common agricultural and defense policies.
“Europe can’t be an area of 450 million people and one of the richest in the world and rely for its protection on either chance or the United States,” Sarkozy said.
“I am a friend of the United States but I insist that Europe give itself autonomous means to defend itself because if one is not capable of this, one is not capable of assuming one’s independence,” Sarkozy added.
In his speech, Blair praised Sarkozy’s leadership and joked that he could quite easily fit in with his government.
From January 2007 meeting of Blair & Sarkozy in Downing Street
LONDON (Reuters) – French conservative presidential candidate Nicolas Sarkozy praised Prime Minister Tony Blair on Tuesday, saying France had much to learn from the actions of his Labour government.
“European Socialists should be proud of what one of us has done,” the rightist interior minister told reporters at Downing Street, before hastily saying that he meant “one of them”.
French Socialists were up in arms earlier this month when Sarkozy quoted heroes from leftist ranks in a keynote speech. They are likely to be less upset over his decision to adopt Blair as a potential role model.
French Socialists have not tried to court Blair, whom they regard as a centrist, especially since his decision to join the U.S.-led attack on Iraq in 2003.
Sarkozy, visiting London three months before France’s presidential election, distanced himself from Blair over Iraq but said there was still plenty to admire.
“He is a man who counts in Europe,” Sarkozy said.
“It is not a question of grabbing hold of a model that isn’t ours, but at the same time Tony Blair is a man whose pragmatism has served his country well,” he told reporters.
Blair will be attending a meeting on 31st Januaryin the Sorbonne, of the “Progressists” of François FillonFrench Prime Minister and close ally of Monsieur Sarkozy.
Mr Blair will talk about universalization and development, the role of the State, new tools for fight against inequalities.There will also be three round tables conflabs with political, expert and intellectual guests.
David Silverman AFP Tony Blair, December 13, 2007 in Jerusalem
Blair unfit to run EU, say French political veterans.
By John Lichfield in Paris
Published: 18 January 2008
Two of France’s senior statesmen have launched an ABB movement – “Anyone But Blair” – in an attempt to prevent the former prime minister becoming the first president of the European Union next year.Although much of the support for Mr Blair comes from President Nicolas Sarkozy, the former French president Valéry Giscard d’Estaing and the former prime minister Edouard Balladur, who is M. Sarkozy’s mentor and friend, have declared Mr Blair to be unfit for the job.Both men say Europe’s first president must come from a country which is fully committed to all EU policies, including the euro. Mr Balladur – breaking publicly with President Sarkozy – also says Mr Blair is too close to the United States to be chosen as a “fitting spokesman for Europe”. Their views are echoed, off the record, by senior officials in Belgium and Italy. But Mr Blair is said to have some support in eastern Europe, Germany and Spain. Whether Mr Blair actually wants the job remains unclear.A semi-permanent European president, or president of the European Council, will be chosen by the 27 member governments this year. At present, EU business is organised, and ministerial and summit meetings chaired, by a different government every six months.
Under the EU Reform Treaty now being ratified by member states, a European Council president will be elected for two and a half years by a qualified majority of governments. He or she will take office next year, after all 27 countries have approved the treaty.
The “president of Europe” would chair summits, and some ministerial meetings but have few real powers. He or she would serve with the existing presidents of the European Commission (the EU executive) and the European Parliament (legislature).
But the job is expected to achieve symbolic importance, especially for the rest of the world. For the new post to achieve this kind of weight and seriousness, President Sarkozy says, it must go to a man, or woman, of proven stature. He began pointing to the possibility of a President Blair almost as soon as he reached the Elysée Palace last year. “[Mr Blair] is a very remarkable man,” he said in June. “He is the most European of Britons; it would be intelligent to think of him.”
Last weekend, M. Sarkozy invited Mr Blair to address his centre-right party, the Union Pour un Mouvement Populaire (UMP) in Paris. Mr Blair, in French, made a passionate plea for a “collective, united and strong Europe” to face the challenges of the 21st century. This was taken by many of those present as a preliminary application for the new job in Brussels.
Hence the alarmed reaction of M. Giscard and M. Balladur. M. Giscard, 81, told a committee of the French National Assembly he would not be a candidate but added that the job must go only to a politician from a country which “respected all Europe’s commitments” and whose public opinion was whole-heartedly European. In other words, no Tony Blair and no Brits.
M. Balladur, who was prime minister from 2003 to 2005, said in the newspaper Le Monde: “To be accepted by all, the president of the Union must come from a country… determined to build European independence, especially in defence and foreign affairs.
“How could Mr Blair embody this ambition when, in the disastrous episode in Iraq, he always clung zealously to the views of the US or even incited them? Mr Blair is, for sure, a remarkable person but he cannot be the symbol of a Europe which wants to exist.”
The Right are by no means ALL with Sarkozy on Blair. This is the translation at Babel of this page.
From Martin Bureau AFP
British ex-First minister Tony Blair, January 12, 2008 with the congress of UMP in Paris
In spite of the implicit support of Nicolas Sarkozy and the triumphal reception reserved Saturday by its UMP party with the British ex-First minister, the candidature of Tony Blair for the future presidency of the European Union does not cause the adhesion of the French right-hand side.
Thus, the former Prime Minister Edouard Balladur is categorical: Mr. Blair does not have the profile, because it “cannot be the symbol of Europe which wants to exist”, he underlined Thursday in a platform with the daily newspaper the World.
If the majority of the persons in charge for UMP praise his “remarkable personality” or “the man charimastic”, it is its nationality which poses more the problem: Great Britain does not belong to Schengen space, has a foreign politics considered to be too pro-American, in particular on the war in Iraq, and especially is not in the zone euro.
“the future president must (…) belong to a country which complies with” all the European rules, Wednesday the former president Valery Giscard d’ Estaing underlined, who chaired convention charged to write the project of European constitution, criticizing the departures (“opting out”) from the Community rules practised by London.
In more felted terms, the Secretary of State to the European Businesses, Jean-Pierre Jouyet, does not say another thing: for this station, it is necessary “to take into account” the “respect of last engagements of each one of those which will postulate with these functions compared to European solidarity and the positions adopted by the Union on the international level”, it launched Tuesday evening to the deputies.
If Nicolas Sarkozy officially did not give his support for Tony Blair, it does not fail to praise the merits of a man described as “large of Europe”.
“Sarkozy is mistaken on the chances in Blair. Blair will never have the support of the EPP (Left popular European, gathering the preserving parties) and even less of the Socialists “, analyzes an UMP person in charge.
“Nicolas Sarkozy is advanced too quickly. I do not think that it is the good candidate. Even if it is most European of the British persons in charge, Blair is very Atlantic. In 2009, one will need refonder Europe. It is necessary to turn the page and to call upon authentic Europeans “, declared Thursday eurodéputée Marielle de Sarnez, arm right of the centre chief Francois Bayrou.
More careful, François Sauvadet, of the New Center, a party created by centrists to support Mr. Sarkozy, as estimates however him “as a president resulting from the zone euro would be a strong signal”.
“the choice of Blair seems really very, very difficult to me. How it would defend the euro, which conditions our growth, in the great international discussions?”, question yourself Axel Poniatowski, president UMP of the commission of the Foreign Affairs of the Parliament.
François Goulard (UMP) worries frankly about the support of Mr. Sarkozy. “It is a proof of more than its alignment on Bush”, said this deputy close to the ex-First Dominique de Villepin minister, which was the rival of the current Head of the State. For him, at Mr. Sarkozy, “the only true rupture, it is in foreign politics”.
“Not with the nomination of vassal of Bush!”, carry yourself the souverainist Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, opposed to the European treaty.
“Blair is the symbol of false modernity clinquante that any more the English do not support and to which the French become increasingly allergic”.
Rare are those, among the UMP deputies, to see of a good eye the Blair candidature. “It would incarnate this presidency very well. It is the best means of anchoring Great Britain well in Europe because we cannot do it without it “, estimates one of between-them, Marc Laffineur.
So, not all plain sailing for the high speed motor boat then.
Martin Bureau AFP – the British ex-First minister Tony Blair, January 12, 2008 with the congress of UMP in Paris
Historical references to Blair’s approach to Europe compared with Brown’s
2001
This article in The Independent, on 22 November 2001 by Donald Macintyre reminds us that Mr Blair & Mr Brown frequently differed on the approach to the EU, if we needed reminding. Indeed a glance at recent books written on the pair shows the same dichotomy of views.
Anthony Seldon’s recent publication, Blair Unbound, coinciding with Blair’s departure from office, seems to conclude that Brown’s Five Economic Tests were a contrivance designed to block Blair’s EU developments at every turn.
Since they both agree on the recent treaty, bargained by Blair and signed (eventually) by Brown, are we right to ask if they are coming closer on this euro issue now? No ‘hub’ for the world, Mr Miliband, can stay out of the EU’s central wheel, if we are to hope to contain the awakening giants of China and India.
I wonder why I feel that Brown has neither the gut instinct nor the guts to take this step.
2003
My thoughts on the article below:
AMALGAMATING CURRENCIES
This CounterPunch article by Anthony Gancarski is particularly interesting in its prescience, written as it was almost 5 years ago!
But “war” on the dollar? In today’s world and with ascending nations snapping at western sliding economies’ heels, might it not be an “amalgation” (or “merger” if amalgamation has too many corporate conotations for you) between the euro and the US dollar that ‘M Le President Blair’ has in mind? A whole new configuration of the balance of money, trade and thus power?
Think ahead folks if you want to keep up with the high speed motorboat. Not that I’m suggesting he is thinking along these lines. But wherever he is, you can be sure he’s ahead of most of us.
And if this prospect frightens some American-shy Europeans, consider the alternative in the next 20 – 30 years. How many of us today even know the name of the Chinese currency? We will.
But since any currency merger of two of the largest trading blocs in the world smacks of worldwide government and we’re not quite ready for that yet (not until the little men arrive from Jupiter), there would be some selling to do to the public. On the other hand, all most people care about is the pound/dollar/euro in their pocket. If there is a prospect of endemic western recession and thus a complete turnaround in the wealth of the world as we know it, the day might come when we laugh at our nations’ attachment to their greenback, or equivalent.
Starvation focuses the mind.
As for the political economics of it all, well, that is for political economists to work out.
Then again, there is always the contrary view (from an anti-euro perspective)
April 19, 2003
Blair’s War on the Dollar
Tony Blair: the Most Powerful Man in the World
by ANTHONY GANCARSKI
The British Prime Minister endured such trials in 2002 that he seemed destined to be ousted from his post, and 2003 didn’t start much better for him. Pilloried throughout his nation’s media as Bush’s lapdog, Blair looked to most in the world like an effete figure at the helm of an irrelevant nation. Some treated him with a measure of respect, hoping he’d play good cop to the US President’s embodiment of Nixon’s “madman theory”. But only a measure — most wondered where things had gone so wrong for the formerly bright-eyed PM.
That said, the last month or so has been something of a coup for Blair. The removal of Hussein, tricky at first, moved with a prearranged swiftness by the time coalition troops moved into Baghdad to what American television called “pockets of resistance.” With the antiwar position momentarily discredited, a rapprochement of sorts was struck with sparring partners like France’s Chirac, who declared that he was not put out by Hussein’s removal. All’s well that ends well, and a resurgent Tony Blair seems poised to call in some markers this year and beyond.
And, according to the Times of London , Blair’s starting to flex his long-dormant political muscle in some interesting ways.
“TONY BLAIR’s plans for a powerful new full-time president of Europe look set to become reality after the man charged with drafting a European Union constitution backed the project yesterday.
“Valery Giscard d’Estaing, the former French President who chairs the convention on Europe’s future, supported the EU’s biggest member states who argue that the Union needs a president if it is to punch its weight on the international stage.”
Who’s in on the initiative so far? France [whose Chirac first publicly floated the idea] and the UK, of course. Aznar’s Spain and Rassmussen’s Denmark, as well as Sweden. Generally, smaller states see the proposal as one intended to quiet their voices within the EU; this power grab, which isn’t what the small states agreed to when they joined, is as much as acknowledged by the former French President. As the Times puts it, “M Giscard made his views clear after protracted talks with leaders gathered in Athens to sign the treaty ushering in the ten new members. Asked how many countries opposed the idea of a president, he said: ‘When you assess these positions, one thing to take into account is the number of states. But we also have to take into account their populations, because we operate in a democratic way here. And the majority of the population is in favour of a somewhat more stable president.'”
The stability referred to here, of course, is that of a monolith. Those who opposed the construction of the EU on the grounds that the organization would sap their nations’ sovereignty have been proven right again in a key respect. Decisions of war and peace, even more so than now, will be dominated by the traditional powers of “Old Europe”, with the smaller states given little legal ground to object.
That much said, there is a payoff for this close cooperation between Chirac’s France and Blair’s Britain. If the US continues down its current reckless course of unilateral intervention, further schisms will be triggered in the US/UK alliance. Left to his own devices, Blair very well might have scuttled the British pound for the Euro already; certainly, that idea will pick up momentum with each move to undermine ties between London and Washington. The more integration there is between the EU and the UK, the better it is for the Euro and the worse it is for the dollar. Thus, it could be said that the EU Presidency will be strengthened at the expense of the United States and the citizens thereof.
Anthony Gancarski is a regular CounterPunch columnist. He can be reached at:
This made me smile. I don’t watch PMQs now that their star has been extinguished, but this report by Matthew D’Ancona of the Telegraph on a Labour MP’s question to Brown raised my interest. Well, it would, wouldn’t it. Nice to know I’m not the only one watching the Rise & Rise of T Blair.
Reference Blair’s “… announcement of his candidacy for the presidency of the European Union, as a prelude to his candidacy for the presidency of the world, the universe and everything?”
Excerpt:
‘It was one of those moments when Gordon all but puts his hands over his ears and says “la, la, la, la, I am not listening.” At Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, Labour’s leading Eurosceptic, Ian Davidson, stood up and made a very naughty inquiry.
“Were the Prime Minister and his Government aware of his predecessor’s plan,” Mr Davidson said, ” to attend the conference of the main party of the French right to announce his candidacy for the presidency of the European Union, as a prelude to his candidacy for the presidency of the world, the universe and everything? Did the Prime Minister know of that intended candidacy when his predecessor was negotiating the European constitution, and did that not represent a conflict of interests?”
For a moment, the chamber resembled a Bateman cartoon with Mr Davidson as “the Man Who Asked a Question About Tony Blair”. The PM’s colleagues flinched. His circuitry smoked as the red mist descended. But in the end Gordon decided to ignore the question altogether, and, leafing through the Physics revision notes in front of him, he read from the red-starred page marked “Emergency Answer To All Questions about Blair” – an answer that had absolutely nothing to do with Mr Davidson’s point.
“My right hon. Friend the former Prime Minister,” Mr Brown declared dutifully, “is doing a wonderful job because he is speaking up for peace in the Middle East; I approve of his taking up any opportunity he gets to put his advocacy of a peaceful settlement for the Middle East, and he was right to do so.”
The PM will not be able to be so brazenly evasive when the Lisbon Treaty (formerly known as the EU Reform Treaty, formerly known as the EU Constitution) returns this week to the Commons for its Second Reading. Having welched on its manifesto promise to let the nation vote on the constitution, the Government has allocated more than a month of parliamentary time to the debate.
“It’s all smoke and mirrors,” admits one senior Labour figure. “We’re claiming it’s the greatest parliamentary event since the Corn Laws or the Impeachment of Warren Hastings, but everyone knows that a single amendment could ruin the entire ratification process and wreck the entire Treaty.”
Privately, ministers also know that they cannot win the tactical battle over the plebiscite. The least worst option for the Government is to get the inevitable Commons amendment calling for a referendum out of the way, and hope that the Labour whips are right that Mr Davidson’s mutiny amounts to a maximum of 30 MPs.’
22nd January: An analysis at The International Herald Tribune of the two front-runners and of the actual job of EU President.Excerpt:”Now, according to one of official Brussels’ authoritative voices, Juncker (Jean-Claude Juncker, the prime minister of Luxembourg), whose reputation is also that of a European federalist or super-state advocate, would be “impossible” for Britain to support.That’s a swath of complicated, vindictive stuff, all contradicting the EU’s unfulfilled promise to bring its politics closer to its people.Unlike America’s presidential primary elections, the start of Europe’s presidential selection process foretells very little to do with revivifying democracy.At this pace, the man Europe’s government leaders finally call president would take office less a representative of new European unity than the EU’s let’s-make-a-deal past.”
‘We can all picture the scene at a European Council sometime next year. Picture the face of our poor Prime Minister as the name “Blair” is nominated by one President and Prime Minister after another: the look of utter gloom on his face at the nauseating, glutinous praise oozing from every Head of Government, the rapid revelation of a majority view, agreed behind closed doors when he, as usual, was excluded. Never would he more regret no longer being in possession of a veto: the famous dropped jaw almost hitting the table, as he realises there is no option but to join in. And then the awful moment when the motorcade of the President of Europe sweeps into Downing street. The gritted teeth and bitten nails: the Prime Minister emerges from his door with a smile of intolerable anguish; the choking sensation as the words, “Mr President”, are forced from his mouth. And then, once in the Cabinet room, the melodrama of, “When will you hand over to me?” all over again.’
My thoughts: What’s English, French, Italian, Spanish, Dutch, Portuguese, Greek, Swedish, Polish, Romanian, Slovakian, Latvian etc + 15 more for “schadenfreude”?
And just so that you don’t think I only ever read the supportive stuff on Tony Blair, here’s a little something about “the most powerful Empire in history”:What? America? Or a future China? Iran even? No. Europe.“The EU is easily the most popular and successful empire in history, for it does not dominate, it disciplines.”What was that I said about only reading supportive stuff about T Blair?
24th April – A new portrait of Tony Blair, by Phil Hale, has been revealed. It has more depth than the Yeo portrait, and shows the full stress of office. It is NOT, as with the one below, focused on his war legacy.
There are more conflicting verbal descriptions of Tony Blair the Man than there are colours in the blue/green painting by Jonathan Yeo, son of Conservative MP, Tim Yeo.
Jonathan Yeo says: “Love him or hate him, Blair is an international icon and it’s fantastic to have had the chance to capture him now because he is a figure who will be polarising opinions for generations to come.”
SO – RUBBISH OR AN ACCURATE PORTRAYAL? WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Should I go on at all here? Does it matter what I or others think?
I’d have thought that Mr Blair is happy with it, or he would not have allowed its continuance and completion. Surely there is an opt-out or a re-starting of the whole enterprise if one thinks that it is not giving out the desired message? On the other hand, Mr Yeo says that Mr Blair does NOT know that the portrait will be hung opposite one of Margaret Thatcher in Lincoln’s Inn. So perhaps he had no control over the final result or what was done with it; but I doubt it.
That leads me to think that this portrait of a careworn, drawn, reflective, sallow complexioned and respectful former prime minister (the only premier never to have had a portrait painted whilst still in office – showing a lack of vanity, I’d have thought) is just what the sitter wanted. He has his own reasons.
But just for the record –
MY THOUGHTS on the Portrait:
Well, I’m ambivalent, but here goes, if you’re interested.
Four points – well, six actually, but two of them concern the artist and/or the report.
1. The colour & the artistic quality
Despite the overdone bluey-greeness, technically, it’s good, apart from being slightly off-centre. I can’t see the point in that. We HAD noticed the poppy!
The blueness in the portrait suggests sadness or remorse. It also alludes to Conservatism in the UK (with a capital ‘C’ as in the Conservative party). Interesting given the family, and presumably political background of the artist.
But Blair’s blue eyes, often considered his strongest and most captivating feature – well … why aren’t THEY blue? They’re fairly nondescript in the painting. The usual Blair sparkle is missing, but perhaps that is to be expected in such a solemn portrait.
2. The poppy
The poppy is central to this portrait and of great significance, and not just to the artist. Tony Blair knows its relevance. Wearing a poppy on Remembrance Day and then being lambasted as a ‘warmonger’ by the feeble-minded, shows how much he has fallen short in the ‘education, education, education’ hopes. He has ALWAYS described our troops as “the bravest and the best”. Oh, that I could say the same about many of my fellow-countrymen.
3. The emotional & political context
The portrait has a certain intensity. Mr Blair is serious, reflective, thoughtful, even sad. It portrays the conflicts and the enormity of decision-making at that level as regards war.
4. The lasting impression of an historical British leader
It is a good likeness but is hardly flattering.
It certainly portrays his age, 54, although he invariably looks younger when he smiles – which he does often. There is something of the essence of Blair missing; the eternal optimism, the peter pan element.
In 1997 he looked ten years younger than his 43 years. Today, he looks his age, which means he has aged twice as fast as most of us! I wonder why? In the portrait, I think he looks five years older than his years, despite leaping around at sittings like “Tigger”, according to Yeo.
It alludes only to his war history. THAT in my humble opinion, will not be his strongest or longest lasting legacy, despite present opinion.
The Blair smile is his trademark.
And these thoughts on the artist’s comments (as reported, if accurate)
5. Tory Trouble-Making?
There may be some significance in the fact that this blue painting of a seemingly less than ‘at ease leader’ was done by a Conservative. But Yeo’s remarks on Mr Blair’s jovial moods as he bounced into his sittings beg some questions. Saying that he never discloses private conversation, and yet hinting that he thought Blair was basking in some schadenfreude over Brown’s present predicament, is hardly ‘remaining confidential’. Trouble making?
6. Tory Inaccuracies (just for a change)
And if the artist used THIS phrase, he is factually incorrect:
“The fact is that there is no escaping what he’s going to be remembered for,” Yeo told Reuters. “By far the most controversial (thing) will be the wars that he started.”
Blair did not “start” any of the wars he has been involved in. True, he allied with the Americans in Afghanistan & Iraq, but let’s not forget who initiated them and called upon their allies for support. (Note: Iam saying that, not him. I’ve never heard him try to evade responsibility and I don’t believe he ever will. But we should still remember that.)
And as for Kosovo, Sierra Leone, and at home in Northern Ireland, he FINISHED wars, he didn’t start them.
PICTURES FOR COMPARISONThis picture below was taken last May, a month before he left office. Here, he looks five years younger than his age.
Below: October 2007
Below: September 2007
Below: November 2006
Below: 2006
Below: 2001
Below: 1995
In the portrait the years and responsibilities of office have clearly taken their toll. (It’s a pity this “vain” man did not have portraits done when he looked at his best – say 5- 10 years ago.) Another retrospective “portrait” worked from the mass of pictures of this most photographed of today’s politicians is surely not beyond artistic imagination? It would not be a portrait in the true sense, but we need to be reminded, by the artist’s hand, of the hope, excitement and attraction of the early Blair too.
A WAR LEADER
It is clearly a painting of a ‘war leader’, thus the poppy.
But Tony Blair is no innocent as regards the power of inferences. He must have known how it would be interpreted by some. He could have removed the poppy and said, “Oh, no. None of that.” He didn’t. So we have to assume that he has come to terms with the war PM title, and is ready to cope with it. Or even, that he is proud of it.
And he may be right. A later portrait might show different emotions. Blair probably regrets much about Iraq. How could he do other? But history is not yet written of this ongoing situation.
Joanthan Yeo , 37, has painted portraits of other prominent public figures, including Prince Philip, actor Dennis Hopper and tycoon Rupert Murdoch.
In Toronto on Thursday Tony Blair said that economic chaos and international terrorism are growing threats in the 21st Century.
“The challenges are clear and profound,” he added, as he urged Canada not to flinch in its fight against Islamic radicals in Afghanistan.
“We have to stand up and fight for our values as though they were at risk – and they are,” he said.
Describing himself as a “fully paid-up fan of Canada,” Blair praised Canadian soldiers who are fighting alongside British troops in southern Afghanistan and said they are serving “as noble a cause as I can think of.”
Groups such as the Taliban thrive on carnage and terror, Blair said, and they will take any sign of weakness as a victory.
“We have to make the Taliban understand that our determination exceeds theirs,” he said.
International terrorism, which came to dominate his final years in power, is a danger that will grow both more complex and more intense, Blair predicted.
“I wish I could stand before you and say I’m more optimistic,” he said. “I can’t. I am optimistic we will prevail in the end, but the challenges facing us are immense.”
Blair urges NATO unity amid Afghan friction
And this report by Jonathan Spicer
TORONTO, Jan 17 (Reuters) – Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair said on Thursday that NATO must challenge its enemies in Afghanistan firmly and in a united way, despite recent reports of friction among Western countries.
Blair urged an audience in Canada — which is deeply split on its combat role battling Taliban militants in Afghanistan — that it and other NATO members “have got to take a decision on this global fight on terrorism.”
“Our determination to fight can’t be in inverse relationship to theirs,” he said.
Blair’s comments come just days after Canada’s death toll in southern Afghanistan rose to 77, and amid reports of discontent between the United States and its NATO allies.
U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates was quoted on Wednesday in a U.S. newspaper criticizing NATO’s counterinsurgency abilities. But Washington moved quickly to smooth any ruffled allied feathers.
Gates called Canadian Defence Minister Peter MacKay to say the Los Angeles Times took his quotes out of context, and on Thursday he denied friction among members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
Blair, who was prime minister when Britain sent troops into Afghanistan, was asked for some good news about the mission which many Canadians believe saddles Canada with a disproportionate amount of the combat burden.
“I know it’s very uncomfortable to engage our armed forces … but whatever your politics you should be immensely proud of the Canadian troops,” Blair told the audience in Toronto.
The Canadian portion of the mission is based in the volatile region of southern Afghanistan around Kandahar, and the report quoting Gates was met with surprise.
A poll this week showed 47 percent of Canadians want the troops brought back from Afghanistan as soon as possible. It also showed 17 percent want troops to continue in their combat role, and 31 percent said the forces should remain in Kandahar but turn over the combat role to another NATO country.
“For all their feudal ideology, they are actually quite sharp on how … our media works,” Blair said of Taliban militants. “They know the impact a vision of carnage has on our television screens.
“Our enemy thinks they can outlast us.”
Blair, who is now acting as a peace envoy to the Middle East, stoked speculation late last week that he would run to be the first president of the European Union by praising the bloc in a speech in France.
When Frank McKenna, the former Canadian ambassador to the United Nations, asked Blair on Thursday whether he would consider the job, Blair said: “I’m happy doing what I’m doing.” (Reporting by Jonathan Spicer; editing by Rob Wilson)
No mention of human rights while in China, the country which executes more than ALL other nations put together. No cosy chats about extending democracy. Blair, for all the criticism he gets, DID discuss human rights with the Chinese two years ago on his last visit.
Is Brown’s finance background influencing this approach – the “it’s the economy, sweetie” mantra? If so, is he wise to remind the Chinese that UK plc, and not the Americans, nor much of the rest of the world, is open to easy take-over of our high flying companies? Is this the way to win friends and influence people?
And anyway, why this determined push for China to know that Britain, the least regulated of all western states, is open for THEIR business? Didn’t they know that already, Mr GB/PM? I did. I just bought several Chinese produced items (garden gloves, electrical items, household odds and ends – all ‘Made in China’) at The Pound Shop. A great find, if you want to save a quid or two in these pre-recession days. In Woolworths the same items would have cost me ten times as much. And in the large national stores, well …
Hmm … mm
So just where IS the quid pro quo in this? What do we get for our converted Renminbi (People’s Currency)?
THE MILIHUB BANDWAGON – Is he playing a dangerous game? (See BBC report – the rise & rise of the MiliHub?)
Foreign Secretary David Miliband is to warn Labour it needs to show it is excited, not exhausted, by the prospect of a fourth term in government.
He will also signal a break with Tony Blair’s leadership by saying Britain is not a bridge between Europe and the US.
Instead, he will say, it can act as a “global hub”, linking world “networks”.
BBC political correspondent Carole Walker said Mr Miliband appeared to be acknowledging how hard it is for Labour under Gordon Brown to present fresh appeal to the public.
My thoughts: Yes. We’d noticed.
Blair Everywhere Else
It’s hard to keep track of the motorboat, especially when one is weaning oneself off the addiction. But, I was thinking the other day of the map of the world, circa 1950’s. Much of it was coloured pink to show the extent of the British empire. But Blair’s map of his little world is looking somewhat similarly shaded these days.
He went to China before Christmas
Much of the Middle East before and after Christmas
France last week
USA & Canada too
And now he has agreed to take on an unpaid role in yet another continent, Africa. He has agreed to act as an adviser to Rwanda’s Government.
Excerpt: “Tony Blair is widening his post-premiership portfolio by becoming an unpaid adviser to the Rwandan government of President Kagame.”
He needs to get into the bottling business. How to cram 48 hours into 24. I’ll buy some of that.
He reminds me at times of the breadth and depth of the British Empire, even within many of our lifetimes.
Not that I’m advocating colonialism again. It’s bad enough trying to keep native natives happy, without upsetting too many others. See original page here.
But these days we, and the driven or ambitious politician, can get around the world in the flash of a jumbo jet. Especially if we’re not tied down at home by the ungrateful grumblers.
Have you ever read any of the Spoof articles? Some of them are quite funny, some not so. And when I received this article with the headline, “Government renames Islamic terrorism as ‘anti-Islamic activity’ to woo Muslims”, I just assumed it was another Spoof post.
Government renames Islamic terrorism as ‘anti-Islamic activity’ to woo Muslims
By JAMES SLACK – 17th January 2008
Ministers have adopted a new language for declarations on Islamic terrorism. In future, fanatics and fundamentalists (My note: particularly of the Islamist type), will be referred to as “pursuing anti-Islamic activity”.
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said that extremists were behaving contrary to their faith, rather than acting in the name of Islam.
Security officials believe that directly linking terrorism to Islam is inflammatory, and risks alienating mainstream Muslim opinion.
What?! WHAT?!!
Are they MAD?
UPDATES & ADDENDUMS
Sunday, 20th January: I heard Jonathan Yeo this morning on Radio 4 talking about THAT painting. He said something to the effect that Blair charms people with his very clever way of making them think that they are in his circle, whilst not actually saying much. Whereas, Mr Yeo points out, Cameron is “much more open” and says certain things, after which he will say, “Oh, I shouldn’t have said that”.
Not making any party/leader political points here, are we Mr Yeo? Honest (naive?) Dave V Something Else?
Well, personally in this world of trickery and subterfuge versus getting results c/w TALKING about it, give me the Something Else anytime.
UPDATE – 27th August, 2008. PLEASE NOTE:The Newsnight report referred to below, is no longer available. The link only leads to the most recent programme, and I have yet been unable to source the 16th January programme from the BBC’s archives. I apologise for this. Will re-post a link if I find one.
Dealing with Terrorism and the Causes of Terrorism
16th January, 2008
[I’ll remove this post if it all turns out to be just propaganda or a hoax.]
AL QAEDA SETTING UP IN BRITAIN?
As my father used to say, “she’s away with the fairies.”
I was stunned into staying up hours later than I had intended to, after hearing this on Newsnight from Dame Pauline Neville-Jones, former Chairman of the British Joint Intelligence Committee, and someone we might have expected to be able to see the whole picture.
Asked by Jeremy Paxman on European terrorism, “How is that to be contained?”, she said:
“Ah, well now you go of course to the core of things because I think we are very fixated by terrorism and we are right to do so, and we cannot take our eye off that ball, but obviously underlying that is the reasons and the motivation that propel people into taking up either arms or following separate ideologies. This is what I think we need to pay a great deal more attention to, as a society, and as government for that matter – is how we combat and how we tempt people away from that kind of extremism. And that means the foreign policy that we pursue and the kind of domestic policies that we pursue in this country.”
UNBELIEVABLE!
HAS SHE TAKEN LEAVE OF HER SENSES?
As some of my American friends would say – “WRONG ANSWER!”
Forget about making political points about this government’s foreign policy. The Conservatives too would have been in Iraq and Afghanistan, and YOU know it Ms Neville-Jones.
We are ‘way past working out what’s upsetting the poor souls. The liberal lefties have seen to that with their continuing state of denial and hounding of the previous Prime Minister over Iraq. We took our eyes off the ball, aided and abetted by much abuse of the Human Rights Act and by the civil libertarians’ rantings.
But in our fight against Terror & The Causes of Terror, I suppose the answer is to hold a few Saturday morning sessions and hug a JIHADIST for the day until they get better, eh?
Volunteers?
Let’s “volunteer” The Baroness and Mr Cameron. Yes, indeedy, why not?
You two do the first one – the rest of us will pick up after you.
Back to the story:
Newsnight reported that the security services are investigating claims that Al Qaeda is setting up a cell in Britain. The claim was made through this password controlled website
Apart from the BBC midnight news on Radio 4, I have seen no further reports on this in other media. Since there are many jihadist and terrorists sites online, many more aspirational than realistic in nature, this could well fall into the propaganda category.
Wednesday night’s programme will cover the story of the son of a diplomat – self-proclaimed as “terrorist 007” – now serving a 16 year sentence in London – for internet incitement to violence. See more on this below.
As many as 1,500 white Britons are believed to have converted to Islam for the purpose of funding, planning and carrying out surprise terror attacks inside the UK, according to one MI5 source.
Lord Carlile, the Government’s independent reviewer of anti-terrorism legislation, said many of the converts had been targeted by radical Muslims while serving prison terms.
Security experts say the growing secret army of white terrorists poses a particularly serious threat as they are far less likely to be detected than members of the Asian community.
Since the 7/7 and 21/7 London bombings, police and intelligence services have had considerable success in identifying, disrupting and stopping extremist plots. As a result, groups such as al-Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Harkat-ul-Mujahideen have been forced to change tack. Converting white non-Muslims has been one response.
The trend is well established in the United States. American-born Adam Gadahn is one of the FBI’s top 10 most-wanted terrorists after converting to Islam and rising through al-Qaeda’s ranks to become a prominent spokesman.
AL QAEDA ISSUES A CALL TO ARMS INSIDE BRITAIN
“Is it a Serious threat?”, asked Jeremy Paxton on Newsnight.
This is The Declaration as posted on a site called ‘Al Ekhlaas’.
Declaration of the Creation of al Qaeda Organization in Britain.
In the name of Allah, the Most Compassionate the Most Merciful We bring to the nation the good news of the creation of al-Qaeda organization in Britain, under the leadership of brother Muahid Sheikh omar Rabis al-Khalaila.
Our goals are:
1. Launch major attacks against Crusaders’ centers and interests.
2. Eliminate members of the political class, and on top of them Brown and Blair, in accordance with the Quran verse, “fight ye the chiefs of Unfaith”.
3. Our goals are to Eliminate all those who stand in the face of the truthful Mujahideen and eliminate all those who aid the Crusaders against Muslims, as per the teachings of the Sheikh of Islam, Mouhammed Ben Abdel Wahab in his book, “The Ten Nullifiers of One’s Islam”.
So that’s us told, eh?
The report and experts in this kind of “aspirational/inspirational” grouping said that they see any individual who does not subscribe to their extremist views, including Muslims, as legitimate targets.
The DECLARATIONS make clear that the aim, (assuming this is worth considering as a genuine call to arms), is to do away with the rest of us because we are “unfaithful” to their beliefs.
On the website which was set up on 2nd January and has received 17 million hits, a call is made for all Muslims in Britain to join them.
Dame Neville-Jones said that it may only be propaganda, perhaps only aspirational, but “even if this is not something that you would connect directly with terrorism [HER words, not mine] it’s an important part of the of the push that proponents of this ideology want.”
America Believes “Europe Becoming A Platform For Terror”
Co-incidentally the US Homeland Security Secretary, Michael Chertoff spoke yesterday about a growing threat of terrorism originating in Europe.
Baroness Pauline Neville-Jones agreed that there is more terror activity in Europe than in continental USA.
But her common sense seems to have flown out of the window. Or perhaps been clouded by the weak leftie liberal naivety that insists that we have brought this upon ourselves by our involvement in two wars in the Middle East. Tell that to the thousands around the world, mainly Muslim, with no national Iraq involvement, who have lost loved ones to islamist terrorism over decades, not just since 2003.
Baroness Neville Jones, now a Conservative Security spokesperson, said on the programme that we need to look at the reasons for this extremism and work out how we lead people away! Does she or her party really expect to lead people anywhere by this sort of nonsense?
Shameful.
NOTE: As someone who has NOT yet decided which party to vote for next time round, I have no political axe to grind. But perhaps we now know on which side our security bread is buttered.
And if the security services consider this no more than background noise, they have probably worked out that the “declaration” is likely to be the work of the ertswhile Adam, he of the destroyed passport and the American who put together the recent AQ video. After all, why would it be spelt with the American spelling of “centers” unless it was by an American English speaker?
Is this publicity man running Bin Laden’s operation these day.
Western home grown terrorists are a BIG problem and we should NOT ignore them.
VIVA LAS VEGAS!
And, wait for it, Adam … Aymman al-Zawahiri … was one of the stars in Las Vegas last week.
Report excerpt:
The Consumer Electronics Show, which has been introducing latest technology trends since 1967, has in past years included the camcorder, CD player, Microsoft Corp’s Xbox video-game system and Internet TV among others.
This year they were left behind in the technological dust by the terrorist group Al Qaeda.
Al Qaeda video messages of Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri can now be downloaded to cell phones, the terror network announced two days ahead of the Las Vegas Tech Show as part of its ongoing attempts to extend its influences.
The announcement was posted by al Qaeda’s media wing, al-Sahab, on websites commonly used by Islamic militants. By the following day, eight previously recorded videos were made available, including a recent tribute to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the former al Qaeda leader in Iraq killed by U.S. forces in Iraq in June 2006.
In a written message introducing the cell phone videos, al-Zawahiri, al Quaeda’s No. 2 figure, asked followers to spread the terror group’s messages.
“I asked God for the men of jihadi media to spread the message of Islam and monotheism to the world and spread real awareness to the people of the nations,” al-Zawahiri said.
“The terror network has been growing more sophisticated in targeting international audiences. Videos are always subtitled in English, and messages this year from bin Laden and al-Zawahiri focusing on Pakistan and Afghanistan have been dubbed in the local languages, Urdu and Pashtu.” (Fox News, Jan. 8, 2008). “In December, al Qaeda invited journalists to send questions to al-Zawahiri. The invitation was the first time the media-savvy al-Qaeda offered outsiders to “interview” one of its leaders since the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.”
British Muslim (Diplomat’s Son) Incited Online Terror
A computer nerd from Shepherd’s Bush, West London, became al Qaeda’s top internet agent, it can be revealed today. Younes Tsouli, 23, an IT student at a London college, used his top-floor flat in W12 to help Islamist extremists wage a propaganda war against the West.
Videos he posted included messages from Osama bin Laden and images of the kidnapping and murder of hostages in Iraq such as American Nick Berg.
His capture led to the arrest of several Islamic terrorists around the world, including 17 men in Canada and two in the US.
Associates linked to Tsouli in the UK have also now been detained. His 10-year jail sentence was increased to 16 years last month.
At first intelligence operatives who came across his activities dismissed him as a joke. It was only when anti-terrorist detectives began trawling through files on his computer after his arrest that they realised his true significance.
When he was seized, forensic science officers found that Tsouli had been creating a website called YOUBOMBIT.
At his trial at Woolwich crown court a jury heard how the Met trawled through a “hugely gigantic” amount of material — computers, CDs and memory sticks — to bring Tsouli and two other men to justice.
Detectives found literature urging Muslims to take up the fight against other religions. It was the first time anyone in Britain had been prosecuted for inciting terrorist murder purely based on the internet, the court heard.
Tsouli, who set up and ran several sites over the summer of 2005, was described as the most prominent of the three on trial. The other two were also jailed. One intelligence source said: “In a network structure, if you get the right guy the whole thing goes down.”
Assistant Commissioner Peter Clarke, the head of the Met’s counterterrorism operations, said: “It was the first virtual conspiracy to murder that we have seen.”
Tsouli arrived in London in 2001 with his father, a Moroccan diplomat. He studied IT at a college in central London and was quickly radicalised by images of the war in Iraq posted on the internet.
By 2003 he had already begun posting his own material including a manual on computer hacking and a year later had moved on to publishing extremist images and al Qaeda propaganda on the web.
It is claimed al Qaeda leaders in Iraq spotted Tsouli’s work and took the decision to recruit him, using his expertise to post their own extremist videos to a wider audience.
In 2005, Tsouli became administrator for the web forum al-Ansat, used by 4,500 extremists to communicate with each other, sharing such practical information as how to make explosives and how to get to Iraq to become a suicide bomber.
But the enterprise had become so huge, it began to attract the attention of cyber-trackers who monitor the internet for extremists, leading to Tsouli’s arrest.
Under the name Irhabi 007 — combining the James Bond reference with the Arabic for terrorist — he worked with al Qaeda leaders in Iraq and came up with a way to convert often gruesome videos into a form that could be put onto the Web.
HISTORY BETWEEN NEVILLE-JONES & BLAIR
It’s worth remembering that there is some (personal) history between these two.In July 2004 Pauline Neville-Jones had some pretty harsh judgements to make on Tony Blair’s decision to take the country into Iraq. She reckoned the Butler Report was going to be tough.Tim Sebastian’s HardTalk interview with Pauline Neville-Jones.Excerpt:
TS: Would you judge him (Blair) incompetent?
PNJ: “I think there has been a systemic failure”
TS: But him personally, the buck stops there doesn’t it?
PNJ: “The buck does stop there and I don’t think that the political layer in any country can escape the consequences of a systemic failure.”
TS: Do you trust the government after this?
PNJ: “I think there is a trust issue now and I think we already see this the trust issue. That’s one of the reasons why it’s important, first of all, the Prime Minister does acknowledge he actually got it wrong. Secondly that confidence is restored in the intelligence services.”
And … the Sacking of the BBC’s Greg Dyke over Gilligan
‘It’s clear that the governors reached their decision in extreme haste – and directed by the acting chairman, Richard Ryder, and the former diplomat, Dame Pauline Neville-Jones. It shows how weak some of the governors clearly were, panicked by the pressure and not knowing how to react. There was something of a Benny Hill-style farce as Dame Pauline and Lord Ryder shuttled between the governors’ meeting room and a room – presumably down the corridor – where Dyke was fuming, refusing to resign. “You go and tell him,” you can imagine one of them saying. “No, you do it,” comes the reply. “No, no, don’t let him back in,” barks another.’
More here on this, following the Hutton Report into the death of Dr David Kelly.
As the Butler Report was being concluded in July 2004, many were calling for Blair’s head.
“Getting through” Butler will depend on what the report said Dame Pauline Neville-Jones, a former head of the Joint Intelligence Committee, says the buck must stop with Mr. Blair himself, and implies that the author of the WMD dossier and former head of the JIC, John Scarlett, appointed head of MI6 by the Prime Minister, might have to stand down if that is what is needed to “restore confidence” in the intelligence services.
In the end The Butler report concluded with:… a very British conclusion – yes, there were failures but no, no individual can be blamed. Mr Blair was NOT held responsible, nor was John Scarlett.Indeed, the report says that John Scarlett, the head of the Joint Intelligence Committee which drew up the government’s September 2002 dossier, should not resign from his promotion as head of the Secret Intelligence Service(SIS).’This, Scarlett recommendation, is at odds with Ms Pauline Neville-Jones’s call.
In January 2006, she led a policy review for the Conservative party, to include policing and immigration.This article also mentions some disquiet over the controversial flotation of defence research group QinetiQ.Excerpt:’Last week, Mr Cameron hired Dame Pauline to lead a policy review for the Conservative Party on international security, including areas such as policing and immigration.’
Having said that she clears her name to me, more or less, as a closet liberal leftie by these comments following the children’s Newsround programme in October 2007 when they seemed to blame the west and America in particular for upsetting Al Qaeda.Excerpt:’Dame Pauline, who is now a shadow security spokesman, added: “Al Qaeda make the manifestly false claim that America is part of an enormous Jewish-Christian conspiracy to dominate the world and kill Muslims.”This is no secret – Osama bin Laden has said as much himself.”We know that in the long run the struggle against terrorists is a battle for hearts and minds.”How can we expect to win when our national broadcaster is parroting their line to our own children? There is only one set of people who are ever to blame for terrorist attacks and that’s the perpetrators themselves.”Dame Pauline said the BBC was a “national treasure” and she had been proud to serve as a governor.”But from time to time I have found myself asking questions about BBC’s attitude to terrorism. It even orders its journalists not to use the word terrorist,” she added.’
My thoughts: I’m sure that Pauline Neville-Jones is an honourable woman, and I don’t mean to be discourteous. I’m sure she has had no ulterior motives throughout her highly successful career. I don’t think most people in public life are self-serving hypocrites. But the above excerpts might cast some light on the fact that everyone in public life has a history and relationships which impact on their statements and beliefs. I’m still disappointed that she seemed to infer that, with understanding, we can bring an end to islamist fundamentalism. Short of all-out war – NOT to be recommended as it is impractical, the enemy is not geographically identifiable, and thus millions of innocents would die – the only way is to strengthen and mobilise the vast tracts of the ordinary people in such countries against these terrorists. Here at home, we need to do the same. A bit of backing from broadcasters might help. Here again, I congratulate the BBC’s Newsnight for its current airing of these issues. We don’t start by going back to Stage 1, and psycho-analysing the psychotics while Rome … erm … Britain burns.
For those of us who think that it is only we British Christians that fundamentalist terrorists pursue, because our government was nasty to the poor innocents, read this:This Syrian intellectual is emigrating to Europe after death threats posted on an Al-Qaeda website calling for his assassination.
Death Threats, Al-Qaeda Fatwas Against Syrian Writer
Syrian writer and researcher Nabil Fayadh has announced that he will emigrate to Europe following death threats and following the posting on Al-Qaeda websites of fatwas calling for his assassination.
The threats and fatwas followed the publication of a book by Fayadh that included stories of disputes between the wife of the Prophet Muhammad, ‘Aisha, and Caliph Uthman bin ‘Afan Ali bin Abu Taleb.
Source: Alarabiya.net, January 16, 2008
And A Former European Prime Minister Lays It On the Line1/18/2008ISLAMABAD: Former prime minister of Spain Jose Maria Aznar said in an article published in a Spanish newspaper that Al-Qaeda, according to all available reports, killed former premier Benazir Bhutto.“I met Benazir Bhutto in 1994 in her only official visit to Spain. She was in her 2nd mandate, which was finally interrupted, like the first, by conspiracies against her government while Pakistan found itself in the midst of a very difficult situation, both internally and externally,” Jose Maria Aznar wrote in daily La Razon.“Pakistan was then the epicenter of a serious regional crisis and was coping with the effects of the Afghan war. That was the origin of Al-Qaeda.”Jose Maria Aznar wrote that since the beginning, Jihadist radicalism had exported terror to the whole world.“What was then a local development has transformed itself into a global threat that affects and threatens our values and our freedoms.”“Ms Bhutto was a brave woman, a great leader with a tragic personal and family life, full of exiles, prison, glory and power.She was the first female prime minister in a Muslim country, one of the most populated of the planet and the only one with nuclear weapons.Very recently she had sent me greetings through a common friend. They tried to assassinate her as soon as she came back to her country from her long exile.”The former Spanish premier wrote that finally the threats of the terrorist groups were realised when a killer assassinated her and finished with the hope that she represented, decapitating the Pakistani People’s Party and eliminating the candidate that according to all the polls was going to win the next general elections in Pakistan.Her murder, Jose Maria Aznar noted, puts again Pakistan in the center of the international agenda and remembers those who had forgotten about it that the destiny of Pakistan is vital for the cause of freedom and for the battle against radicalism and terrorism.LATEST UPDATESGone all quiet as to whether there really IS a British cell of AQ yet in Britain. Just as well, really. I suggest the security services and the government eliminate them quietly. And would somebody please sit on the ‘Human Rights’ twits while they do it. The “human” rights act does not apply to such as these.A few days after this British AQ business another messsage was posted at that site, saying that if Britain did not remove its troops from Iraq by the end of March, we are all targets, and it looks like Blair & Brown are goners. The article on WTOP News says there is a pattern to an earlier threat after which the 7/7/2005 London bombings took place.Excerpt from message:
Statement of the Leader of al-Qaeda in Britain, Shaykh Umar Rabie al-Khalaila: We, the organization of Al-Qaeda in Britain, offer a truce to the British government.Our demands are as follows:I. A complete withdrawal of the British troops from Afghanistan and Iraq. II. To free all Muslim captives from Belmarsh prison, and the foremost of them Shaykh Abu Qatada al-Filistini and Shaykh Abu Hamza al-Misri.
If the British government fails to respond to our demands by the last day of March 2008 as they fail to answer to the truce of our Shaykh Usama bin Laden and to the truce of the Emir of Believers Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, then the Martyrdom seekers of the organisation of al-Qaeda in Britain will target all the political leaders especially Tony Blair and Gordan Brown, and we will also target all Embassies, Crusaders Centers and their Interests through out the country, with the help of Allah.
Finally, all praise is to Allah.
Umar Rabie al-Khalaila The leader of Al-Qaeda in Britain
The organisation of Al-Qaeda in Britain
23- January 2008
My thoughts:The way things are in this country at the moment, if they could manage a nice clean surgical strike on the Brothers B, they’d be greeted by some as heroes!
Dhimmitude thrives in the land of Winston Churchill.
Top Brand Marketing to Company Director: “Do you know I can get you Tony?”
“Blair? For how much?”
“Only X amount for such and such, or XX for …”
“How soon can he start?”
The point of the above, simplistic as it is, is this:
‘TONY BLAIR‘ is a name which is known worldwide, to the extent that the very mention of “Tony” or “Blair” in such circles conjures up a picture, to those whose business is knowing business and/or politics, of a respected statesman, politician and communicator. One who is still active politically and at the top of his game, though out of office in his own (naive little) country. Articulate, empathetic, with wide international experience, business law schooling and great contacts. Well travelled, respected, fully cognisant of business & political complexities around the world, he is experienced in the promises, shortcomings and traps of diplomacy. In the deal or no deal world, he is a deal-maker.
In other words – HE SELLS!
So even if his enemies don’t like it, top companies would be doing their shareholders a disservice NOT to grab him, if only for a few days a year. You can bet there are already many disappointed, and more hopefuls queuing up.
SO, DO YOU HAVE A BRAND ATTACHED TO YOUR NAME?
No? Me neither. But if you did, would you use it? Yes, me too. So enough of this nonsense about abusing a previous position of power.
By David Wighton in New York, Published: January 9 2008
Tony Blair is joining one of Wall Street’s best-known banks in what the former prime minister told the Financial Times would be the first of a series of positions he expects to take in the private sector.
Mr Blair, who stepped down as prime minister last year, is to become a part-time adviser to JP Morgan, where he will use his experience and contacts to provide political and strategic advice to the US bank and participate in some client events. Mr Blair’s income from the job has not been disclosed. However, one New York recruitment consultant said it was likely to be more than $1m (£500,000) a year.
I say – good on you, Sir! I really did have to smile when I heard this the other day. Mainly at the thought of Les Miserables being indescribably miserable over it ;0(
“Mr Blair’s salary should be a matter of quiet satisfaction to his fellow countrymen. It is a small symbol that subjected to a very tough test – how much is he worth to a commercial outfit – one of our statesmen is regarded as highly valuable.”
Too right, Mr Finkelstein, too right.
POINT BY DOTTED POINT
TONY.BLAIR.
Former.British.Prime.Minister;
Extraordinary.Communicator;
Empathetic.considerate.understanding;
Used.to.working.with.wallies;
Sharp.mind;
Cuts.to.the.chase;
No.nonsense;
Drives.a.keen.bargain;
Makes.everyone.feel.like.a.winner;
Will.deliver;
Presentable;
Not.bad.looking;
Courteous.Well.mannered;
Winning.ways.with.spouses.partners;
Never.over.powering;
Nice.smile;
Physically.fit (as long as he keeps away from the heart-stopping erstwhile neighbour);
Knows.one.or.two.decision.makers;
Understands.those.foreign.chaps;
Listens.well;
Prefers.tea.to.whisky
Has.been.known.to.come.back.from.the.’dead’
Anyway, what’s a politician SUPPOSED to do when he’s only 54 and he no longer has the job he excelled at?
And there’s still SO much to do politically in this world?
And if you think that companies in this global village can ignore or afford to live in ignorance of political niceties and relationships, think again.
Branding companies with T Blair on their list have a treasure-trove of USPs to work on with THIS product; and it’s likely that they don’t have to work too hard.
A marketable product. Yes.
The market price? High.
Hello, folks .. wake up to the real world. If a footballer is worth X millions why would Tony Blair not be worth much more … X squared … to successful, well-funded, multi-nationals such as the investment bank lucky enough to have secured his services?
If you got it, flaunt it, Mister. You’re a long time dead.
And before I go on to Bush in the M.E., Machiavelli, Cherie, GB/PM or anything else … let me just say this, quietly, in case you’re wondering …
It’s hard to let go …
… just as Santha, my regular commenter warned me. She was right. So I’m still here; just about.
But, worry not, dear reader. I’m not going to be writing as hungrily as before. Perhaps now and again, for a bit, when the spirit moves me.
And today it’s been getting to me. You knew it would, didn’t you, Santha?
Over the last few days I’ve found it amusing, no hysterical actually, to notice the Blair detractors online still fuming over his continued high standing in the world. Mainly the new job, the money, and all its ramifications. But there’s also the fact that even Jeremy Bowen says that the politicians he meets in the Middle East seem genuinely hopeful. (I expect it’s a conspiracy to try to see if they can get him to crack a smile.)
Now THAT would be seriously disconcerting. Smiles breaking out amongst the doubters, if Blair, Bush et al actually GOT somewhere in their peace quest?
How horrifying for hate-huggers unlimited.
Read on …
LISTEN TO ‘SCHINDLER’S LIST’ THEME
Attending a holocaust memorial service in Jerusalem President Bush was said to have been moved to tears. This haunting, evocative and powerful composition came to mind. It serves as a reminder of man’s inhumanity to man. Composed by John Williams for the 1993 film “Schindler’s List”. Beautiful. If this doesn’t move you, you’re not sensitive enough to be at this site.
International Middle East envoy Tony Blair held landmark talks with Jewish settler representatives this week, their main lobby group announced.
“It’s the first time that an international figure of this rank has sat down with settler representatives,” the Yesha Council said.
The meeting with Yesha secretary-general Danny Dayan took place in a Jerusalem hotel and also involved members of the Israeli parliament from the religious and ultra-nationalist right as well as one from Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s centre-right Kadima Party.
The settler representatives told Mr Blair that Mr Olmert had no mandate to negotiate a peace deal with the Palestinians that required the dismantling of settlements in the occupied West Bank, Israeli participants in the meeting said.
The former British premier retorted that “nothing can stop the relaunching of the peace process”.
MAJOR SUCCESS – SEWAGE PLANT
And today the Israeli Haaretz website reported a “pleasant surprise” which awaited Tony Blair, who returned to Jerusalem for the visit of U.S. President George W. Bush. His small staff, which has taken over the south wing of the American Colony Hotel in East Jerusalem, celebrated a major success this week, maybe the biggest since the office’s inauguration last June: The sewage project in Beit Lahia is starting to move forward. If all goes as planned, and Israel allows the concrete and equipment to be brought in, the first stage will be completed this March.
President Bush too delivered some straight-talking to the Israelis in the last few days. And even after the hip-shooting, Ehud Olmert insisted on draping an arm around the Bush shoulders and generally seeming delighted at the American President’s visit. After being told to stop building in Jerusalem, and to start dismantling walls … well, you’d think he might have looked a little put out, if only to keep his ‘antis’ in line. But no, everything seemed just hunky-dory. Not that everyone feels the same. The word “betrayal” is on many Israeli lips.
Mr Bush and Mr Blair met on Friday for a progress report, and to brief each other, no doubt, on meetings to come with other Middle East leaders. It seems they are both singing from the same song book now, and it would seem to be the book Blair wrote.
Chapters on the need for a two-state solution, dismantling walls, building infrastructure. By those that matter, Tony Blair is listened to, (watch him on Bush’s comments), and his optimistic approach seems to be highly contagious.
Bush Urges end to Israeli Occupation
On arrival Mr Bush said that Israel must end its occupation of Arab land to enable the creation of a viable Palestinian state.
He also urged a solution to the issue of Palestinian refugees that would involve paying them compensation. It is thought to be Mr Bush’s strongest public statement pressing Israel to give up land it seized in the 1967 war.
Earlier, Mr Bush said he believed the two sides would be able to sign a peace deal before he leaves office in January 2009.
Blair: “…owes it to the Middle East”
This Guardian article says that Mr Blair is determined to dedicate 10 days a month to his unpaid role as Middle East envoy because of the strong sense of obligation he feels following the Iraq war.
The former British prime minister, who earlier announced that he is to become a part-time adviser to JP Morgan, one of Wall Street’s best-known banks, for an annual salary of about £500,000, is said to be most interested in the interface between faith and politics.
It is understood Blair has turned down a number of big-money offers he felt were unsuitable before agreeing to work for JP Morgan. In addition to his inter-faith foundation, he is expected to undertake some work to help tackle climate change.
The move is likely to quash speculation that Blair was being lined up for the first presidency of the European Union. While at Number 10, Blair often displayed impatience with the Brussels bureaucracy.
My thoughts: Don’t agree with this opting out of the European presidency business; not unless he knows he won’t get the necessary support from EU leaders. But, who ELSE is there?
And, today the Iraq government has agreed to re-instate Ba-athists to public life. By all accounts in 2003 Blair did not wish them to be banned to begin with, but was over-ruled by Washington.
Another song, Mr Bush?
BLAIR Et Son Ami SARKOZY Although with only an outside chance, due to his Iraq involvement and the failure of Britain to embrace the euro, there is still a possibility that Mr Blair may be the first EU permanent president in about a year’s time. Particularly if Monsieur Sarkozy, who clearly idolizes Blair, can convince others of the wisdom of this choice when France assumes the present six monthly EU presidency later this year.
Enquiries for attendance at the French national UMP debate today, because of Blair’s visit, overwhelmed organisers.
Why, I wonder, when this is the party of the right in France? The same cross-party magic that Blair showed this country in 1997/2001/2005?
And here, Ben Brogan of The Daily Mail – yes, THE MAIL(!) praises Blair highly for his contribution in French today. Excerpt:
“… I’ve just got round to watching the former PM address France’s ruling UMP party at their conference to launch their local election campaign. Say what you like about the guy, and I’ve said some things in my time, but sacrebleu he’s good.
PS I said yesterday that Mr Blair’s appearance was part of his campaign to become president of the EU. I only saw the clips on French telly (here), so don’t yet know what he said about Europe. The speech video won’t be posted on the UMP website before Monday, and the Office of Tony Blair website hasn’t been updated for a month.”
Yes, it seems everyone wants a piece of Tony – except us of course. He may still be ‘the outsider’ in some books – but watch this space.
Machiavelli’s ‘The Prince’ & the paucity …
Now THIS was interesting.All last week BBC Radio 4 ran an absorbing series, introduced each day by the BBC political commentator, Nick Robinson. I have a comment on Nick’s page.
Machiavelli gets a bad name, perhaps wrongly, if the words on his tombstone are to be taken at face value. The marble monument carries the legend TANTO NOMINI NULLUM PAR ELOGIUM. “No elegy is equal to such a name.”
Conventional wisdom is that to be described as Machiavellian is insult indeed. Yet in this short version of his thoughts on politics he was strangely pragmatic, rather than his reputed conspiratorial.On Wednesday’s programme, the importance of being a war leader is seen as crucial. As is the necessity of allying firmly with another in the cause of war. Fence-sitting is NOT wise; ever.
Written just over 500 years ago it is of course, relevant to its own times. But if the years have not changed much in the matters of peace, war and human nature there may be some eternal lessons for all who would be leaders of men.
It just makes me wonder how limited in our expectations we are by the desire to constantly live up to someone else’s. Not that I recommend murder, mind you. Although, I don’t know …
Read full version of ‘The Prince’ here
See Nick Robinson’s blog on this
Here follow a couple of ‘fun’ blog entries …Villain of the Week
At the peace talks Blair stands on stage with the leaders of both sides when a gunman steps forward from the crowd. Blair stands in front of the leaders, ostensibly trying to talk the strangely pasty gunman down.The shooter opens fire. Only Blair is left standing, spared by God. The assassin somehow manages to escape. Alastair Campbell, by coincidence on a book tour in Tel Aviv, immediately appears on regional telly stating he is not surprised by Blair’s supposed heroism.In the next few weeks, whilst investigators from all countries including the US search for the assassin, Blair is asked by both Israel and Palestine to become their respective leaders. Renewed conflict brews over who gets Blair.
Finally in a surprise move he is appointed President of a new country called Blairdownia comprising of both states unified under one glorious psychotic grin.
A new religion springs up from the miracle of the bullets, adherents refer to themselves as Blairites and their sacrament initially involves the machine-gunning of six out of seven of adherents. Later changed to striking with rubber balls rather than machine guns for the sake of propagating the faith.
My thoughts: What I want to know is – where can I get a passport for this new country-Blairdonia … I mean … Blairuppia? And does it have ID cards? Can’t just let every b**gg*r in now, can we? Some of them need to cling onto every little wisp of hope in their new state of purgatory, that one day, maybe …
And Campbell WILL be there, now, won’t he? Didn’t get life for murder, did he?(I love all this conspiratorial stuff. Don’t you?)
A VISION FOR … OF … GORDON
The Telegraph says that ‘Teflon Tony’s’ burgeoning empire is putting GB/PM in the shade.Excerpt:With an income in the millions and a burgeoning international role, the former Prime Minister is threatening to put his rival in the shade once again. Gordon Rayner charts the return of Teflon Tony.
Since agreeing to take on the world’s trickiest job, international peace envoy to the Middle East, Mr Blair has been largely invisible – which was just fine with Mr Brown, after years of simmering resentment of the man he believed had cheated him out of the premiership.
But this month Tony Blair begins a comeback which, if all goes according to plan, will see him crowned as the inaugural president of the European Union in 12 months’ time – making him, in effect, Gordon Brown’s boss.
The word irony doesn’t even begin to cover it.
Incredible as it may seem for a man described by even his most loyal parliamentary colleagues as “history”, Mr Blair could soon be more powerful than ever.
This writer too made me smile, describing how Mr Brown might soon be at a loss as to how exactly he rids himself of the non-present presence on his shoulder. Especially now, with continued EU presidency rumours, that there IS a political hereafter for the chosen few. Not sure why I find so satisfying the possible come-uppance of the supercilious types to be found on the net; must be my cruel side.
Quote:
Imagine the scene, then, in early January 2009 of Gordon genuflecting before Smuggo in the transept of the Cathedral of Notre-Dame de Reims:
I, James Gordon Brown, do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Serene Majesty the Emperor Anthony, his heirs and successors, according to law. So help me God.
Or perhaps that should be “Gawd ‘elp us!”.
Lovely, eh?
CHERIE
Cherie Booth-Blair (how’s that – hyphenated?) has been giving more of her time and energy, through her wide charity work, to set up a school in Punjab. Quote from here:
‘Kapurthala, Jan 12: Punjab Government has signed an initial accord with the UK-based Loomba Trust, headed by former British premier Tony Blair’s wife Cherie, to upgrade a school in Kapurthala district.
The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed by Cherie Blair, president of the Trust, and Principal Secretary School Education K B S Sidhu in presence of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal last evening, an official spokesman said.
Chandigarh, Jan 12 (IANS): Cherie Blair, wife of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, has signed a memorandum of understanding with the Punjab government on behalf of the London-based Loomba Trust for setting up a Rs 10 mn ‘Adarsh’ (model) school in Dhilwan village of Punjab’s Kapurthala district.’
And meanwhile Ms Booth is expected to get her book out well before her husband’s memoirs. Not surprising really. He hasn’t been home long enough to write anything in the last six months! I wonder if Cherie foresaw THAT bit of the deal? No wonder she didn’t want to leave Downing Street. At least she knew where he was then. Well, most of the time.
British monarch Queen Elizabeth was targeted by al-Qaida-linked suicide terrorists posing as TV crews at November’s Commonwealth Heads of Government summit in Uganda, but the plot was discovered by authorities and “neutralized” before it could be carried out, an Ugandan official has confirmed.
This was not the first time the Queen has been targeted in an African nation.
At the end of 2003, “operatives hope to exploit the country’s (Nigeria’s) security weaknesses to strike during the Commonwealth Heads of Government conference in December. The queen will see Nigerian village life during the four-day summit and Tony Blair, the Prime Minister, will also attend.”
NEW STUDY SAYS 151,000 IRAQI DEAD
One of the biggest surveys so far of Iraqis who have died violently since the US-led invasion of 2003 has put the figure at about 151,000.
This is about a quarter of the figure given in a disputed Lancet article, but nearly three times higher than that of the Iraq Body Count campaigning group.
The result is based on interviews with over 9,000 families across Iraq carried out by the health ministry for the WHO.
PETER HAIN
And Peter Hain, in trouble over election expenses, is determined to get on with his work. Watch his statement here. Must be particularly irritating to have put so much money into the deputy leadership campaign and only to come fifth out of six, and THEN to have more fund-raising issues to deal with than even Harriet Harman, the winner of the election. Wonder if he’d have done better without the couple of hundred thousand?
How long do you give him then … Monday, Wednesday?
Over 400 Muslim groups from 28 European countries have signed the European Islamic Charter in a bid to ease tensions with non-Muslim communities.
Following the Bishop of Rochester’s warning on “no-go areas of Britain”, there has been support & criticism of his remarks. He apologises here if he gave offence (!?) What? Have those who make some of us feel uneasy in our own land also apologised? Perhaps; but I haven’t noticed. I’m no racist, by the way. No way. But … sort it out, please.
The government has now lined up an executive chairman just in case they are stuck with nationalising the troubled bank.
Blair To The Rescue?
I wonder if he’ll give the CEO a ring and find out if he can afford to buy the rest of it. But he’ll have to do it soon. By the end of the week the government may be forced to nationalise. A huge kick for Brown’s government, and a clear failure of the tactic of borrowing tax-payers’ billions (£55Bn).
More Tony Blair
And Tony Blair admits to being technologically without it here – talking about his first attempt at texting on a mobile phone, which was AFTER he’d left office. Well, we’ve all made THAT mistake at times. It all comes down to who considers you important enough to store your number. Shouldn’t be a problem for the TB Brand in the future.
He often used the phrase, much derided, “it’s time to move on”. That may be ONE of the reasons he has impressed on Blairites to cease criticising the present prime minister. There may be other reasons; I wouldn’t know about that. But being British PM is now more of a threat than an opportunity, it seems.
The former PM wrote to the present PM before Christmas, to offer him some pointers and advice, it would seem.
Excerpt from the ‘This Is London’ article:
“Tony Blair has written to Gordon Brown with a detailed assessment of his successor’s performance as Prime Minister.
He congratulated Mr Brown on his successes – and spelled out where he thinks he is going wrong.
And he told his friend – and long-time rival – to work on being “post-Blair and not anti-Blair”.
Downing Street spokesmen yesterday refused to comment on the Premier’s private correspondence but it is believed that the letter was accepted by Mr Brown in the supportive spirit in which it was intended.
However, the revelation that Mr Blair has offered his views, even in private, risks infuriating the Prime Minister’s supporters.
It could also add to doubts about Mr Brown’s ability to lead Labour to a fourth General Election victory at a time when he is fighting to assert his authority.
While he tries to do so, his predecessor has ordered supporters to keep quiet and say nothing which could be seen as disloyal.
The revelation that Mr Blair is still concerning himself with Labour’s fortunes will also fuel speculation that he is considering a return to politics.”
As if …
Why on earth would he want to return to this job as target practice for the press, when he can forge a career on the international political and business stage AND make some decent money with added worldwide kudos, regardless of the ignorant press?
On the other hand – why on earth would he care if GB/PM continues to cock it all up? After all, if Labour loses all, wouldn’t it be evidence that they should never have got rid of their election winner in the first place?
But wouldn’t losing next time risk another 18 years in the wilderness, making Blairism no more than a blip in our political history?
And … erm … how and why do we know about this “private” letter?
Hmmm … I wonder.
Hope thrives on such as this for those who mourn.
Translation of commentary on Blair’s speech in Paris, 12th January 2008:
Tony Blair, high-speed motorboat of the day to the national Council of UMP “In the United States, I would be democratic. In the United Kingdom, I am Labour. In France, I would be… probably with the government!”Laughter and applause from the 2.000 to 3.000 participants. Small sentences with humour very british, punctuated of political spades, the whole in perfect French: Tony Blair, guest at the sides of Nicolas Sarkozy to the national Council of UMP Saturday in Paris, was without question the high-speed motorboat of the day.But truce of joke:”Not I joke, I would be with the socialist Party, the sides of those which have in heart to transform it”, the ex-First British minister begins again. But the sentence did not fall into the ear from a deaf person: the French president answered at once that Tony Blair “is intelligent, is courageous, is a friend, he modernized a friendly country like the United Kingdom, he is faithful. Then of course he is socialist, but a Socialist like that, he has all his place with the French government (…)I want that the opening is the trademark of the French right-hand side “. Sarkozy “energetics” The man of New Labour (left Labour renovated) expressed himself for the first time in front of the leading authorities of a party, in fact UMP, the party of his “friend Nicolas” (Sarkozy) who it was the first to be congratulated after his election last May. A friend whom he described as “energetic in all the fields”, by evoking a conversation with a “other leader of which I will conceal the name”. Whereas this leader asked Tony Blair “Sarkozy,he is very tonic, not?”, the British known as to have answered: “No, I had not noticed it…” Laughter still in the room. More seriously, “energy, the will to carry out the changes necessary to survive in a world of change is the key”, he concluded.Tony Blair also evoked, on a more conventional tone, “the agenda of a new governorship”: “Education, and not regulation”, “active and nonpassive Welfare state”, “balance travail/vie deprived, new border of the Welfare state”, and “trade unions partners of the change and not of resistance”. Ségolène Royal considered Saturday on France 2 that the presence of Tony Blair to the national Council of UMP was “to push us ahead, us socialist, to be a force of attractivity”.”I think that the French Socialists must invent their own modernization compared to the time which is ours and compared to the years which come”, it declared. UMP launches its countryside for the local elections At the time of this national Council of UMP, the majority launched its countryside for the local elections. This poll will be “a first test for the majority” and for “his action”, the president of the UMP group ensured the Parliament. “It is not because the stakes are local that there is not a national reality”, for its part judged the Prime Minister, Francois Fillon. This “nationalization” of the poll divides the rows of the majority. Jean-Pierre Raffarin thus warned Friday against a “local policy” which “is not systematically a national stake”. “If not one mobilizes especially the unfavourable camp”, it judged.
Lyrics of “Come and Get It”
by Paul McCartney
If you want it, here it is, come and get it
mmmmmm, make your mind up fast
If you want it, any time, I can give it
But you better hurry ’cause it may not last
Did I hear you say that there must be a catch
Will you walk away from a fool and his money?
If you want it, here it is, come and get it
But you better hurry ’cause its goin’ fast
If you want it, here it is, come and get it
mmmmmm, make your mind up fast
If you want it, any time, I can give it
But you better hurry ’cause it may not last
Did I hear you say that there must be a catch
Will you walk away from a fool and his money?
Sonny, if you want it, here it is, come and get it
But you better hurry ’cause its goin’ fast
You better hurry ’cause its goin’ fast
oooohhh
Fool and his money…
Sonny, if you want it, here it is, come and get it
But you better hurry ’cause its goin’ fast
You better hurry ’cause its goin’ fast
You better hurry ’cause its goin’ fast
An American al-Qaeda militant urges Islamist groups to greet President Bush with bombs when he visits the Middle East.The threat comes in a video message posted on the Internet. The authenticity of the tape could not be immediately verified but it bears the logo of al-Qaeda’s media arm and had been advertised on an Islamist site for several days.
So you want to Kill An American?
After watching this, I want to sing this (and I’m British) –
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining sea!
And this US video report below of the sad AQ video, where the reporters sound a bit like automatons, tells us a little more.
But this Adam guy refers to England as “not so great Britain”. Cheek! Where’s he been for the last ten years? It IS GREAT here; more or less.
Oh, yeah. He’s been holed away up in the mountains somewhere, winning his war, and playing around on the internet. Far too much time on his hands, say I.
(Btw, what happens to a former westerner’s sense of humour when he becomes islamicised? Not that I imply that ONLY westerners have a sense of humour, you understand.)
Go on Adam – tell us a joke. There must be one about the Christian, the Muslim and the Jew! No?
Addendum – just noticed – he DOES have a sense of humour. Ripped up his American passport! That’s funny. Especially when so many are crying out for one of those. Ah well, he wouldn’t want to fly into the states these days. All that finger-printing, body scanning and stuff, and all because of those blasted terrorists. What IS the world coming to?
CAIRO, Egypt – Al-Qaida’s American spokesman called on the terror network’s fighters to greet President Bush with “bombs and booby-trapped vehicles” when he visits the Middle East later this week, according to a video posted Sunday.
The rhetoric-packed video also featured the California-born Adam Gadahn tearing up his U.S. passport as part of a “symbolic” protest against Washington and marked the terror network’s first message of 2008.”Now we direct an urgent call to our militant brothers in Muslim Palestine and the Arab peninsula … to be ready to receive the Crusader slayer Bush in his visit to Muslim Palestine and the Arab peninsula in the beginning of January and to receive him not with flowers or clapping but with bombs and booby-trapped vehicles,” Gadahn said in Arabic, though he spoke mostly in English during the video.Bush is scheduled to arrive in Israel on Wednesday for a weeklong regional trip that will also bring him to the West Bank, Kuwait, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.Most of the 50-minute long video, titled “An Invitation to Reflection and Repentance,” appeared to be aimed at ordinary Americans, with Gadahn saying al-Qaida felt the need to release the statement after Washington’s “defeat” in Iraq and Afghanistan and failed attempts by Bush and other diplomats to bring peace to the Middle East.”We felt it necessary to address the American people and explain to them some of the facts about these critical and fast-moving events,” said the California-born Gadahn, who wore a white and red headscarf.”The first questions Americans might ask is has America really been defeated? The answer is yes and on all fronts,” he said while sitting behind a desk with a coffee cup and laptop computer nearby.The video could not immediately be independently verified, but it appeared on a Web site often used by Islamic militants and carried the logo of al-Qaida’s media wing, al-Sahab. At the beginning of the video, the date December 2007 was displayed, and Gadahn mentioned Robert Hawkins, who killed eight people at a mall in Omaha, Neb. on Dec. 5, suggesting the tape was made sometime after then.Gadahn, also known as Azzam al-Amriki, was charged with treason in the U.S. in 2006 and has been wanted since 2004 by the FBI, which is offering a $1 million reward for information leading to his arrest or conviction.He has appeared in several al-Qaida videos including most recently in August when he threatened new attacks on foreign embassies. In May, al-Qaida released another video featuring Gadahn, who warned Bush to end U.S. involvement in Muslim lands or face an attack worse than the Sept. 11, 2001, strikes.In his latest video statement, Gadahn lashed out repeatedly at the United States for its wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and close ties to Israel and the leaders of some Muslim countries, including Egypt and Pakistan, which he described as some of the “worst dictators and tyrants.”Gadahn also criticized Christianity, which he called “baseless and doubt-filled,” and urged Americans — including soldiers who fought in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan — to convert to Islam.”Listen to me, and listen to me carefully, before you lose your mind to flashbacks, and drugs and drink-induced dementia and before your demons drive you to self-destruction and suicide, in these verses (in the Quran), God calls out to each and every one of you saying God forgives all sins … if you simply stop and repent,” he said.At one point in the video, Gadahn took out his U.S. passport, showed it to the camera and tore it into several pieces.”In symbolic rejection of the American citizenship that honorable and decent and compassionate people are ashamed to carry, I will now proceed to destroy my American passport,” he said.”But don’t get too excited, I don’t need it to travel anyway,” he added with a smile after tearing it apart.Gadahn is the first American to be charged with treason in more than 50 years and could face the death penalty if convicted. He also was indicted on a charge of providing material support to terrorists.
Earlier this month, FBI spokesman Richard Kolko said the agency would review the latest tape for intelligence value and vowed never to give up the hunt for Gadahn.
The prime minister/president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, (you didn’t think he had only one job?) is in the eye of the storm right now over Georgia. The rights and wrongs of the argument are still being debated but the Conservative leader David Cameron, and following him (it seems he said nothing before) Gordon Brown have both attacked the Russian response.
The Russians are saying that they are only defending their own citizens in the region. What? This from the country which kills its (former) citizens, if they leave the motherland and settle elsewhere – Litvinenko. And perhaps even removes Russia-based Russian journalists if they dare to speak out against the government.
It does seem that Putin IS trying to re-configure the map of Europe.
I have written a post on Russia/Georgia/South Ossetia here.
It seems Russia is not getting very far with its Middle East ambitions to bring Hamas to a Moscow negotiating table on the Middle East. Russia wants its own Conference on the matter soon, and thinks Hamas should be represented, although Hamas seems to have gone cold on it all. I expect they’re glowing in the warmth of the light of President Jimmy Carter, who knows better than all the rest of them, it seems. Israel is none too excited about Hamas’s attendance either, for some strange reason.
And now Russia is reluctant to work with Blair because Blair is seen as “an instigator of tension between Russia and the UK”. WHAT? Nothing to do with polonium killings, Mr Putin? Litvinenko’s murder? Only Blair in the UK was bothered about that? Not the present PM too!? Nor anything to do with Putin threatening to nuke Europe if the USA goes ahead with its nuclear shield?
Russia & Tony Blair have past issues. I remember, on the day Blair was leaving Parliament. It seems he had to wait until the very last moment for Putin, Russia to say they had agreed to his becoming the Quartet’s Middle East Envoy.
So if the Russiana suddenly decide they can’t or won’t have a Spring conference on the Middle East after all, watch out for who they blame? One guess? It won’t be Hamas, Israel or the USA.
There has often been tension between Russia & Britain. Clearly there might be more for some time yet. Whatever we do, let’s look after Mr Blair. We NEED him, in ALL sorts of hotspots in this world.
//////////
6th January, 2008
All right – all RIGHT! Don’t shout.
The cold turkey was awful – so I’m back, for a bit anyway. They warned me this computer business would get me in the end. Caught the norovirus thing. Then again, it might have been the cold turkey. Some of my loyal commenters told me it would be unpalatable ;0(
Anyway, what am I doing here? You might well ask. I know I said I’d have stopped this site by now, but the period between Christmas and a few days ago took me away on unexpected business. On my return I probably caught the bug from all those people on the train who insist on breathing in my presence; so inconsiderate. The family are pretty bemused, since I’m famously never ill.
Much better now, thank you. How are you?
So this is the post I started to draft ready for the last day of December, 2007 (now with appropriate updates).
But before I continue – what do you make of this story of an incident on December 23rd? I must have been busy then; I missed it. And just after Christmas, Benazir Bhutto’s assassination stunned the world. I’m tempted to ask this: is Putin cashing in on the present fears of political assassination to gather his adoring public protectively around him? Especially since over 10,000 policemen are lined up to protect Bush on his trip to Jerusalem this week, and millions are now spent on Blair’s security?
Can’t be out-classed in the ‘importance’ stakes now, can we? That’s a joke, Mr Putin. Honestly.
SO WHAT’S THE STORY, MORNING GLORY?
It seems that British agents were out to kill Vladimir Putin tomorrow! Oh, no! Not the Person of the Year, the hero of the Russian teenager? It reports that three “Armenians” are actually “British MI5 agents” who’ve been paid millions by the Vatican – yes, that’s what it says – the Vatican!!! And guess who’s running the Vatican now, AND the EU in a year or so’s time, when he’s sorted out the Middle East? Yep, you got it. Our man in Jerusalem, no less.
Presumably they also think Mr Blair runs MI5, though he never did before, even when he was PM. Although having “overall responsibility”, he did not make operational day-to-day decisions.
And the fact that there are some maneuverings by a Russian civil nuclear energy company – which already provides some of our power – to take over our ageing nuclear power stations has nothing to do with anything! Should make one of GB/PM’s ‘difficult’ tasks of persuading the country that we need to build new nuclear power stations that bit less onerous. (Btw, Blair already did most of the persuading on this while he was winning the Trident debate in March 2007 in Parliament. The country already approves and understands both these issue, even if all of Old Labour doesn’t. Not too much hard work there, then GB/PM).
Excerpt:
“But, the greatest ‘shock’ to Moscow, in their growing state of crisis with the United Kingdom, was this past weeks news that Britain’s former Prime Minister, Tony Blair, and who once headed the Church of England, renounced his faith and has converted to Catholicism thus forming an alliance with Rome’s Dark Pope, and which to the Kremlin is a ‘defacto declaration of war’ as Blair is set to become the President ofthe newly formed European Union, and which was foisted upon the European peoples by the treachery of their leaders in league with Rome.”
And, er … “newly-formed” EU. Been hibernating for a while, oh Great Russian Bear?
Blair never ‘headed the Church of England’. The Queen does; the Monarch ALWAYS does. Blair’s desire to defer changing denomination within the Christian Church was probably to avoid any clash with the Prime Ministerial role of appointing Church of England high-ranking leaders, if as PM, he were then Roman Catholic. Sensible and sensitive, I’d have thought.
Anyway, surely you don’t mean that that nasty Blair man, 007-like, is after your great leader in the guise of a religious peacemaker? Titchy too! They could write a song about it and get it to the top of the Russian pop charts. (Could call it “Jealousy” but that’s a touch insipid).
In fact here goes: (quick five minute job; I charge for a more thoughtful effort.)
VLAD THE GREAT
They loathe him, they fear him, Vladimir the Great
We love him, we need him, the man they love to hate.
No threats and no power will staunch his might
For Russia, forever, he’ll stand and fight.
CHORUS (all together now)
Fight, fight, fight for the right to be the one
Who’ll sink the creepy Vatican and their brand new son.
They beat us once and they’ll never do that again
Fight for the right to write with your polonium pen.
The “assassinate Putin” story could all be fabricated, for consumption by Russia for political purposes. A mixture of Russian conspiracy, big business, energy supply concerns, power muscle-flexing, positioning in the same old Putin way, fear of Blair’s probable new EU authority, envy and mixed loyalties at any possible success in the ME, anti-religion, and well anti- more or less anything. Except Vlad the Great, of course.
Now where was I?
2007 – THE COUP – AND A TRULY POLITICAL MILESTONE YEAR
Sadly, a year I’d rather forget for its misguided political machinations. But I know I’m prejudiced, unlike many who insist that they are the unbiased font of all true knowledge.
In my humble opinion, there was but ONE HUGE event inside British politics this year. No, not the Northern Ireland settlement, though that was truly remarkable. And not the Scottish elections bringing smirking, snide Salmond into power in Scotland. Nor the fact that the cash for honours debacle came to nothing. Nor the coronation of whatsisname. Nor the election that wasn’t. Nor the Northern Rock business, though that still has some way to run. Nor that Cameron went up in the polls as Brown went down. Nor the missing data or umpteen other bits of fun and games afflicting Brown’s ‘new’ government.
The huge event was the loss of one of the best prime ministers this country has ever had. Ever!
Listen out for Mr Blair’s sigh right at the start of this full recording of his statement made in a North London school. VERY significant.
We were persuaded in the summer of 2006 that a Labour Party clique knew best, and were singularly competent to decide who should be our prime minister, although we had just voted for Labour under Blair a year or so before (in 2005 for a 4/5 year term). We read the press, and they seemed to agree that he had to go. Eventually, in September 2006, after the coup attempt, even he conceded this.
Wrongly, in my humble opinion, and I do wish I had been in his parliamentary party to speak on his behalf. But his statement was understandable. (Click here to watch Nick Robinson’s BBC report and clips of Blair’s statement). There is only so much that any of us can take.
Blair: “… it’s important for the Labour party to understand that we can’t treat the public as irrelevant by-standers in a subject as important as who is their prime minister.”
Ah, but they did, Mr Blair – and we, the great British voters, let ’em!
Nick Robinson quotes one angry Blairite minister as saying, “it would be an absolute effing disaster if Gordon Brown was PM, and I’ll do anything in my power to effing stop him”.
Nick Robinson on Blair: “This was the day he was co-erced by his party into declaring that his time in power was almost up”.
Here’s a quick reminder of Labour’s folly, so that you don’t have to chase around this blog to see what I and others thought at the time.
Why did they, in their collective wisdom, think he had to go? Three sets of villains – for three sets of reasons:
1. Brown’s ‘reason’: His misplaced and unrealised ambition. He felt it was part of a ‘deal’. So, presumably, even if things had changed, the deal still had to be honoured. Even if the successor-to-be came to be considered incompetent or lacking the right character requirements?
My thoughts: No deal made years ago in youthful exuberance is quite mingled blood even to the Brothers B. And, Brown has now proved himself not to be made of the right prime ministerial stuff. He might have realised that years ago.
2. Old unreconstructed Labour’s ‘reason’: The Left of Labour thought … possibly still think … that Blair was too ‘new’ or too ‘Tory’ for them. They fool themselves if they think they can return to their old socialist habits and still win over Middle Britain.
My thoughts: Blair won by appealing right across the electorate. He was not ‘Left’ or ‘Right’ – just in tune with the times. Brown and his acolytes, the B Team, will never be able to do this.
3. The disgustingly unbalanced feral intelligentsia press’s reasons: Not ALL of the press, granted, but much of the printed press in this country decided in their wisdom that Tony Blair was evil, easily led, or at least misguided, and that therefore he had to be removed and replaced. Their excuse was Iraq and their differences with Blair on this. It was NOT, imho, their place to set out to destroy a prime minister over press dissatisfaction. They are there to report, not to make policy. No-one voted for the press!
My thoughts: The press grabbed onto any snippet of information and any quote from any ‘authority’ to support their political stance. Any overheard thought and opinion on Tony Blair was printed as fact. They traduced his reputation gleefully, with no personal regard for him or his family. They behaved like a malignant tumour and should, imho, be excised or radiated out of existence. I do not buy into this “freedom of the press” business while they seldom preface their writings, with an “in my opinion”. Facts, leaks and opinion are used and abused in their hands. They behaved like the scum which many of them clearly are.
The feral press, Brown and Labour were all WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!
AND WHO DO THE BL***Y PRESS THINK THEY ARE ANYWAY? God Almighty?!
Freedom of the press comes with responsibility, imho. And much of the British press, and/or their leader writers, shouldn’t be left in charge of a mouse much less a keyboard. Unless, of course, they’d like to borrow mine; it’s probably covered with the norovirus!
I still considerate it an affront to democracy that some in the Labour party and/or the press, in an underhand collaboration, felt they had the right to push the country’s Prime Minister to resign before he either needed or intended to.
There are some facts we should remember:
1. Tony Blair said in 2004 he’d serve a full third term if elected in 2005. (See the start of my video below for his words on this).
2. The Iraq invasion had started in 2003, and yet Labour, under his premiership, was still elected in 2005, over two years later. THAT was the time, 2005, for the electorate to complain; they didn’t. A smaller majority, true, than in 2001 or 1997. But still a larger majority than for many UK governments, reduced as to be expected for ANY third term government. This, under Blair, was the FIRST time Labour had EVER won three consecutive elections, so they didn’t quite get it. They still don’t. They soon will. Labour still managed a 64 seat overall majority in 2005, which was 158 seats more than the official opposition party, the Conservatives.
3. The unease over the WMD issue and the so-called ‘dodgy dossier” added to the lies about “lying” around Blair. The ‘dodginess’ concerns had long been in the public domain, since just after March 2003, long before the 2005 general election. The rest of the civilised world, the UN, all nations who heard the “intelligence” accepted that Saddam had WMD (since he had used them to kill his own people). But Blair’s motivation for Iraq and his ‘blind following’ of Bush were relentlessly hammered at. The electorate, imho, were more ready to trust their leader on this than a despotic murdering madman in Iraq, and were sufficiently sophisticated to understand the complexities. But our shameful press persuaded them otherwise. The perceived “lies” were more important than the known facts.
4. The honours fiasco provided more ammunition for the ferals and Blair’s opponents. It was pregnant with come-uppance and hoisting on petards. It was also largely flagged by self-motivated Brownites within Blair’s government, and by the nationalists, who actually gained in the end by this “dissing”. Here Charles Clarke , at the start of the police investigation, asks why Jack Dromey, Labour’s party Treasurer, did not know about the loans.) Something to do with trust and the behind-the-scenes leadership struggle? Dromey is married to Harriet Harman, sacked early, 1998, as a Blair minister, but later re-instated by Blair, 2001 – 2005, as the first female Solicitor General. She now holds five posts in Brown’s government.
Neither issue – WMDs nor the ill-advised, costly and failedhonours investigation which dogged Blair’s last 16 months was grounds for hanging. And yet the press hung out to dry one of the most highly respected international leaders in democratic politics, and our most successful Labour Prime Minister EVER.
[Pics: Blair at the time of his party’s unrest, spring and summer 2006. The stress of this, and the police honours inquiry, clearly shows.]
I have written extensively about this shameful episode at these pages:
Talking about hanging – yes, I know some people would be happy to hang the lot of them – me included now that Blair is out of the place. But the reason I consider Blair’s leaving as The Huge Event is simple. Only time will tell, but it is my humble opinion that the Labour Party will lose the next election, or at the very best share government with the Liberal Democrats. It’s an uphill battle for Cameron to bridge the huge gap of parliamentary seats that presently remains, especially with boundaries presently favouring Labour. But Brown is helping him all the way.
What a legacy that would be for Brown, the erstwhile saviour of the Labour party. They dump their election winner – and then lose. Complicated?
[Pic right: Blair in May 2007, announcing his resignation date of June 27th to his constituents in Sedgefield.]
The loss of Tony Blair as our country’s prime minister before his time and when we needed him most, was excruciatingly painful. At least it was to those of us with the wherewithal to recognise him for the unique politician that he is.
What a ludicrous and unnecessary thing to allow to happen! Blair was never beaten by the opposition or dismissed by the voters in a general election; he was Labour’s record-breaking three times winner; he was and still is a highly regarded international figure; he has proved himself a man of vision with the ability to articulate that vision. I could go on …
Don’t think I’ll ever quite get over the matchless stupidity of the pathetic British Labour party and the equally pathetic press. Oh, and the apathetic public!
This Venezuelan analyst puts it well on the “coup” of 7th September 2006. Excerpt:
‘Ergo why is Brown doing this? What does he want to obtain by destroying both the best leader Labour has ever had and the party? Why haven’t mature senior leaders reprimanded Brown, or are we to believe that this is a case of collective political suicide?’
Couldn’t have put it better myself. Wonder why foreigners can see this more clearly than we can?
And all that summer the press kept informing us that “senior figures” in the party (Kinnock, Straw et al) were about to present Blair with the pearl-handled pistol and the whisky.
These ‘senior figures’ should have presented the glass of Glenkillmeoff to Brown instead.
He certainly needs it now. Cheers, Gordon. Doon the hatch.
Just had to show you this disturbing picture of the present prime minister, taken as he launched his “new” health check-ups campaign to avoid disease (though much of it was hardly new)! Now which mad or evil character from which film does he remind you of? The mind boggles. I know I go on a bit in the comparison business, but I have NEVER seen Mr Blair with this kind of look, even in his darkest moments. And this was supposed to be a good news days for Brown. What is he thinking here? “If your neck fits, put it here”?
Back to …
BLAIR ANNOUNCES IT’S TIME TO GO
Nicholas Watt
Sunday December 23, 2007, The Observer, Excerpt:
With a final theatrical flourish, the greatest actor of the modern era to occupy Number 10 Downing Street took his leave of British politics. ‘That is that. The end,’ said an emotional Tony Blair to MPs in the Commons, at his ultimate Prime Minister’s Questions on 27 June.
… the outpouring of affection showed respect for one of Blair’s most remarkable qualities: his skill in reaching across party barriers. It was telling that Blair’s final put-down to the fiercely Eurosceptic Conservative MP Nick Winterton – ‘Au revoir, auf Wiedersehen and arrivederci’ – reduced the veteran Tory to fits of laughter. Blair made it look easy at the time. It was only some time after his departure that Labour – and the political world – realised what it had lost. ‘We won’t see his like for another generation,’ one cabinet minister said.
TOO RIGHT, Mr Watt … too right! If we ever see his like again!
Two questions: Why didn’t that cabinet minister speak out at the right time? And HAVE Labour and the rest of us really realised what we have lost?
On that, I suppose I can claim a clear conscience, as recorded at this blog for posterity.
QUALITY & CLASS SHONE THROUGH AT HIS LAST PMQs ON 27TH JUNE 2007
Tony Blair’s final question time started, as usual, with probably the most difficult message about the most troublesome issue of his premiership – Iraq. He did not baulk at this or avoid it. Saying that he did not consider that those who had died had given their lives in vain, he paid sincere tribute to our forces as “the bravest and the best”.
David Cameron, the Tory leader, paid a warm tribute to him, with particular attention paid to the effect of recent years on his family. This genuine and personal touch showed a capacity for empathy which might well pay dividends for Cameron in the end.
Blair received a warmer tribute than he might have expected about, arguably his greatest achievement – Northern Ireland. Ian Paisley of the DUP, the man who fought Blair hard against the Good Friday Agreement wished him the same success in the Middle East. Blair, despite Paisley’s misgivings, won the Good Friday argument, with the help of the electorate in Northern Ireland and Ireland. In the end Paisley won too, despite himself. As did Northern Ireland and the rest of us.
For me, the words of the Father of the House, Alan Williams, were deserved indeed and very moving, as well as long awaited, coming as they did from a senior Labour party member. They will be proved in time to be deeply appropriate:
Mr. Alan Williams (Swansea, West) (Lab): I apologise for being more political than I normally would, but it is a special occasion.
May I wish the Prime Minister success and fulfilment in whatever he chooses to do? I hope that he chooses to do something that makes best use of those qualities that brought peace to Northern Ireland. He and I have not always agreed on policy, but I genuinely say to him that he is one of the outstanding Prime Ministers of my political lifetime and, without doubt, the most politically effective Prime Minister that the party has ever had.
May I thank him for leading us out of 18 years of wilderness life on the Opposition Benches, leading us successfully through three general elections and giving us 10 years of government with more to come? Under him, the party has once again become a natural party of government.
Blair’s Last Official Visitor – Arnie on 26th June, 2007
Watch video below of Blair/Arnie press conference on Blair’s last day as PM
On a visit to the UK on climate change talks, Arnold Schwarzenegger praised Tony Blair’s environmental leadership as “truly a model for the world”, as the two men met in Downing Street on Mr Blair’s last full day as prime minister. He revealed that it was only thanks to Mr Blair “getting everyone back round the table” at this month’s G8 that any deal at all was achieved.In an early morning press conference between the two men, Mr Schwarzenegger said that the prime minister’s visit last year had “been an inspiration to everyone in California”, and the state had now copied a British style cap-and-trade model on curbing emissions.Mr Blair, in his turn, praised Mr Schwarzenegger’s “vision and leadership” on the issue, which has seen California lead a small number of US states in adopting Kyoto-style targets, despite Washington having pulled out of that treaty back in 2001.Asked if the meeting would be Mr Blair’s last bilateral talks at No 10, his official spokesman said: “I suppose that will be the case.”But the governor, who has made the battle against climate change a personal crusade, added: “Out of selfish reasons I hope that he becomes the envoy for the environment and brings all the countries of the world together to join some kind of treaty – a Kyoto kind of treaty – that everyone can join and we can all together reduce greenhouse gases.”I think the prime minister is the only person who can do that.”
………………………………………………..
My thoughts: Hhm…mm. Next job lined up for Mr Blair? Someone, somewhere, internationally is going to have to grab hold of this issue, and he’s going to be busy sorting out the EU next year, if Vlad the Great is right!
Blair – The Family Man[With Cherie and youngest son Leo in 2001, second election win]
[Family departing Number 10 Downing Street, 27th June, 2007]
This may sound inconceivable, but looking at the Conservative lead in the polls and Labour’s disastrous end to 2007, there is a chance Gordon Brown will not survive as leader of the Labour Party until the end of this year. This possibility is based on a lot of ‘ifs’:
If Gordon Brown continues to preside over episodes such as ‘data-gate’ and Northern Rock;
If the credit crunch causes the economic downturn that many fear;
If Gordon Brown’s reputation for economic prudence is undermined by allegations that his failure to capitalise on the good times by putting something aside for the bad times, has left Britain over-exposed to economic downturn;
If the process of ratification of the Lisbon Treaty exposes rifts within the Labour Party over Europe;
If Gordon Brown loses the trust of the public by appearing to spin his way through government, relying on opportunism without strategy;
If Gordon Brown alienates all but a small handful of his closest colleagues by refusing to let his ministers run their departments;
If the Stalin caricature sticks (fair or unfair);
If the Mr Bean caricature sticks (fair or unfair);
If Boris Johnson wins the Mayoral election;
If Labour fares badly in May’s Local Government elections;
If Nick Clegg provokes a revival in the Lib Dem’s fortunes;
If David Cameron positions the Conservative Party as a credible party of government;
If all of those things happen, and Brown has committed to holding an election in 2009, at what point will the Labour Party decide that he is not the man to lead them in the fight for a fourth term in office?
Obviously this is all speculation and raises questions about who would be powerful enough to challenge him, but I’m throwing it out there for debate…
Posted by Mark Lever, Senior Account Executive, Edelman UK
……………………………………………….
The Chancellor … er … PM Trying To Work It All Out
Michael Portillo has a perceptive article in today’s Times on Brown’s inability to act the part” of PM. He says, in a nutshell, what I said a year ago. That Brown has only ever held ONE job in government; insufficient for the overall job of PM.
And following Brown’s interview with Andrew Marr today, in which he prattled on about fiscal matters as he used to do in his real job, this article too argues that Brown is basically still the Chancellor.
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear …
“Subprime” having been voted the US word of the year – you almost have to pity GB/PM AGAIN. A sub-prime minister indeed.
And if Stephen Byers, Alan Milburn, Charles Clarke and other Blairites are anything to go by, we friends and followers of Tony Blair can find no further reason for continuing. They are right, inasmuch as the Labour party is concerned. Blair IS history, and they need to move on from where they are. HE himself has emphasised this fact to them, and rightly so.
This blog gave up any small hope of retaining Mr Blair as PM just a few short weeks after it was launched in September 2006; but still I felt that it should continue to record the many achievements pursued under his premiership. I suppose in that way it has become a shrine, if that’s the right word, to his memory.
But since I am not a Labour member – nor a member or supporter of any party – disenfranchised at the moment – I suppose they can’t tell me to shutup! Not that I’d listen anyway. Still …
This phrase used by Stephen Byers last month struck home with me; it pains me too, to know that Tony Blair will no longer be part of – in fact, the dominating figure in British politics. It feels just as wrong today as it did 6 months ago when he left office. Or 16 months ago when the Little People – the Coup Plot Planners – performed political hari-kiri as well as regicide.
It’s clearly the case that had Blair remained in place there would have been no talk of hurrying forward an election and none of this resultant discounting of Labour that is presently ongoing.
The message from Byers is that we have to move on. No-one is indispensable. And at least we have the satisfaction of knowing that Tony Blair is bringing his consummate political skills to a wider arena than UK politics.
List of Clickable Links – Pages/Video/Audio/External Sites
This list is alphabetical. Browse down the lists to search for an item.
Or click through to a 'popular page' on the topic where it is likely to be found. All video/audio/articles etc will also be found at the appropriate page or post.
Putting a search item into the search box will bring up one or more pages which include your search item.
Should the USA, Britain & the rest of the western world seriously consider Sharia Finance, in view of the present financial worries?
There is concern that such is the state of collapse of western capitalism that SOME of our leaders may even be considering adopting "Sharia Finance".
It already exists in the west in various forms and is presently being marketed heavily to non-Muslims.
Is this a slippery slope to Sharia Law?
Sharia law and now Sharia finance are touted by its proponents as the answers to the "evils" of the west.
I don't want ANYTHING Sharia in my country - Britain. And I am not happy that there are already FIVE Sharia courts in our land. I don't recall the government asking us to vote for this in 1997, 2001 or 2005.
But two months after Mr Brown took over from Mr Blair in 2007 Sharia courts were set up in English cities. Perhaps Mr Brown thought he had received subliminal permission from the people to do this when he took over from Mr Blair in a subliminal non-election.
What do YOU think?
VOTE NOW for or against Sharia Finance for the West
And for how long can he manage on three hours sleep a night? It’s almost as though he knows there is a time limit into which he has to pack a lifetime’s achievements.
[With Cherie and youngest son Leo in 2001, second election win]
Tony Blair 
