- Home
- All Contents of Site – Index
- Tony Blair website: CNN interview today: Gaza’s future & Donors’ pledge of $4.4bn
UPDATE – ON THE ON/OFF PRESS CONFERENCE – IT WAS THE WRONG KIND OF SHOW … SNOW
“Mr Brown might be forgiven for thinking that his friend, rival and predecessor Tony Blair would not have been treated the same way by his bosom buddy President George W. Bush. After all, there are 132 rooms in the White House at least some of which, presumably, are currently free of snow.”
Comment at end
3rd March, 2009
[Key: "The Present" = The Present British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown
"The Former" = The Former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair]
THE ‘BROTHERS B’ IN AMERICA’S HOUSE
It must be co-incidental. Surely? But poor ol’ Gordon Brown can’t seem to do anything without the shadow of his predecessor looming over his shoulder.
As Brown meets Obama – lucky him – (you choose which “him”), it just so happens that Tony is in town too. And not just in town (Washington), but in the same building (Congress)! And not just in the same building, but speaking to the same people – America’s lawmakers.
Small world, eh?
You couldn’t have written the plot and had it accepted as a credible BBC story.
To rub salt into the Brown wound Blair has already met the new American President.
Sorry, I just have to smile. You could see that in my writing, couldn’t you? Go on admit it … you could! I just can’t pretend.
A smile in this world goes a long way. Don’t you think?
I can hardly wait for the reports of Brown’s speech to Congress. Wonder if any American reports will be tempted to compare it to Blair’s in 2003 (transcript)?
As if.
NO OBAMA/BROWN PRESS CONFERENCE ON THE LAWN – I DON’T BELIEVE IT!
And the fact that there won’t – repeat WON’T be an Obama/Brown news conference has upset our British journalists on board with The Present.
But, surely, on the plane they would have been briefed about that? Was there no timetable? Was there no KNOWLEDGE of that non-event even within Brown’s immediate circle?
Or has Obama already got one “good (British) friend” and is worried that another might be another too many?
Now if I were a conspiracy theorist …!
SAVING THE ECONOMY AND/OR THE WORLD
Anyway, hats off to Gordon. He has an important task in America today. He is struggling for the survival of the world’s economy. And now even America knows it’s not HIS fault.
It wasn’t HIS fault in Britain either. Despite being the British Treasury Minister for ten years (‘Chancellor’, traditionally the Number 2 power seat in government) who famously liked to keep his boss the Prime Minister in the dark about economic policy.
After all, he keeps telling us it’s a world issue. It certainly is.
Meanwhile Tony is struggling for the survival of the world.
To each his own.
- Listen to Brown on today’s radio report on ‘Morning Edition’: ‘Global New Deal’ (G20 would threaten countries which do not comply with bank regulation with “exclusion!”/troops to Afghanistan/Pakistan. The interviewer, in my humble opinion, didn’t sound over-impressed, especially on the New Deal & on Afghanistan. Also, listen to this Dec 2008 take on Brown’s direction on economic policy. Asking if Labour has gone back to pre-Blair (particularly economic) policies, it might explain the distance I sensed coming from the Brown interviewer. It shows how difficult Brown might find the task of selling his worldwide socialist-sounding interventionist economic “New Deal” to the Americans, even Obama’s Democrats.
- It seems Gordon’s carbon footprint is the biggest of ALL today’s European leaders. Poor man. He keeps putting his foot in it, even when he doesn’t say anything. (French report here) Luckily for the high-flying Former, they haven’t included former leaders in this calculation.
- The Telegraph asks if Brown is getting the Kinnock treatment. They SO miss the big picture, don’t they? Even the Right in the UK don’t get it. Kinnock’s treatment was regarding his then unilateralist views. Brown, if his NEW DEAL (running out of catchy phrases, Gordon?) is the ANSWER should be feted as the world’s financial saviour if he has ALL the answers. But America LOVES a winner. They can spot one, or its opposite, an ocean’s length away. But to be perfectly frank I am not sure what good it would do anyone if Brown did a mea culpa. The Tories would not have done anything different while or if the economy had been booming for years. It seems to me that Blair was right here (video). Perhaps Brown still knows who to listen to. Roosevelt, too had a New Deal, remember, in 1932. Just after the 1920s recession (ooops! …“depression”- eh, Gordon?)
- Herald Tribune: Obama’s about turn: Bush’s approach to fighting terror. The irony of his new position, however, is that Al Qaeda’s very failure to attack any major American targets outside Iraq appears to vindicate the Bush administration’s seven-year hunt for Bin Laden. In the end, President Obama is inadvertently giving President George W. Bush credit for the very same policies which Candidate Obama condemned.
Tags: blair speaks to congress, British Prime Minister in Congress, congress speech by brown, Gordon Brown America USA meets Obama, no obama brown press conference in washington, Tony Blair
March 3, 2009 at 10:05 pm |
it’s like something out of coronation street, but then life is stranger than fiction. poor old tony having gordon there watching his every move AGAIN.
March 3, 2009 at 10:56 pm
I like that – Poor Old Tony!
I think you might be the only person putting it that way.
Downing Street is now on damage limitation over the on/off press conference. Looks like they were hoping for the many, many, MANY President & PM pics that we used to have back in the days when we had real leadership.
So, it wouldn’t have bothered Tony one bit that Gordon was there at the same time. In the compare & contrast stakes there is simply NO comparison. In fact I expect some of the journos (the Mail) are already trying to work out if Tony said he was ONLY available today (after he new that Brown would be there!) Not that I’m suggesting he would ever do anything like that! Not on purpose … oh, no … would he ever!?
Thanks for the links you sent, margaret. Will use them all, probably.
March 3, 2009 at 11:21 pm |
i meant it sarcastically as tony would milk it for all it’s worth and rub Gordon’s nose in it. specially as A Boulton was rubbing tony’s nose in it last week over the best bedroom in uk ambassador’s residence being given to brown and blair being pushed out. and now look what’s happened. something that never would have happened in tony’s time you’ll be sure. i’m sure blair is having a quiet laugh behind the scenes about Gordon and the press. he’s had quite a nice week so far unlike Gordon. poor old tony though. the press will blame him i’m sure for this if they can.
March 4, 2009 at 12:35 am
It’s got to be tough for Brown, margaret, to have to follow the King. But I find it hard to have much sympathy for him. Well, ANY, actually.
As you know I think he was wrong to push out the best PM we’ve had in Britain for decades, and I think he is SERIOUSLY wrong on Wilders, Free Speech and the other “creeping” problem. So I suppose I wouldn’t shed a tear if his speech tomorrow falls flat. Sadly for him I find his tone heavy, laborious, monotonous and just not pitched at a level that touches people. Touching people is just not his style. Yet that’s what a leader must do. Gordon’s thing is economics.
B-O-R-I-N-G. YAWN!
So he has a tougher job than Blair ever had. The enemy then was fighting terror. The enemy now is getting money flowing again. If he can do that, he’ll be made. But Obama is not yet on board his ideas, that is clear after their meeting today. Obama has a lot of people to talk it all through with, including Sarkozy & Merkel. He hasn’t decided yet how to tackle this Global New Deal thingy.
But I bet he has Tony’s mobile number in his cellphone.
March 4, 2009 at 12:01 am |
Alastair blogged about Gordon’s coming speech. Surely did start the comparison between Gordon and Tony.
http://www.alastaircampbell.org/blog.php?id=27
March 4, 2009 at 12:51 am
Thanks, Caela.
Interesting stuff from Alastair Campbell. Didn’t notice a debate there though – only two unrelated comments.
The debate will start tomorrow after he speaks to Congress. And it will be led by the American press. Assuming THAT is when he is going to mention the much-trailed “New Deal”. I think I could write their headlines now.
A little ungenerous all round. Bloggers headlines, maybe. The American press are far too polite. Of course who knows – he may even surprise me. I may even watch it!
Do you think I should apply to The Daily Mail for a headline writer’s job!?
;0)
What do you mean “not rude enough”?
March 4, 2009 at 2:41 am |
I can almost imagine this conversation:
The gathering Blair addressed at Congress on climate change, on the other hand, which included business and political leaders and policy makers is the most high-powered of it’s kind since Obama became president. I think this creates a good momentum for the UN climate meetings in December in Copenhagen.
I’m also interested if Obama would use words like “good friend” or something similar about Brown or even say something remotely constructive about his international leadership (attempt) on the global economic turn down. He surely went out of his way to praise Blair and his leadership skills as it was clearly not part of his original speech. So far the only thing he said about Brown is that their “relationship is good” which in diplomatic terms means ‘we’re speaking to each other’.
March 4, 2009 at 1:18 pm
Diary Secretary chat – Could be! Who knows!
I reckon it was downgraded BEFORE Brown came, just in case Brown put Obama on the spot over the economy and in case it became clear that they are not on the same page on other issues. I also think Obama is still working out where he stands on various things.
There was always a chance – OK, a small chance – that Brown would come over as the more experienced (which of course he is.)
Whatever, it’s clear that the weather was NO excuse. It’s a BIG place the White House – 132 rooms.
It makes you long for the good old days when the world felt a safer place, doesn’t it?
Blair, as usual, seems to be all over the papers on the climate. His timing, as always, is immaculate.
Perhaps I’ll have to force myself to watch the Brown delivery in Congress later. Mustn’t be biased … mustn’t be biased … musn’t …
Apart from the “good” relationship, they also have wives in common!?!
WOW!
March 4, 2009 at 5:45 pm |
i wonder if brown knew blair was going to be there and went there at that time hoping blair’s shine with americans might shine on him too.
March 4, 2009 at 6:50 pm
No, margaret. Brown’s timetable would have been decided by the White House. And Blair’s meeting yesterday by the Environment Group which organised it.
So – as usual – probably NO conspiracy at all. If there had been the press would have uncovered it by now, you can bet.
March 4, 2009 at 10:45 pm |
according to the mail hardly a pro blair paper GB was clapped 18 times by congress today, one less than TB in 2003. that must have rubbed in both their noses and make Blair smile.
March 4, 2009 at 11:14 pm
I have mentioned this in the next post, margaret. Though the BBC radio 4 news said 15 or 16 times, and they didn’t compare it to Blair’s.
March 9, 2009 at 12:06 am |
Great website KeepTonyBlairforPM.
I couldnt put it better myself (refferring to your username here). Tony Blair is the GREATEST PM this country has ever had. He had flair and class. He was a far better bet than GB and infinitely more so than Major before him and Margaret “milk snatcher” Thatcher.
He led this country so well and, for me at least, he was irreplaceable.
With regards to the GB-Obama first meeting i couldnt help but sit there with a slightly smug smile on my face hearing the way Brown was recieved and then comparing it to Mr Blairs own meeting with Obama. I seem to recall the words “my GOOD FRIEND” being used by Mr Obama. Little surprise that congress recieved Tony Blair so well. No doubt they appreciate a true winner. As you so correctly pointed out “America can spot a winner” and they surely saw just that quality in our Tony.
March 9, 2009 at 1:18 am
Hi Mortimer – thanks for this. Just what I needed right now as my faith in my hero is slipping. I honestly admit that, and it is quite painful to admit.
Despite meeting many people who say that they miss Mr Blair and that he knew how to lead and represent our country, the press and many people online still paint him as a liar, cheat, greasy, weak, warmonger or war criminal. He is NONE of those, imho.
But I am having serious concerns over another matter, one which the press largely are choosing to ignore, and one which I think he can influence even from outside government.
If you haven’t noticed what I’m referring about, perhaps you can read some of my recent posts on Sharia Law and what he’s been saying recently in his Church of England interview on the whole Sharia/Archbishop of Canterbury business being a bit of a “fuss”. Please feel free to add your thoughts to any of those posts. I DO notice that few who accuse him of other sins and misdemeanours seldom if ever pick on this issue. Easily explained, of course. These people are motivated by agendas – centred around around an anti-Iraq war position and the authoritarian state nonsense. And for them the rise of Islam fundamentalist does their long-term aims no harm. Many of them probably welcome it. And of course the admission that it exists would in one fell swoop neutralise ALL their arguments.
I don’t think we or the politicians are fussing enough on creeping Sharia and the slow but steady take-over of our country by a political religion. It’s like watching a slow-motion car crash. You just KNOW we’re all going to die in the end, but it’s as though we are in a suspended dreamlike state and can’t do anything to stop it. Mr Blair too, if his interview to the Church of England newspaper is anything to go by, is in this paralysed state of helplessness.
I realise it’s difficult for him in his present position in the Middle East, and with his wide-reaching Faith Foundation. But if HE can’t see it, and I always felt he was ahead of the game on most issues, what hope is there for the rest? And yes I understand he has to tread carefully so as not to step on Brown’s toes. Also that he carries some baggage here, in that he too went along happily for years with the multi-cultural agenda (but no, he didn’t invent it any more than he invented radical Islamism.) He still possesses the linguistic skills to explain a new position. If not, I’ll write it for him!
I thought in 2006 when he gave his speech on Multiculturalism that he was trying to row back a little. To say, more or less, as far as politicians ever do ’sorry’, it hasn’t quite turned out as we wanted it to. Jack Straw made similar noises about burkhas etc. But then it was as though they were both sat upon by the left of their party and told to cool it (for inner city ethnic vote purposes, perhaps?) The Left press of course were on them like a ton of bricks.
The Tories are equally as blind or at least as mute on this issue. But they do KNOW as does Labour that it’s a big issue.
A website reporting Blair’s Deceber 2006 multiculturalism speech and reactions to it (Canadian, I presume). His speech and videos are here at the Downing Street website.
So it was just as well you called here tonight. In recent days I have been all but ready to pack it all in with a final post saying something like – “Sorry, I got Tony Blair all wrong. I have just wasted almost two years of my life praising a man who does NOT have the interests of my country at heart. Whose commitment to religion has made him blind to the facts. Whose understanding of The Other and reaching out to ALL of them regardless of what it might bring means he is seeing through a glass darkly. Who has, like so many other present leaders of this country, let Britain and British culture (even western civilisation) down, down, down (since much of the west’s culture and civilised norms came from here to begin with.”)
And I don’t want to say that.
But I have to tell you, Mortimer, as far as I am concerned the jury’s still out. Mr Blair is still in the dock. Perhaps it’s time he put up a sturdy defence of his position, or better still, altered it to reflect this changing world. That would be a mitigating circumstance for which he’d get an acquittal.
If Mr Blair loses moderate people like me – (I belong to no party, I am no racist, and I am not anti-immigration per se) – then he’s lost the very people his vision, tolerance, inclusiveness and non-ideological appeal attracted in the first place.
March 9, 2009 at 12:51 pm |
Great Post and very interesting conjecture KeepTonyBlairforPM. I see exactly the point your trying to make. I too have my own take on Sharia law in the UK.
Indeed as a serving member (Sergeant) of the British Army, namely of the Royal Artillery (7 Para RHA) as an Observation Post and Tactical Air Control Party Sgt, i’ve seen first hand the way Sharia law administers its rules and laws. Im more than happy to be vocal on my opinions on this matter as well.
As with yourself, im no racist, am not TOTALLY anti-immigration (with certain reservations however), i DID belong to the labour party however i havent since Tony Blairs departure, and in large part due to the manner in which he was forced out and replaced by someone of a far less Political calibre. However, with these points taken into consideration i’ll let my take on Sharia law be known.
Its a harsh religion, a Political religion, as you so well pointed out. On a number of occasions in Helmand, Afghanistan we got to see the extreme version of Talibani sharia law at work, albeit not by Taliban rebels themselves. Women are held in low regard and any attempts to seek an education or fullfilling career by women is strictly forbidden. Abuse, both mental and physical is widely accepted towards women by the men who follow these laws. Any schools permitting and encouraging the education of women is either torn down or its female students are ejected, usually forcefully. Children are indoctrinated into an anti-west frame of mind from an early age and this simply serves to widen the gap between us all. I also cannot see how a religion that can condone the outright punishment and borderline torture of a woman simply for showing her face in public can be deemed as a Just one.
In short i too, like you, am strongly against permitting Sharia law to take hold in this country. Im all for someone being free to practice whatever religion it is that they wish to practice, however, i would never want such an outright brutal religious law such as Sharia law to be permitted in the UK. I fear politicians at the moment are all to willing to let Those seeking the installation of Sharia law have their wish.
I strongly think you and i see eye to eye on a great many matters Sir and look forward to hearing more of your thoughts on this, and other, matters. Many Thanks for another great post.
Mortimer
March 9, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Thanks, Mortimer. Will get back to you later when I have time.
March 11, 2009 at 10:38 pm
Hi Mortimer,
Sorry to take so long to get back to you. I have been away for a few days. Just got back to the computer this afternoon, and have just written a post about that atrocious Anjem Choudary character and his parade of charlatans in Luton. The attacking of the regiment’s homecoming must have set your pulse racing too, with your background!
No-one needs to do much of a search around the internet do work out what Sharia Law is about. It’s a misogynist, punishing creed which permits for no tolerance and little laxity in interpretation of the koran’s instructions. Even if we were fortunate enough here in Britain – were it ever to take hold – to have a milder version, there is NOTHING whatsoever in Sharia Law that should hold ANY attraction for the leftists of this world. Those are the very people who seem to see no fatal link between their support for the ‘poor downtrodden Muslims’ in this land and the fact that the Intelligentsia Left would be amongst the first to get in the neck from Sharia courts (for their liberalism towards gays, abortion, sex etc).
Like yourself I have my own ideas on limitations on immigration for the future. That is largely as a result of the fact that I believe we have been infiltrated by many from certain Asian countries intent on doing down our country. And they have thoroughly
washed– polluted the brains of such as the Guardian writers.I have no racial obstacles at all regarding immigration. West Indians – as long as their drug, gang and knife crime minorities are properly dealt with under our laws – are as welcome as any white European. To me it’s about culture and tolerance. And accepting our norms if they come here – as I would need to if I moved to an Islamic land.
ALL immigrants would have to pass a far stricter test than presently (for instance – nothing that could be tutored beforehand) and I would certainly ban immigration from certain countries.
Unfortunately the issues are complicated by the fact of our EU membership. They seem to have the upper hand with the stupidly named ‘Human Rights Courts’. Judges there seem to deal with few with human traits as far as I can see. And almost everyone gets off with anything once they go there!!!
That was one of my hopes for Blair becoming EU president – IF HE AND I ARE STILL ON THE SAME PAGE IN THIS REGARD (?) The hope that the EU HR Act would be modified at an all-Europe level.
As you will know I have this feeling his position is presently compromised. How else could anyone explain his weasel words on Sharia – “a fuss about nothing”. That’s not the Tony Blair I knew and not the one appearing here in his last few months in office. Not unless I misread him completely.
Where oh where is the man who said that – and not that long ago?
I don’t want him to leave the Quartet post just to separate himself from this need to be all things to all men in the Middle East, or just to give attention to an EU post he might not get. It never worked here in Britain anyway, this median tracking idea – when push came to shove. Probably because half the men (and women) are mice in this country. So it may not work in Europe until such time as there is real civil unrest over Islamification of one of our countries – Britain, France, the Netherlands? Who knows?
And then we might start looking to his leadership qualities.
But then there’s his Faith Foundation. That too might be weakening rather than strengthening the hand of those of us who want to protect European culture, liberalism and liberty as we know it. What good is a Nobel Peace Prize for bringing religions together and working for peace inthe Middle East if it’s at the expense of a mush of religious law and pick’n'mix compromise in Britain?
Losing his country along the way to a personal Peace Prize would not be just a footnote in history. Of course it would likely stop the campaign of the ‘Blair to the International Criminal Court’ ranters, I suppose. (Which understandably, at a personal level, is something he’d like to scupper.)
So, I’m still waiting for Mr Blair to say something that restores my faith in him.
Keep in touch, Mortimer.
All the best.
March 10, 2009 at 1:37 am |
It was recently brought to my attention that Obama had been snubbing world leaders who had been friendly with the US — so Brown wasn’t alone in this department. During the National Prayer Breakfast, foreign heads of state [Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, Haitian President Rene Preval and the Prime Ministers of Albania, Macedonia, and Mauritius] should have been treated as such and not made to sit with the US Speaker of the House of Representatives who they outrank. Not to mention the fact that it took him a complete 2 weeks to return the Philippine president’s call to congratulate him upon his election victory despite the fact that the Philippines had been a “major US non-NATO ally” (Washington’s own words) during the past years.
When the Philippine President went to the US, President Obama didn’t even grant her an audience and was met by US Secretary of State Clinton instead who reiterated that “the Philippines is one of [US] closest and most important allies”. Honestly, it fell on deaf ears in Manila with the chair of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations saying that the President shouldn’t have wasted her time and that an ambassador should have been sent instead.
It seems that while the Obama administration is (thinking of) opening the diplomatic channel with Iran, North Korea and particularly with Russia and China, it is ignoring US ties with some of the countries that stood unwaveringly with the US. They should be careful not to let go of time tested “relations” particularly now that the power is shifting east and everyone is starting to get chummy with China.