From CBC News: “In fact, earlier this year, well before Polanski’s arrest in Switzerland, she (the victim, Samantha Geimer) filed a formal appeal to the Los Angeles prosecutor’s office asking for the charges to be dropped. A few years ago, she sued the filmmaker and received an undisclosed settlement.”
Comment at end
30th September, 2009
WHAT GHOSTLY INTEREST DO POLANSKI, HARRIS, FREARS & CO SHARE?
Stephen Frears – he of the “chop off (Blair’s) head and stick it on a spear” infamy (see here), has spoken out in support of Roman Polanski, following the latter’s arrest in Switzerland for his conviction for the admitted rape of a child over 30 years ago.
Yes, you read it right.
A film director (Frears) is supporting another film director (Polanski) who admitted abusing a child and is a convicted, fugitive rapist.
This Frears – a one-man horror show – is the film director who wants summary justice meted out to our former prime minister. No trial of course, before the death penalty. Just an everyday beheading and a display of the bloody consequences in the public square. Despite there being no capital punishment in Britain or Europe even for convicted criminals, Frears’ hope is for Tony Blair to get his ‘just’ desserts.
But for Polanski – ah, well, that’s different.
It surely is. VERY different.
Frears and his luvvie likes have long been free in the freedom-loving west to incite the murder of a politician or of any individual they happen to dislike. I consider that a weakness in our freedom of expression laws. With a film like this many half-sane and gullible individuals could interpret it as a free pass to do as they see fit, and “right wrongs”. Try the same trick in many of the Middle Eastern countries they constantly claim to represent and these artistes would part company with their heads in no time.
But when it comes to supporting a convicted child-molesting criminal who happens to be one of them, well, PURLE-E-E-E-ASE!
Let’s not complicate things by bringing morals and justice into this.
It’s suddenly all about artistic freedom.
What a load of self-serving codswallop!!!!
‘GHOST’ WRITER ROBERT HARRIS & FRIENDS
Yet the frightful Frears is not the only values-vacant fool supporting Polanski.
Described as “bizarre” here there are dozens of other arty types leaping to Polanski’s defence. Aren’t these the same people, on the whole, who see political decisions with which they disagree as hanging offences?
MICHAEL MANSFIELD, QC
[Aside: And today, Barrister to the Left, Michael Mansfield QC argued on Radio 4's "Today" (listen here, 6 mins) that Polanski should be released. Mansfield said, "There's a distinction to be drawn between extremely serious crimes, of the kind that might be genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity ... and I think one has to consider how best to deploy resources ... at the moment the resources are best devolved towards investigating and solving crimes ... in Guinea, in Gaza ... which are so horrific that they need to be dealt with now. The Polanski case is a very different one ... he pleaded guilty, there was supposed to be a deal ... but where the victim herself is saying enough is enough ... this is the point where we do say as she does let's put our resources elsewhere. Prosecutors should be allowed to make discretionary decisions."]
Would Mansfield say the same if the accused fugitive were Tony Blair? No way. Never. Not ever. Even if Blair were in his 70s. “Justice” would be Mansfield’s middle name.
Robert Harris, who says he is “shocked and stunned” by Roman Polanski’s arrest, possesses a lively imagination. Harris’s interest? His book, ‘The Ghost’ is his attempt to destroy the reputation of Tony Blair. It is also the basis of Polanski’s present unfinished work.
The novel is clearly part of Harris’s personal bitter animus towards Mr Blair, and part of his money-making ambitions on the back of others’ political abilities. All very palatable to the gullible, just desperate to swallow it all unquestioningly as they part with their pennies.
And, some might say, useful stuff to hit the airwaves just as the Iraq war Inquiry gets underway.
This movie, like ‘The Trial of Tony Blair’, is designed to satisfy and strengthen the mind-wandering delusions of conspiracy theorists everywhere to the point of their even greater delusion and worse, the muddying and distortion of the real truth.
‘The Ghost’ ends with the once highly popular British prime minister being blown to smithereens by the father of a soldier killed in an ‘illegal’ war. But before the unfortunate former PM meets his untimely but obviously deserved end, he discovers that his wife of 30 years has been double-crossing both him and Britain and has been a long-time American secret agent.
A kind of double shattering.
Ooops! Sorry. Have I inadvertently let slip the ending?
Didn’t spoil it for you, did I?
Never mind. That means you can avoid spending your money on watching this cra… carping insult to living people.
I’M NOT INTO CONSPIRACIES, BUT I DO HOPE THE STALLING OF ‘THE GHOST’ IS ONE
It’s purely co-incidental, of course, that Roman Polanski is the director and Robert Harris the writer of the book upon which the film “The Ghost” is based. And purely tough luck that Roman Polanski’s arrest in Switzerland has left his latest film in limbo. More here
Roman Polanski’s wife has asked a host of film stars to join her fight to prevent the director being extradited to America. The 76-year-old Oscar-winner – who fled the US to France in 1978 after being convicted of unlawful sex with a minor – was arrested on Saturday in Zurich, Switzerland, and faces being sent back to the US so his actress wife Emanuelle Seigner has begun compiling a petition calling for his release.
Emmanuelle … is hoping A-list stars and important figures in the film industry will sign the sign the petition.
“Emmanuelle is outraged. She is rallying friends and colleagues from many years in the film industry.”
British director Stephen Frears ….and writer Robert Harris have already spoken out in support and Emmanuelle is convinced more stars will show their support.
In 1977, Roman pleaded guilty to charges of having underage sex with 13-year-old Samantha Gailey, now known as Samantha Geimer. He believed he would face a jail term of just 42 days, and claimed a judge had reneged on a plea bargain deal to reduce the charges from rape and serious sexual assault if he admitted under-age sex.
Polanski – director of a host of acclaimed movies, including 1968′s ‘Rosemary’s Baby’ – plied Samantha with alcohol and sedatives while photographing her for a magazine shoot at actor Jack Nicholson’s Hollywood home. Nicholson was not present at the time of the incident. Read more here
‘France’s Society of Film Directors joined in the chorus of disapproval, voicing concern that the arrest “could have disastrous consequences for freedom of expression across the world”.
Polish film-makers called on their government to prevent a “judicial lynching”, while more than 100 Swiss artists and intellectuals have signed a separate petition demanding Polanski’s release.’
A “judicial lynching”? As opposed to the unjudicial one they wish for Blair?
No, not the present leader. Don’t worry, you haven’t missed it. I meant the REAL leader.
At the Labour party conference this week all eyes and much analysis will be awaiting the speech from the leader (Gordon Brown, in case you’ve forgotten.) Here, a propos nothing much, apart from significance, follows analysis of the last speech to conference (2006) of the man who should still be leading Labour AND this country – Tony Blair, or as Julie describes him here – “the golden boy”.
This Tony Blair speech was three years ago! How time flies when you’re enjoying yourself.
Most notable to ME is that of all Blair’s noted popular comments this one came out second from top, with a 24.16 secs ovation.
“New Labour would never have happened … without Gordon Brown” 24.16
So that clearly touched a chord with the assembled faithful.
But which one topped it?
“If we can’t take this lot [the Tories] apart … we shouldn’t be in the business of politics” 29.55
Quite, Mr Party Leader.
Other high scoring Blair excerpts:
“Darfur … showing an African life is worth as much as a western one” 21.18
“The next election … will be about who has the … judgment … and we do” 20.94
“The only legacy that matters to me: a fourth term election victory” 20.36
“They will forgive a wrong decision but they won’t forgive not deciding” 19.78
“There’s only one tradition I ever hated – losing” 17.90
“At least she’s [Cherie] not going to run off with the bloke next door” 17.30
“Advancing peace between Israel and Palestine” 17.16
And Blair’s last words to conference:
“So: it’s up to you. You take my advice. You don’t take it. Your choice. Whatever you do, I’m always with you. Head and heart.
You’ve given me all I have ever achieved, and all that we’ve achieved, together, for the country. Next year I won’t be making this speech. But, in the years to come, wherever I am, whatever I do. I’m with you. Wishing you well. Wanting you to win. You’re the future now. So make the most of it.”
Standing ovation:7 minutes 15 seconds
Total speech time (including applause): 58 minutes, 9 seconds
Clapometer stats by Simon Rogers
Rogers also notes that Blair used “thank/thanks” 13 times, which was 13 times more than Brown had used it in his speech the day before. And whose speech do we recall? I forgot Brown’s as soon as he’d finished.
Now THAT’S significant!
But the major significance to this Blair Supporter is that as always Blair managed to put his finger on the points which mattered, as well as adding his own touch of light humour so defusing an otherwise tricky situation. From praising Brown, the heir-apparent, to stating that Labour CAN defeat the Tories; from invoking the power of ‘judgement’ and ‘decision-making’ to hating ‘losing’; from empathy with the oppressed to helping with the Israel/Palestinian issues, Blair as always pressed all the right buttons.
I wonder how many of the right buttons Brown can even identify in his big platform occasion later this week?
It’s your choice. This is my advice. Take it or leave it, Blair tells party
The key extracts from the prime minister’s speech in Manchester yesterday
Thank-you. Thank you the Labour party for giving me the extraordinary privilege of leading you these past 12 years … thank you to my family, to the children, to Cherie. I mean, at least I don’t have to worry about her running off with the bloke next door …
There has been a lot of talk of lies and truths these past few weeks. In no relationship at the top of any walk of life is it always easy, least of all in politics which matters so much and which is conducted in such a piercing spotlight. But I know New Labour would never have happened and three election victories would never have been secured without Gordon Brown. He is a remarkable man, a remarkable servant to this country – and that is the truth.
Achievements
In 1994 I stood before you for the first time and shared with you the country’s anger at crumbling school buildings, patients languishing, sometimes dying in pain, waiting for operations, of crime doubled, of homes repossessed, of pensioners living in poverty; and I told you of our dismay at four election defeats and how it was not us who should feel betrayed but the British people.
That such a speech seems so dated today is not through the passage of time but through progress …
We have had the longest period of sustained economic growth in British history. Mortgage repossession, like mass unemployment, are terms we have to be reminded of. The last NHS winter crisis was six years ago. Heart patients wait on average less than three months. Cancer deaths are down by 43,000 …
We have black ministers and the first woman and then the first black woman leader of the lords. Not enough women MPs but twice what there were. A London mayor, thankfully Labour again. Devolution in Scotland and Wales.
But not just this. Free museum entry that has seen a 50% rise in visitors. Banning things that should never have been allowed: handguns; cosmetic testing on animals; fur farming; blacklisting of trade unionists and from summer next year, smoking in public places.
And allowing things that should never have been banned: the right to roam; the right to request flexible working; civil partnerships for gay people.
And in 2012 it is London that will host the Olympic Games. Take a step back and be proud: this is the changed country.
Above all, it is progressive politics which define its politics. That’s the real result of a third term victory. And the Tories have to pretend they love it …
Don’t lose heart from that; take heart from it. New Labour is aspiration and compassion reconciled.
We reach out not just to those in poverty or need but those who are doing well but want to do better; those on their way up, ambitious for themselves and their families. These are our people too. Not to be tolerated for electoral reasons, but embraced out of political conviction.
The core vote of this party is not the heartlands, the inner city, not any sectional interest or lobby. Our core vote is the country. And it was they who made us change.
The challenges ahead
In 1997 the challenges we faced were essentially British. Today they are essentially global. The world today is a vast reservoir of potential opportunity. New jobs in environmental technology, the creative industries, financial services. Cheap goods and travel. The internet. Extraordinary advances in science and technology…
We used to feel we could shut our front door on the problems and conflicts of the wider world. Not any more … some want a fortress Britain – job protection, pull up the drawbridge, get out of international engagement. Others see no option but to submit to global forces and let the strongest survive.
Our answer is very clear. It is, once again, to help people through a changing world by using collective power to advance opportunity and provide security for all. Over the past 10 years Britain has invested more in our public services than any comparable nation in the world. From near the bottom in Europe to the average in a decade.
Three hundred thousand more workers, treble the money, 25% more pay in real terms and the largest ever hospital programme; that is an NHS being rebuilt not privatised.
Refurbishing or rebuilding every secondary school in the country. Ninety-two thousand more classroom assistants, 36,000 more teachers, pay also up 17% in real terms. This isn’t about privatising state education; it’s about producing the best schools results ever.
But what happens? Expectations rise. People want power in their own hands.
Two-thirds of the country has access to the internet … the Google generation has moved beyond the idea of 9 to 5, closed on weekends and bank holidays. Today’s technology is profoundly empowering.
Of course public services are different. Their values are different. Today people won’t accept a service handed down from on high. They want to shape it to their needs, and the reality of their lives. My advice: at the next election, the issue will not only be, who is trusted to invest in our public services, vital though that will be. It will be who comes first. And our answer has to be: the patient; the parent.
Security, human rights and foreign policy
I don’t want to live in a police state, or a Big Brother society or put any of our essential freedoms in jeopardy. But because our idea of liberty is not keeping pace with change in reality, those freedoms are in jeopardy … we can only protect liberty by making it relevant to the modern world. That is why identity cards using biometric technology are not a breach of our basic rights, they are an essential part of responding to the reality of modern migration and protecting us against identity fraud …
In the next parliamentary session, the centrepiece will be John Reid’s immigration and law and order reforms. I ask people of all parties to support them. Let liberty at last stand up for the law-abiding citizens in this country.
The new anxiety is the global struggle against terrorism without mercy or limit. This is a struggle that will last a generation and more. But this I believe passionately: we will not win until we shake ourselves free of the wretched capitulation to the propaganda of the enemy, that somehow we are the ones responsible …
If we retreat now, hand Iraq over to al-Qaida and sectarian death squads and Afghanistan back to al-Qaida and the Taliban, we won’t be safer; we will be committing a craven act of surrender that will put our future security in the deepest peril …
From now until I leave office I will dedicate myself, with the same commitment I have given to Northern Ireland , to advancing peace between Israel and Palestine. I may not succeed. But I will try because peace in the Middle East is a defeat for terrorism.
We must never again let Lebanon become the battleground for a conflict that neither Israeli or Lebanese people wanted, though it was they who paid the price for it. Peace in Lebanon is a defeat for terrorism. Action in Africa is a defeat for terrorism.
What is happening now in the Sudan cannot stand. If this were in the continent of Europe we would act. Showing an African life is worth as much as a western one – that would help defeat terrorism too.
Yes it’s hard sometimes to be America’s strongest ally. Yes, Europe can be a political headache for a proud sovereign nation like Britain. But believe me there are no half-hearted allies of America today and no semi-detached partners in Europe.
The Tories
The British people will, sometimes, forgive a wrong decision. They won’t forgive not deciding. They know the choices are hard …
There are no third-term popular governments. Don’t ignore the polls but don’t be paralysed by them either …
There’s no rule that says the Tories have got to come back. David Cameron’s Tories? My advice: get after them …
Built to last? They haven’t even laid the foundation stone. If we can’t take this lot apart in the next few years we shouldn’t be in the business of politics at all.
Farewell
The truth is, you can’t go on forever. That’s why it is right that this is my last conference as leader. Of course it is hard to let go but it is also right to let go – for the country and for you, the party.
Over the coming months, I will take through the changes I have worked on so hard these past years. And I will try to help build a unified party with a strong platform for the only legacy that has ever mattered to me – a fourth term election victory that allows us to keep changing Britain for the better …
They say I hate the party, and its traditions. I don’t. I love this party. There’s only one tradition I ever hated: losing …
I don’t want to be the Labour leader who won three successive elections. I want to be the first Labour leader to win three successive elections.
So: it’s up to you. You take my advice. You don’t take it. Your choice. Whatever you do, I’m always with you. Head and heart.
You’ve given me all I have ever achieved, and all that we’ve achieved, together, for the country. Next year I won’t be making this speech. But, in the years to come, wherever I am, whatever I do. I’m with you. Wishing you well. Wanting you to win. You’re the future now. So make the most of it.
Buzzwords
The word “thank” or “thanks” came up 13 times – 13 times more than it passed Gordon Brown’s lips on Monday. There were name-checks for John Prescott, Dennis Skinner, former union leader Rodney Bickerstaffe, Harold Wilson, Google, Gordon Brown, Big Brother, David Cameron, John Burton (Mr Blair’s agent) and sacked ministers Janet Anderson, George Howarth and Mike Hall.
Sedgefield, Manchester, Liverpool, Darlington, Birmingham, Knowsley and Lewisham were mentioned too.
The clapometer: How the conference reacted to key points of the speech
· John Prescott 12.24 seconds
· “At least she’s [Cherie] not going to run off with the bloke next door” 17.30
· “Not enough women MPs but twice what there were” 11.41
· “Smoking in public places banned” 9.41
· “Civil partnerships for gay people” 7.21
· “In 2012 it is London that will host the Olympic games” 9.5
· “Our core vote is the country” 13.56
· “Gossip and controversy [not so] important [as] real news” 10.53
· “The only legacy that matters to me: a fourth term election victory” 20.36
· “New Labour would never have happened … without Gordon Brown” 24.16
· “Relinking state pensions to earnings” 8.70
· Nuclear power: “Without it we are going to face an energy crisis” 6.01
· Stem cell research: “We welcome it here” 12.2
· “Custodians of our public service for the next generation” 11.83
· “When a crime goes unpunished, that is a breach of the victim’s liberties and human rights” 12.02
· “Identity cards … are an essential part of responding to the reality of modern migration” 10.74
· “Let liberty at last stand up for the law-abiding citizen in this country” 12.23
· “This is a war fought by extremists who pervert … Islam” 14.6
· Withdrawal from Iraq: “A craven act of surrender” 11.44
· “Our troops … the bravest that any nation could hope for” 12.24
· “Advancing peace between Israel and Palestine” 17.16
· “Darfur … showing an African life is worth as much as a western one” 21.18
· “Nothing we strive for … can be solved without America or without Europe” 9.58
· “They will forgive a wrong decision but they won’t forgive not deciding” 19.78
· “They will lose faith in us only if first we lose faith in ourselves” 13.93
· “If we can’t take this lot [the Tories] apart … we shouldn’t be in the business of politics” 29.55
· “The next election … will be about who has the … judgment … and we do” 20.94
· “There’s only one tradition I ever hated – losing” 17.90
· “You’re the future now, so make the most of it” Standing ovation:7 minutes 15 seconds
Total speech time (including applause): 58 minutes, 9 seconds
Simon Rogers
RELATED
1. A sensible article, from Tory, Bruce Anderson on Labour’s future and our desperate need of good and honest government
“Tony Blair was often and unfairly accused of subservience to George Bush, whose “Yo, Blair!” greeting was interpreted as a humiliation, when it was no more than Mr Bush’s habit of addressing good friends as if they had both known one other since they were 12 years old.Mr Blair was not Mr Bush’s poodle.The canine humiliation came in Pittsburgh, where Mr Brown behaved like a neglected lap-dog, trying every pathetic trick he could think of to please his owner. In the end, the PM was given a patronising dog-biscuit of a meeting, but what a cringe-making episode. Is our great country reduced to this? As this lamentable Premiership staggers on to its eagerly-awaited end, we can only hope that there are no more trips abroad.
[...]
But Tony Blair is the problem as well as the solution. It is as if he had been an organ that had been transplanted in a controversial operation, and has now, at last, been rejected. Yet the patient thinks that he is feeling healthier, which is odd, given that the organ involved was electoral success. It may take years before the Labour party is able to think dispassionately about the Blair legacy. Yet one thing is clear. If Labour is to survive as the second party, old Labour will have to be expunged.”
By the way, I reminded some of Bruce Anderson’s commenters here that “Yo, Blair!” was NOT uttered by Bush. It was “Yeah, Blair”. Evidence? Watch from around 18 secs here.
“Yo Blair!” – he NEVER said it
And a propos nothing much again, note how little coverage Blair’s proposal at the end of this video got, struck off in its prime, as it were, like the speaker. He suggested an “international force …”
So, whatever became of the rest of the international community’s sense of responsibility? Nothing, as often before. Blair, as often before, made the RIGHT suggestion.
‘The packed conference in Brighton erupts in regular bursts of sustained applause as Labour’s leader warns his party to back him or risk consignment to the political wilderness. The hall throbs with excitement. The delegates scent success.
No, I’ve not lost the plot. And I’m certainly not gazing into my crystal ball at Gordon Brown’s speech today.
The truth is, as I was sitting through a session with Gordon Brown and Harriet Harman at the weekend – so dull the conference hall was half empty – I found my mind drifting back to the birth of New Labour in 1994 in the same, considerably more animated room.
I can still see the youthful Tony Blair striding to the podium and carrying the brotherhood with his passionate call to abolish Clause IV, an archaic part of Labour’s constitution which committed the party to nationalising GB plc. Mr Brown, then shadow chancellor, and John Prescott, the deputy leader, were the first to their feet to lead the standing ovation.’
‘But in private there is an overwhelming sense of doom. “It’s catastrophic,” a former Cabinet minister says. “If we lose the election we’ll be out of power for a generation.” Another claims: “Labour really could be finished as a force in British politics.”
In this country Labour is wobbling as it becomes increasingly financially dependent on the trade unions and its support base shrinks to a core vote. After more than a decade in power, the coalition of working and middle-class voters that swept it to victory in 1997 is fracturing. “We’ve lost the middle classes,” says a Downing Street aide, “and we know we’ve got to win them back.”
Today Mr Brown will make his pitch to Middle England with a promise to do more to tackle antisocial behaviour — part of the Blair agenda that he deliberately sidelined when he first moved into No 10. He is focusing on what he recently called the “squeezed middle” because he knows that the aspirational voters who supported Tony Blair have turned away from him. But the phrase he has chosen is telling: Gordon is interested in the middle classes only if he thinks they are “squeezed” — and therefore joining the ranks of the poor who have concerned him most for all his life. These voters want to feel loved when they are comfortable too. And as they see their taxes rise, as they battle with a schools system that puts equality above excellence, as they find themselves compared to paedophiles if they drive a group of children to a swimming class, they feel increasingly that Labour disapproves of them.
Somehow the Government has also managed to alienate the hard-working families it claims to represent, from the dinner lady fired for reporting bullies to the policewomen who cannot babysit for each other’s child unless they join a childminders register.
If Labour returns to “class war” against David Cameron, as some are suggesting, that impression will be further reinforced.
A No 10 aide admits that Mr Brown does not have the natural empathy with the middle classes that Mr Blair did. “The moment Tony sent his son to the Oratory those voters thought — ‘he gets it’,” he says. “Gordon wouldn’t understand that. He knows that he has to reassure Middle England but he’s not part of it.”
A minister once told me that Mr Brown doesn’t understand the “conservatory-building classes” — in fact, Brownites insist, the Prime Minister has a conservatory attached to his Scottish home. But he didn’t build it and it is filled from floor to ceiling with books. When Mr Blair spoke of the many, not the few he meant the middle classes; when Mr Brown used the same phrase he was referring to the poor.’
I don’t imagine that it was by order of BHO, but I DO expect that he puts a stop to it – RIGHT NOW!
Schools and the malleable minds of young children are not suitable material for this atrocious brainwashing. It is reminiscent of a period of national condition that we Europeans, at least, will and should never forget.
Whoever is the president/prime minister/leader of ANY country it is NO business of any school to sing in praise of any transient politician.
I am including only the first videos of the speeches of both these men here. You can click through to the YouTube sites to see the rest.
Full Netanyahu UN Speech Part 1 of 4
Nothing to add.
Benjamin Netanyahu says it all.
Touted as the “FULL speech” by an Ahmadinejad supporter at YouTube this is presumably the best we get from the leader of the Islamic Republic in his UN speech. So, being fair-minded, I’ll post it all here:
Ahmadinejad: The FULL Speech to the UN conference 2/4
“Racism is the symbol of ignorance.”
As usual this holocaust denier describes the west as “racists”.
Hysterical! Madness!
Can you imagine Iran presently electing a caucasion as president? No chance.
Adam Boulton and the usual “sources close to…” have been busy recently.
It is said that Mandelson is “despairing” over Gordon, and that Blair has paraphrased Mandelson by describing Brown as “a quitter not a fighter”. So nothing unexpected there, then.
With notably sharp timing, Sky TV journalist Adam Boulton has just published ‘Tony’s Ten Years’.
So my question to Mr Boulton?
Who took this picture of Tony Blair, and when?
EXHAUSTED? DESPAIRING? DEPRESSED?
Probably. Possibly many times.
So why does this picture matter?
Pictures paint a thousand words as we all know. Somehow I don’t think this is a Blair posed effort. And yes I DO realise we are talking about the greatest “actor” on a world stage crammed with canny political actors. But Boulton’s cover picture of an exhausted, despairing or at the very best deep in thought Tony Blair seems to convey its own message. Even his hands seem to have given up the fight.
When was it taken? Presumably within the last two years of Blair’s time as PM, 2005-2007. WHY does he look so down-hearted? This is not the familiar, smiling, never-say-die PM we had all grown to love or even hate.
Michael Cockerell used the same picture in his BBC2 documentary on Blair to illustrate the time leading up to a crucial vote in the Commons. On that occasion Blair did NOT KNOW if Brown and his cohorts were backing him, right up until the votes were counted. In the end the government scraped through with only 5 votes. Three votes less and Blair could have been forced to resign.
Blair was despairing MAINLY, imho, because the back-stabbing of the “courageous” Brown for all of his time as PM, was relentless and weakening. Better if either of them had had the courage and/or backing to finally dispatch the other far sooner.
So Boulton’s message may be in his picture as much as in his book’s contents.
Just as the Labour Party is about to meet and ponder over Gordon’s TWO years the book will no doubt sell at the Labour party conference next week.
It’s time the activists understood a few things. I don’t recall them dwelling much on Tony’s Ten Years in their 2007 conference. That was a baleful omission. Airbrushing Blair from Labour’ s history was an injustice too far for me. An attempt to give Brown a clean sheet? An attempt to gloss over Blair’s “mistakes” as though it had nothing to do with the rest of them?
Their lack of grateful thanks, political nous, even graciousness towards their missing, deposed leader at that 2007 conference was despicable. As Gordon revelled in the faithful’s undeserved and soon to be disappointed worship, the very fact that he was able to revel AND airbrush Blair was unforgivable.
Gordon Brown and airbrushing and even replacing Blair were WRONG decisions. It was never going to work for Labour, and never will work.
Apart from that it was all WRONG. Now the Labour party may have many years to mull over just how wrong.
You’ve given me all I have ever achieved, and all that we’ve achieved, together, for the country.
Next year I won’t be making this speech.
But, in the years to come, wherever I am, whatever I do.
I’m with you.
Wishing you well.
Wanting you to win.
You’re the future now.
Make the most of it.
So now we have the future.
It’s hardly surprising that Blair “resigned in episodes”. He was hoping that someone would find the strategy and tactics to step up to the mark and change the ending. Instead, we have ‘courageous’ Brown “leading” the country, as Blair speaks to many worldwide about ‘leadership’.
But will Brown REALLY leave before the election for health reasons to avoid humiliation? Well, not NOW he won’t.
Tony Blair and Peter Mandelson have given up hope of Gordon Brown winning the General Election and believe he may throw in the towel to avoid humiliation by David Cameron, it was revealed last night.
The damning verdict on the Prime Minister by his two most prominent Labour colleagues came as a new book disclosed that Mr Blair has branded Mr Brown a ‘quitter not a fighter’.
The Mail on Sunday has been told that Business Secretary Lord Mandelson is ‘in despair’ at Mr Brown’s failure to get a grip of events which have led to a growing conviction in Mr Blair’s inner circle that a Conservative victory is almost inevitable.
A well-placed source said: ‘Peter genuinely thought he could turn things round for Gordon but it is proving to be much harder than he imagined. Tony was deeply sceptical about Gordon taking over all along and thinks he is a disaster.’
The book by Sky News political editor Adam Boulton, who is married to Mr Blair’s former Downing Street ‘gatekeeper’ Anji Hunter, says Mr Blair has a near contemptuous view of his successor’s ability to bounce back.
It says Mr Blair believes Mr Brown may find an excuse to ‘duck out’ of the Election – which must take place by next June – possibly on health grounds.
It also suggests that Lord Mandelson is merely ‘propping up’ Mr Brown to make sure the EU’s Lisbon Treaty is approved next month and that, as a result, his friend and ally Mr Blair becomes the EU’s first all-powerful President.
Mr Boulton, one of the most influential political commentators in Britain, says that although Mr Blair is still in regular contact with Mr Brown, he has always regarded him as weak.
Witheringly, Mr Boulton’s book, Tony’s Ten Years, reveals: ‘In private, Mr Blair commented to several friends that history showed Mr Brown to be a quitter, not a fighter (to reverse Peter Mandelson’s 2001 election-night description of himself).’
When Lord Mandelson held his Hartlepool seat after he was forced to quit the Cabinet, he declared: ‘I’m a fighter not a quitter.’
Mr Boulton lists all the occasions that Brown had backed down, leading Mr Blair to believe he lacks the stomach for a fight.
He states: ‘In 1983, Mr Brown had arrived in Parliament at the same time as Mr Blair because he had rejected repeated invitations to challenge an incumbent in a Scottish constituency. In 1994, he ducked out of contesting the leadership with Mr Blair.
‘In 2007, he and his lieutenants launched a reign of terror to make sure there was no leadership contest.
‘So, even before the ministerial resignations of last June, Mr Blair and his circle wondered: could Mr Brown duck out again –on sickness grounds, say, or to take up a big public job elsewhere – to avoid a potentially ugly reckoning with the voters?’
And since June, when, aided by Lord Mandelson, Mr Brown survived an abortive attempt by Labour enemies to force him out, both Mr Blair and Lord Mandelson are increasingly doubtful of the likelihood of him surviving to polling day as Labour leader.
There have also been rumours that Mr Brown could leave No10 for a job in academia or at a leading economic institution.
In stark contrast to Mr Brown’s demise, Mr Boulton says Mr Blair is as ambitious as ever and determined to become the first President of the EU, a post which will be created by Christmas if the final obstacle to the Lisbon Treaty – next month’s Irish referendum – results in a yes vote.
Mr Boulton says: ‘By propping up Mr Brown, Lord Mandelson has delayed the Election – and quite possibly facilitated the ratification of the treaty. This will doubtless endear him to EU leaders, who in turn might look all the more favourably on choosing Mr Blair as their president.’
4. Lauren Booth’s 8 year-old daughter to cycle across “Palestine”. And they want Tony to comment on this abuse of his niece? What about her stupid mother? Assuming the poor child survives, she will understand her mother’s politics, but NOT her uncle’s.
Nothing like brainwashing them young.
5. New poll: Brown “not trusted” on economy, Cameron “liked”.
It’s lovely, isn’t it? You release a convicted prisoner on “compassionate grounds”, which automatically means that his appeal is dropped.
Except that it isn’t.
There’s always the internet – that well-trodden path of “truth”. So the poor guy, in his dying days, can play his appeal out for all to read even after he has shuffled off this mortal coil.
We can all have the benefit. The benefit of HIS side of the argument, anyway. Uncontestable, of course, since the legal authorities in Scotland will not argue this “case” online.
A win-win for Megrahi.
The convicted, recently released Lockerbie bomber is clearly still out to clear his name.
I wonder if that’s what the Scottish government expected when they released him on “compassionate grounds”.
His argument is that he was wrongly convicted. Nothing else, yet, it seems. He is unlikely to talk about any hand in this from his government’s side. But, hey-ho, the conspiracy theorists will have a field day. They will likely be at it in tomorrow’s Sundays.
What, they will ask … what use is a good ol’ conspiracy if the “victim” doesn’t comply fully? Even to the end?
Mr Megrahi won’t be around to watch the proverbial hit the fan if an expensive and possibly explosive analysis of his case ever proves that he was right.
But Libya’s Gaddafi will be; he’s ALWAYS around.
I can’t help wondering what the Colonel is thinking of Megrahi’s revelations at his new website. And what the Scottish government is thinking as regards their ‘compassionate’ decision. Presumably they just expected him to lie down and die.
Or did they?
Conspiracy, thy name is the internet … complex.
MEGRAHI ON THE WMD (Weapon of Mass Deception), aka The Internet
Terrorists tried it in Britain too in 2005. But this time they bombed London two months after the election, which Blair’s party had already won. They either expected him to lose, and were so irritated when he won for the third time that they attacked and killed over 50 people in London. Or they intended to attacked anyway, as a cute little welcome for the new governent.
Tony Blair was elected for a third time despite us being warned not to vote for him and his party. And despite his being so deeply involved in the Iraq war.
Appease them and you lose. There’s only one answer – FIGHT THEM in every way you can.
Acording to my contacts in Germany there is NO chance that any anti-Afghanistan deployment party will win in their general election in a few days time.
Sept. 18 (Bloomberg) — An al-Qaeda spokesman warned Germans that if they don’t vote to change their government in the Sept. 27 national election, there will be a “bad awakening,” according to the U.S.-based IntelCenter.
On the almost 26-minute video, Abu Talha, also known as Bekay Harrach, spoke in German and told Muslims to avoid vital services for two weeks following the election and for Muslim youth to let al-Qaeda act first if jihad is declared in Germany, the Alexandria, Virginia-based IntelCenter said in an e-mailed report.
Ben Venzke, a spokesman for IntelCenter, which monitors extremist Web sites, didn’t immediately return a telephone message seeking comment.
Germany’s involvement with the war in Afghanistan has become a political issue after a German commander ordered a NATO air strike that may have killed civilians. Two tanker trucks seized by Taliban militants were targeted in the Sept. 4 strike, killing scores of people in an area where International Security Assistance Force troops are under German command.
German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s main challenger in the election, wants to create the conditions for an international troop withdrawal from Afghanistan within four years, his spokesman said this week.
10-Point Plan
Aides to Steinmeier, a Social Democrat, have drafted 10 points for a possible pullout accord with the Afghan government, a Foreign Ministry spokesman, Jens Ploetner, told reporters in Berlin on Sept. 14.
Polls show a majority of voters oppose German military involvement in Afghanistan. The country has about 4,000 troops in Afghanistan as of July 23, according to the ISAF Web site. They are among the total of about 64,500 international troops in the country.
Merkel’s Christian Democrats and the Free Democrats, her preferred ally after the election, dropped to a combined 49 percent support in an FG Wahlen poll for ZDF television today. The Social Democrats, Merkel’s current coalition partner and main election rival, rose 2 points to 25 percent.
In a videotaped message released in January, a group linked to al-Qaeda threatened attacks on Germany’s military mission in Afghanistan.
Thirty-three Germans were killed in Afghanistan from March 2002 through June 23, 2009, and five of the deaths occurred this year, according to iCasualties.org, which tracks military deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq.
In Deutschland ist die Ablehnung des Bundeswehreinsatzes in Afghanistan trotz des umstrittenen Luftschlags mit vielen Toten bei Kundus geringer geworden. (……) Im Auftrag der ARD-„Tagesthemen“ sprachen sich zwar 57 Prozent der Befragten für einen möglichst schnellen Abzug der Bundeswehr aus. Dies waren aber zwölf Punkte weniger als im Juli. Umgekehrt wuchs die Zahl der Befürworter des Einsatzes am Hindukusch um zehn Punkte auf 37 Prozent. Die Befragung fand in dieser Woche statt und damit nach der von einem Bundeswehroffizier angeordneten Bombardierung von zweier Tanklaster, bei dem auch Zivilsten getötet wurden.
Translation -
In Germany, the rejection for the deployment of Bundeswehr troops in Afghanistan has decreased, despite the controversial and deadly airstrike near Kundus. When asked by the The ARD-Tagesthemen (equivalent of the BBC news), 57% voters favoured a quick withdrawal of the Bundeswehr. That’s 12% less than in July. On the contrary, the number of people in support of the mission on the Hindukush increased by 10% up to 37%. This poll was carried out this week, namely after the bombing of two tanker trucks, ordered by a Bundeswehroffizier (one rank below a general), where civilians were killed,too.
These are two interesting graphics (graphic 1)
On the left you see the PROS, on the right the CONS
It starts with the general approval: (plus 10) 37% pro/ (minus 12) 57% against
Now the parties:
Greens
CDU/CSU (comparable to the Tories)
FDP (Liberals)
SPD (comparable to Labour, but rather left)
Linke (ULTRA Lefties; almost communism, imho)
Now let us look at the poll again without the votes of the Linke (nobody takes them seriously, because they are ” intellectually compromised”)
If we add the votes of the Greens/CDU/CSU/FDP/SPD the outcome is
PRO 43%
Cons 51.5 %
Now that’s the second graphic which is also helpful because it shows the development.
The red line is PRO withdrawal
The blue PRO continuity
RELATED
Ahmadinejad is condemned by Germany, USA, Britain & France as he repeats his holocaust denial.If he lived in Germany he would be charged for this crime. Not that he’d be punished as his religion insists – under Sharia Law. More’s the pity.
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
