Blair, The Mail, negativity & the Elephant who’ll never forget

Original Home Page

All Contents of Site – Index

“Ban Blair-Baiting” petition linked from ‘Blair Foundation Watch’ here

Comment at end

12th August, 2009

TO THE MAIL: DON’T PUBLISH ME. I’M A POSITIVE THINKER

I have referred to this comment and thus opinion management before by such anti-Blair rags as The Mail. Their readers should UNDERSTAND that the Mail is expert at this game and uses many-pronged weaponry.  Even when appearing as easy on Blair as the topic allows, for years The Mail has moderated OUT pro-Tony Blair comments, even if, presumably, few in number.  Thus Mail readers get the impression that their anti/ANTI/ANTI opinion is natural, honest and true, as well as held universally.

(That said, I notice The Mail now says that it has changed its policy on moderation.  Hm-mm… we’ll see. Perhaps with the upcoming Iraq Inquiry they have been leant upon for their biased reporting.)

First, in my positive, human and humour-filled fashion, I should congratulate them.

This is a great picture from today’s Mail

Pity about the article.

Jegeg, the baby elephant searching around for something up inside the clothing of Tony Blair. Sweet stuff ... don't you think? Some might say that Jegeg, ('Beautiful') seems to have good taste - for one so young.

If such a picture had been of anyone other than Tony Blair even the miserable Mail (and thus its readers) would be forced to smile. Instead they employ a double … correction … TRIPLE tactic in spinning that is so perfectly honed that their readers don’t even notice.

TACTICS IN THE ONGOING MAIL STRATEGY OF TRADUCING TONY BLAIR

1. They pretend they are talking about someone else – Cherie Blair and an elephant.

2. Then they turn to their real target, her husband and another elephant. They slip in phrases like “embarrassed grin … placed a hand on the young female’s head … ready to wriggle … as so often … out of a  tricky situation.”

3. They then leave the door open wide for the REAL criticism by their commenters encouraged as they have been by the article’s reminder of the powers of the manipulative, smiling, snake-oil salesman.

And so, as if to order, the commenters pile in.

The brainwashing is so clearly evident that The Mail’s readers, if they had a washable braincell among them, should have realised how they are being manipulated. There is NO way, and I mean NO way that any newspaper would fail to receive ONE comment with a touch of human empathy or even humour as regards this picture.

But smiles came there none: only vile, envious, nasty, vitriolic, hated-filled comment.

Nothing … NOTHING light or positive to say.

NONE of them. Not ONE!

I suppose we Blair Supporters should consider ourselves lucky. The Mail could have led with – “Up Yours, Blair”. But they knew they could leave that to their commenters, few of whom seem to have noticed that the story was purportedly, according to its title, about Cherie.

Cherie’s packed her holiday trunk and rides off into the Bali sun

Passenger service: On holiday with husband Tony, Cherie Blair takes an elephant ride in Bali.

The Mail

Excerpt:

“A baby elephant called Jegeg seemed fascinated by the former prime minister’s blue shorts and extended an investigatory trunk.

Mr Blair flashed an embarrassed grin and placed a hand on the young female’s head, ready – as so often during his years at Number 10  -  to wriggle out of a tricky situation.”

An “embarrassed” grin? He looks remarkably UNembarrassed to me.

So from this ‘elephant’ – I won’t forget The Mail’s bias against Tony Blair, cute pictures notwithstanding.

RELATED – SORT OF

Are Angela Merkel & her female colleagues casting around for the sex vote? Merkel and sex appeal aren’t necessarily contradictory terms, but … is this a good idea? It’d be like Gordon Brown campaigning in his Y-Fronts.

“WE HAVE MORE TO OFFER”

The poster shows Christian Democratic candidate Vera Lengsfeld (right) alongside a 2008 photo of Angela Merkel above the slogan: "We have more to offer."

Update to the cleavage story: According to Spiegel it seems Ms Merkel was neither consulted nor informed about the picture used.  She is not amused.

Update to the Elephant story: The Express says that the Blairs are being criticised for taking rides on these elephants. The complainants evidently need to do some research into this Bali elephant sanctuary. The Express too, for that matter. But why let the truth get in the way of an opportunity to trample on the Blairs?

With thanks to Bali Adventure Tours (history) for this photograph. More with pictures here

Bali Adventure Tours
www.baliadventuretours.com
info@baliadventuretours.com
Ph 62 361 721480 fax 62 361 721481

---

---

Executing virgins, Iran style

Original Home Page

All Contents of Site – Index

“Ban Blair-Baiting” petition linked from ‘Blair Foundation Watch’ here

Comment at end

11th August, 2009

Occasionally, quite often in fact,  I use complete artices printed elsewhere. The highly informative article below is one of those.

By: Deborah Weiss
FrontPageMagazine.com | Monday, August 10, 2009

Despite the fact that Iran’s penal code prohibits the execution of virgins, Iran executes more juveniles than any other country in the world.  The executions are conducted through hangings, stonings, and other barbaric measures consistent with Sharia law.  Since the age of personal responsibility in Iran is 13 for boys and 9 for girls, surely many of those sentenced to death are virgins.  How does the government get around this?  On the condition of anonymity, a Basiji guard recently spoke out to explain how Iran executes virgins.

The Basiji is a volunteer paramilitary force founded by the Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979.  Known as the people’s militia, it is subordinate to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and remains very loyal to Khomeini’s successor, the Supreme Leader Khamenei.

Explaining how he became a member of the Basiji, the guard stated that his father was a martyr in the Iran-Iraq war.  At age 16, his mother took him to the Basijis and pleaded with them to accept him so he’d have a better life.  They agreed.

The guard became a well-regarded member of the force.  His superiors were so impressed with him that they gave him the “honor” of temporarily marrying young girls prior to their executions.  The girls are forced into marriage with a prison guard, and then raped on their wedding night before being killed the next morning.

The girls always fight back when their marriage is to be “consummated”, so sometimes the guards put sleeping pills into the girls’ food.  When the rapes were over, the guard would hear the girls crying and screaming.  He remembered one girl who clawed her own face and neck, resulting in deep scratches all over.  Though the non-consensual weddings are considered legal, the guard admitted that the girls were more afraid of their wedding nights than of their pending deaths.  “By morning the girls would have an empty expression; it seemed like they were ready or wanted to die.”

In Sharia law, certain crimes are punishable by death.  According to Amnesty International, the Ayatollah, who followed strict Sharia law, had twenty thousand girls and women executed in the first three years of his rule.  Though Islam does not prohibit the execution of virgins, it does teach that virgins go to Paradise after death.  Many Islamic clerics, not satisfied with merely cutting short the lives of young girls, also wanted to ensure that the girls would suffer an eternity in hell.  Therefore, Iran made it illegal to execute virgins, but created a legal loophole by ordering guards to “marry” and rape their prisoners.  Authorities in many other Islamic countries also order their guards to systematically rape female prisoners.  In Iran, the crimes of homosexuality, fornication, armed robbery, kidnapping, drug trafficking are among those deemed capital offenses.  Often fornication charges are leveled even when the accused is raped.  The victim is rarely able to “prove” her innocence due to a lack of due process and the fact that the testimony of females is worth one half that of a man’s.

The Basiji guard spoke after recently being released from prison by Iranian authorities.  He had been jailed for the crime of releasing a 13 year old boy and a 15 year old girl after they were arrested for  protesting the Presidential election results in June.  Many other police and members of security forces have also been arrested for showing leniency to protestors or for releasing them from custody without authorization from higher-ups.  The guard released the two teens because they looked so young and he knew what was going to happen to them.  He believes it was primarily the release of the girl that got him into trouble.  However, while in prison he was treated well and spent most of his time praying and thinking about his wife and children.

Ironically, it is no longer the Presidential election results that Iranians are protesting, but the kind of  brutality and inhumanity that the Basiji guard himself perpetrated through his “temporary” marriages.  Iranians are tired of living under the oppression of an Islamic theocracy.  Protestors are willing to risk imprisonment, bodily injury and their lives for the cause of freedom.  Many of them are under age 18.

As of July 30, 2009, dozens of protestors have been killed and hundreds more have been arrested.  While in jail, they may have their fingernails ripped off, be forced to lick dirty toilet bowls or be beaten to death.  Numerous Islamic clerics are formally demanding the death penalty for protest leaders.

Though Iran publicly condemns the execution of minors, it justifies the execution of its own youth by defining minors to be those under age 13 if male and under age 9 if female.  Alternatively, sometimes Iran holds minors in prison until the age of 18 before executing them.  Prior to the riots, 140 girls remained on death row for crimes committed as juveniles.  This number is twice what it was in 2007.  Since the demonstrations began, the current number of juveniles on death row is impossible to ascertain.

Iran accounts for two thirds of the world’s child executions, earning them worldwide condemnation.  However, international criticism has not resulted in sufficient pressure to stop Iran’s practice of raping and executing minors.  Let’s hope that the demonstrations will succeed at putting an end to this savage practice and other human rights violations put in place by Iran’s religious mullahs.

ENDS Article

RELATED

I put up a post here two months ago with reference to the Taliban’s treatment of other Muslims. A Pakistani YouTube user made use of it.   But he didn’t quite get, or wish to get the whole message, as you will see when you read his transcript.  He implores Muslims NOT to read the text in my blog post, presumably because it may be ‘blasphemous’ or even just make good Muslims put two and two together and get the uncomfortable sum of four.

Until people understand and challenge what is being done in THEIR name, how can the civilised world ever expect to stop such barbaric practices?

---

Another Frontpage article, by Nonie Darwish, a woman brought up as a Muslim: “If you convert, you die”

Excerpt:

‘The end result is a chaotic society where everything happens behind closed doors but at a very heavy price to interpersonal relationships. Fear and distrust of others exists in all Muslim societies. Muslims are not just distrustful of the West, but they are distrustful of one another. In Muslim society, people are often more afraid of their neighbors and family members than of the police. Thus, we see husbands or fathers pressured to apply Sharia by killing an adulterous wife or daughter, or a perfect stranger participate in the killing of an apostate in the public square. Very few get arrested or punished for such crimes across the Muslim world. The ingenious Sharia uses vigilante street justice to bring about Islamic submission. That is why civil unrest and honor crimes go wherever Islam goes. The power of Islam comes from turning Muslim against Muslim — with a reward in heaven.

The above two examples of Islamic tyranny are not unique to Egypt, but exist in all Muslim countries. Islamic tyranny is encapsulated in a law that some Muslims claim to be their religious right in America. Many American citizens who left Islam are living in constant fear from Islamist individuals and groups right here, in the land of the free and home of the brave. I am one of them.’

---

Nonie Darwish is an American of Arab/Muslim origin. A freelance writer and public speaker, she runs the website www.ArabsForIsrael.com. Her new book is Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law.

---

---

We Tories are the HEIRS to Blair

Original Home Page

All Contents of Site – Index

“Ban Blair-Baiting” petition linked from ‘Blair Foundation Watch’ here

Demos meets at 2:30pm today in London, if you want to hear Osborne touting for Blairite votes

Comment at end

11th August, 2009

OH, THE IRONY

Hysterical, isn’t it?

They dreamed as dreamers do of the day the unconquerable would be conquered and they could have their place in the sun. And when he, their inspiration, is finally off the scene, though still unconquered at the ballot box, what to do they do, what do they say?

Well, this -

Only we can save (Blair’s) public services: Shadow Chancellor George Osborne

By Tim Shipman
Last updated at 12:07 AM on 11th August 2009

George Osborne, Shadow Chancellor says Tories are the "heirs to Blair"

The Tories will complete Tony Blair’s revolution in the public services to secure the jobs of doctors, teacher and nurses, George Osborne will say today.

In a major speech to the Blairite thinktank Demos in central London, the Shadow Chancellor will argue that only the Tories can save frontline services from the axe after the next General Election.

He will claim that far greater cuts will have to be made by Labour because Gordon Brown has stalled reforms that would save money and jobs.

Mr Osborne will say: ‘We face a choice between public service reform with the Conservatives and front line service cuts under Labour.

‘Without fundamentally improving the productivity of public services, the quality of those services will deteriorate as budgets are squeezed.’

In a clear appeal to the middle-class voters who backed Mr Blair, Mr Osborne will position the Tories as the true party of ‘ progressives’. He will add: ‘There is nothing progressive about out-of-control spending that the poorest end up having to pay for.’

The speech echoes David Cameron’s former claim that he – not Gordon Brown – is the true ‘heir to Blair’.

It is also likely to be seen as a riposte to any Tories who see Mr Cameron’s modernising proposals as ‘luxuries that cannot be afforded an age of austerity’.

Prior to Tony Blair's last Queen's Speech, November 2006, he and David Cameron share a joke in the walk from the Commons to the Lords. Now, who's that behind trying to lip-read?

RELATED

David Cameron, October 2005 – “I am the heir to Blair”

Excerpts:

‘DAVID CAMERON, the young pretender to the Tory throne who came close yesterday to embracing Tony Blair in his conference speech, has already done so in private.

Mr Cameron, 38, who has put a modernising agenda at the centre of his campaign, clearly enjoys the comparisons that have been made between him and Labour’s most successful modern-day Prime Minister.

At a dinner with newspaper executives on the eve of his address, he took the comparison a step further. “I am the heir to Blair,” he said. If his hosts were in any doubt about what they had heard, Mr Cameron repeated the mantra. He also said that a Cameron Tory Government would not reverse all of the Blairite reforms in the public services.

[...]

George Osborne, the Shadow Chancellor and fellow member of the so-called Notting Hill set of young modernising Tories, was also at the dinner table. Mr Osborne, defending the heir to Blair boast, said: “We have nothing to be ashamed of in saying it.”

Martin Newland, the Editor of The Daily Telegraph, which has yet to declare for any of the five candidates, was not so sure. “David,” he said. “I would not repeat that outside this room.”’

And now they’ve repeated it.  LOUDLY. This original Cameron “heir” claim was made a few months after Tony Blair had won his third successive election, despite decreasing popularity, and before David Cameron became Tory leader.  Evidently even Brown’s two years ‘looking after’ our public services have not dimmed Cameron’s ardour for the reforming former PM, or for HIS votes.

Dave can’t be all bad!

• Also see Pulse’s report here: Tories to dismantle NHS IT infrastructure. (I wonder if they’ve asked Tony’s permission.)
• So, what did Tony Blair ever do for me? Part 1, Health
• Does Ed Balls see himself as the heir to Nye Bevan? A little lateral thinking here on Oswald Mosley, but, hey, it’s August!
• Google ‘David Cameron & Rachel Whetstone‘ and see if Google has this combination listed. Ms Whetstone is married to Cameron adviser Steve Hilton. Ms Whetstone is also Google’s vice-president of public policy and communications. Interesting. Nothing else, of course.

---

---

Tony Blair, the Bears and the Leech in Borneo (pictures)

Original Home Page

All Contents of Site – Index

“Ban Blair-Baiting” petition linked from ‘Blair Foundation Watch’ here

Comment at end

11th August, 2009

THE BLAIRS AT CAMP BORNEO

[Ed: It's purely co-incidental that he was visiting a Bear Conservation Sanctuary as I was linking to this Ban Blair-Baiting petition.]

FROM BORNEAN SUN BEAR CONSERVATION

by Jungle Bob (BATs volunteer)

‘After a few hiccups relating to helicopter availability and some frantic preparation by Sylvia Alisto and her team it finally came together. At 9.40 in the morning two helicopters arrived at Sepilok and the visit of one of the World’s most prominent former leaders was on.Tony Blair, together with his family and security staff, had arrived and began his visit to the Orang-utan Sanctuary and Sun Bear project (BSBCC).The visit began with a presentation on the Orang-utans and then a guided walk to Platform four where the party trekked along the boardwalk and enjoyed the attentions of the primates. Tony actually enjoyed the attention of a leech on his ankle which I assured him was ‘good luck’ and a souvenir of Sabah.

[Ed: See picture here below]

They then visited the juvenile Orang-utans in the nursery area. At about 1pm they were given a presentation on the Sun Bears by Wai Pak and myself. They were very interested and asked lots of questions. Cherie Blair (Tony’s wife) was particularly fascinated and keen to get lots of information about the bears.

[...]

I was very impressed with his enthusiasm and patience. This was a valuable visit for the purposes of the Sun Bear profile carried out by a genuine warm hearted and sociable former world leader and was enjoyed by everyone.

I received some feedback from their senior security officer after they had arrived back in KK. He said the ‘Blairs’ had had a ‘brilliant day’.I donated BSBCC T-shirts to Tony Blair, Cherie Blair and two of the children and Sylvia gave them some souvenirs of their visit. I will make sure that they also receive copies of the photographs taken on the day so that they remember us and perhaps they will take me up on my offer of getting one or more of their children to come and work for us as volunteer Bat’s!’

More from Jungle Bob here

PICTURES

This Picasa site has 34 excellent pictures of Tony Blair and family’s recent trip to Camp Borneo.

With thanks to Leap’s Picasa web album. Visit for many more photos of this visit

A blood-sucking leech grabs onto Tony Blair's ankle. He doesn't seem too fazed. I suppose he's used to them.

The Borneo Leech

Another creature after his blood?

The Borneo leech curls and fattens as it fills with blood. Similar to the British press, then?

Notes attached to this picture from Wikipedia:

Picture of a Borneo leech attached to the author’s foot. Author: snpoj

Back to top

Tony Blair and family on a surprise visit to a Church in Borneo last Sunday.

RELATED

Another report on the Blairs’ visit to the Sun Bears

• The Sunday before last, 2nd August, 2009, Tony Blair made a surprise visit to the Sacred Heart Church in Kota, Kinabalu, Sabah, Borneo, Malaysia (Video and report)
• Thanks to the above linked site and the original source of this story here – Dreamy Borneo blogspot

---

---

Petition to ‘Ban Blair-Baiting’ at the Iraq Inquiry

Original Home Page

All Contents of Site – Index

Petition also linked from ‘Blair Foundation Watch’ here and here.

Comment at end

10th August, 2009

You might be interested in this new online petition

---

Ban Blair-Baiting

Published by John Justice on Aug 05, 2009

Category: Politics

Region: United Kingdom

Target: Opinion-formers

Web site: http://justicefortonyblair.blogspot.com/
Background (Preamble):

Bear-baiting, whereby a tethered bear was attacked by a pack of dogs, was outlawed in this country in 1835. It is now time to stop BLAIR-baiting, i.e. attacks on our former Prime Minister by the dogs of anti-war. Less metaphorically it can be defined as the constant incitement of hatred against Tony Blair for taking us to war in Iraq.This year’s Blair-baiting season will reach its peak when the Iraq war inquiry starts to call witnesses. Parts of the media, the anti-Iraq war lobby and some families of soldiers killed in the war are already calling for this to be a TRIAL of Tony Blair with a view to gathering as much evidence as possible to send him to The Hague for “war crimes”. Except that unlike a normal trial, Tony Blair has been presumed guilty in advance.

The organisers of this petition do not belong to any one party but are united in our belief in “innocent until proved guilty” and that Mr Blair should be given a fair hearing at the inquiry. To this end we demand that if the Blair-baiters want to turn the inquiry into a trial they should follow the same rules as a trial and not be allowed to make any public comment on the proceedings until they are over.

Please show your support for Tony Blair through this period of “trial” by signing this petition. If you would like to be more actively involved in the campaign associated with it could you please leave your contact details in the “contact author” box that accompanies this petition.

Petition:

---

We, the undersigned agree that Blair-baiting should NOT be allowed to prejudice the outcome of the Iraq war inquiry. We therefore call upon the media and other interested parties to refrain from such activity for the duration of the inquiry.

Sign the petition

---

It seems that I am not alone in wanting to avoid the ‘hangman’s noose’ (aka The ICC) for our Tone! Please go and sign if you agree that he, like every other British citizen, deserves a fair hearing at this trial … I mean … Inquiry. Reports following “evidence” should NOT be twisted to “prove” what Blair did or didn’t know. Click the following link:

Ban-Blair-Baiting at the Iraq Inquiry and in reports following

---

---

Cherie wins Libel claim against the News of The World

Original Home Page

All Contents of Site – Index

Comment at end

10th August, 2009

I wrote about this the other day, but trustingly, as is my wont, I took The News of the Worlds’ minimalist statement of apology as the whole story, ambivalent as I thought it was. Cherie Blair had complained about the dreadful Carole Malone’s insulting article, the News of The World had retracted, sacked Ms Malone and apologised profusely, sort of, to Ms Blair-Booth. And that was that.

But, like the apology that wasn’t yesterday, it wasn’t “that”.

How silly of me.

The News of the World had actually LOST a libel action claimed against them by Cherie Booth-Blair

I wouldn’t expect the paper to howl about it, but they might have mentioned it, if only pour encourager …decourager les autres.

Evidence again of the half-truths, untruths and everything-but-the-whole-truth that our press like to sell us?

Well done, Cherie.

Now, who’s next up for some libel claims?

Probably not this lot, as insanity is a good defence.  But it could be this lot (Mail) or any or all of this lot (Guardian, Independent, Telegraph, Sky, BBC oh – and the Mail again.)

The Guardian’s report on the fall from grace of the News of the World follows below picture.

Cherie Blair: the criticisms were made following her appearance on a panel at a meeting attended by victims of crime. Photograph: Scott Barbour/Getty Images

By Mark Sweeney

News of the World settles Cherie Blair libel case

‘Cherie Blair has settled a libel action against the News of the World for an article that falsely accused her of having an “inhuman” attitude in a discussion about the victims of crime.

An article penned by News of the World columnist Carole Malone, which appeared on 5 October last year, contained a string of criticisms of Blair after she appeared as a panellist at a meeting attended by victims of crime.

The News of the World settled the libel claim made by Blair, printing an apology in yesterday’s edition of the tabloid and online accepting that Malone’s claims were “unfounded”, and paid unspecified damages and legal costs.

Malone’s column made a number of false claims, including that Blair had arrived with hordes of secuity men, only made the appearance at the event for publicity purposes and gave “inhuman” responses about the Human Rights Act when questioned in a panel discussion.

The News of the World apology stated: “In the Carole Malone column on 5 October, several criticisms were made of Cherie Blair after she appeared as a panellist at a fringe meeting attended by prominent victims of crime.

“In particular, it was not right to say Mrs Blair arrived with hordes of security men, only appeared for publicity and was “inhuman” in her responses about the Human Rights Act.

“We apologise to her for these assertions which we accept were unfounded.”

Graham Atkins, a partner at law firm Atkins Thomson, which represented Blair, said: “Mrs Blair is delighted with the settlement and that her reputation has been restored by taking this action. She will be paying the damages she received to her foundation.”

The law firm also pointed out that Blair has spent a “considerable period of time investigating and highlighting for public attention issues relating to crime in this country”. She was formerly the patron of Victim Support London.’

ENDS ARTICLE

RELATED

• Also reported here at Press Gazette
• PCC upholds compliants against News of World & Sunday Times on MPs’ expenses

---

---

Iraq, Aghanistan & Zimbabwe: wrongs & rights of invasion

Original Home Page

All Contents of Site – Index

Comment at end

10th August, 2009

IRAQ/AFGHANISTAN/ZIMBABWE – INVASION WRONG OR RIGHT?

DAILY MAIL GROUP-THINK IN THE ‘DEBATE’ V THE ‘BLAME GAME’

Imagine... life without Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe

At this “debate” article in the Mail – “Should Britain Invade Zimbabwe?” it’s intriguing if not surprising the angle many take.  Mail commenters seem to prefer disparaging comments;  in other words no debate. Just a clear position put with which they can obviously agree. Thus many of them are confused. They liked the dreamlike thought that Mugabe had been removed. But when Tony Blair’s name was mentioned it was perhaps not such a good idea after all.

You see, Mugabe – BAD, Blair – WORSE!

That’s Mail Group-Think for what passes as debate at that publication’s highly selective “moderated in advance” comment section.

The anti-Blair types were wrong about Iraq; they will be proved wrong about Afghanistan, even if it takes decades to prove it, and they are wrong about Blair.  As for Zimbabwe, and whether or not Britain should have acted to remove him decades ago, the jury is still out.

One thing the Group-Thinkers should note is that Blair did not say HE would remove Mugabe, but that ‘you’ should if you can.

What did Tony Blair actually say?

I think whoever has the possibility should topple Mugabe – the man has destroyed his country, many people have died unnecessarily because of him.’

He added: ‘If you can do, then you should do it. My idea of foreign policy is that if you can do something, you should do it.’

He couldn’t do it evidently when in power for all sorts of past colonial reasons and neither will Brown, ditto reasons. But the EU? Maybe. Just maybe. One day.

The first commenter at The Mail (always neatly selected by their “moderators” to slam home their point) says this:

“We have no right to invade Zimbabwe: Forget it.

We had no Right to Invade Afghanistan. Do not forget that.

We had no right to Invade Iraq. The liar must pay for that.

Why invade Zimbabwe? Womens rights again? like the tosh arguments for Afghanistan.”

The “liar” must pay…? Which liar?

There you see Mail Group Think writ as large as the word TRIAL at the Iraq war Inquest. The first chosen, carefully selected comment=The Mail’s political message.

“The LIAR must pay”.

Extraordinary nonsense.

Their understanding of the concept of “innocent until proved guilty” doesn’t fill me with admiration for their comprehension of the complexities of the law or of political decision-making.

To understand would be to take away from the “correctness” of their attacks on Blair, which presumably would have been just as vitriolic had a Tory leader taken the necessary decisions to invade Iraq and Afghanistan? And we know they would have.

NO? No attack on a Tory decision like this? You surprise me.

In a recent interview with the German magazine Stern, Blair wistfully confirmed that his neocolonial interventionist instincts had not been blunted by difficult operations in Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Clearly the only “neocolonialists” in Britain are or ever were from the political Left!

Hysterical, if it hadn’t been swallowed so willingly by the gullible; dangerous, since it has.

People, or to be more precise the Mail’s commenters, are into “blaming” far more than they are into “debating”. But you’d expect reasonably informed people to try to stand back from the blame game for a moment and look at the realities of political decision-making.  But no. For them their simplistic inclination is to rush to judgement on the ‘wrongs’ of western leaders (based on the lying press’s own conceptions of  “lies”). For instance, their commenters usually jump Pavlov’s-dog-like to excited attention at THIS:

“For his [Blair's] duplicity in the run-up to the Iraq invasion, lying about Weapons of Mass Destruction to justify war, means that his notion of moral interventionism has been so discredited that it can no longer be applied.”

So that’s the Butler Inquiry disparaged and discounted in one tale-telling swipe of bias and made-up minds. And just as a by the way, the “lying” Blair’s notion of moral interventionism smashed too.

Blair was actually right in his instinct to overturn tyrannical despots and regimes.

IRAQ?

The Iraq invasion was RIGHT. Now, despite being still under attack AGAIN by insurgents, Iraq is settling into an infant democracy. Iraq, as the second and newer Middle East democracy after Israel, even feels up to commenting in support of Americans:  Iraq asks Iran to release three lost American hikers.  If Iraq is now participating in this way in world affairs, that is a sure sign of progress.

And yet for Blair’s “lies” over Iraq he is still ‘on trial’. He should be receiving plaudits by right-minded people on any side of British politics.

AFGHANISTAN?

Tougher, and needing greater international commitment. But in the long-run, and it may be VERY long, we in Britain with noteable others can and will hold our heads up.

ZIMBABWE?

A missed opportunity? Perhaps. Some of the arguments against removing Mugabe are well rehearsed in this article – former colonialists, wider African reaction.

Clearly, Tony Blair, whatever he does or doesn’t do, is fated to be damned by the agenda of the Daily Mail.

RELATED

Ministers deny complicity in “torture”

---

---

Netanyahu: We will not evict any more Jewish settlers from occupied land

Original Home Page

All Contents of Site – Index

Comment at end

9th August, 2009

UPDATE: First Qassam rockets in almost a month fired from Gaza to Israel

NETANYAHU STANDS FIRM AGAINST EVICTING JEWISH SETTLERS

In what looks like a challenge to US President Obama and much of the international community the Israeli Prime Minister today vowed never to evict Jewish settlers from occupied Palestinian land.

It isn’t hard to see his rationale. Once Gaza had been handed over to the Palestinians by Israel it became a base for Hamas, the group still recognised by much of the international community as a “terror organisation.” There was a time when the words ‘Gaza Strip’ were synonymous with the high-life for western tourists, as are other parts of the Meditteranean today. Not any more, and not just since Israel’s bombing attacks in the closing days of  last year.

REPORT: (AFP) – 5 hours ago

JERUSALEM — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pledged on Sunday that he will never evict Jewish settlers from occupied Palestinian land as Israel did in 2005 in the Gaza Strip.

“The withdrawal from the Gaza Strip brought us neither peace nor security. The territory has become a base for the pro-Iranian Hamas movement and we will never make the same mistake again,” Netanyahu said at the weekly cabinet meeting.

“We will not evict any more people from their homes,” he added in comments carried by public radio.

In September 2005, the government of prime minister Ariel Sharon unilaterally removed all Jewish settlements from Gaza in a move aimed at ending Israel’s costly 38-year military presence in the Gaza Strip.

Sharon vowed to follow up that withdrawal with further pullbacks from the West Bank, but a massive stroke incapacitated him and his successor Ehud Olmert abandoned the policy in the wake of the June 2006 capture of an Israeli soldier by Gaza-based militants in a deadly cross-border raid.

An opinion poll published on Sunday showed Israeli Jews back Netanyahu’s stance against halting construction of settlements in occupied territory, with 66 percent endorsing his view that Israel has the right to build in east Jerusalem, which Palestinians want as the capital of their proposed state.

The survey of 512 people by Tel Aviv University’s BI Cohen Institute found that only 27 percent of Israeli Jews, mostly supporters of the leftwing Meretz and Labour parties, oppose Netanyahu?s position.

Netanyahu has risked a rift with Israel’s strongest ally, the United States, by refusing to heed Washington’s calls to freeze building of settlements, which the international community considers illegal.

Deputy Foreign Minister Dany Ayalon on Sunday rejected UN protests against last week’s expulsion of two Palestinian families from their homes in occupied east Jerusalem.

In a meeting with UN Middle East envoy Robert Serry, Ayalon told him the expulsion followed a decision in an Israeli court and that Israeli jurisdiction applied to the entire city, a senior diplomat told AFP.

On August 2 club-wielding Israeli riot police evicted two Palestinian families from their houses in Jerusalem’s Sheikh Jarrah district.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the European Union condemned the evictions, which followed an announcement by Israel that it planned to build Jewish homes in the Arab neighborhood.

Israel annexed the eastern part of the city in 1967 but Israeli sovereignty over the conquered territory has not been recognised internationally.

Around 200,000 Jewish people are estimated to have moved into the dozen or so Israeli settlements in east Jerusalem, home to 270,000 Palestinians.

Copyright © 2009 AFP. All rights reserved. More »

Meanwhile, Abbas’s Fatah has renewed its “right to resist” (Israel) charter for the first time since 1991. Hopeful, isn’t it?

Related articles

• MKs’ Sheikh Jarrah visit sparks clashes
  Jerusalem Post – 2 hours ago
• 66 Percent of Jews: Our Sovereignty in Jerusalem is Indisputable
  Arutz Sheva – 35 minutes ago
• Hamas delegation in Cairo to discuss unity talks
  PRESS TV – 18 hours ago

---

---