Archive for December, 2010

4 Weeping & A Funeral – A good week to bury politicians

December 4, 2010
  • Original Home Page – And another very early post from this blog
  • Current Latest Page
  • All Contents of Site – Index
  • Sign the Ban Blair-Baiting petition here
  • Comment at end

    4th December 2010

    Click to Buy Tony Blair’s ‘A Journey’

    TWO DAVIDS, A PHIL, A VINCE & A FUNERAL A NICK

    It certainly hasn’t been a lot of fun being one of the people’s people this week.

    David Chaytor, former MP for Bury North, was barred by Labour from ever standing again as a candidate. He stood down in May this year. He will be sentenced in January.

    DAVID CHAYTOR

    One of our politicians can go to bed tonight knowing he is now a convicted criminal.

    It’s what they call ‘justice’. I suppose The Telegraph is pleased with itself.

    Today, a Labour politician pleaded guilty to three expenses charges – totalling around £20,000, and could face seven years in jail.  I know I’m not reacting as most will to this news, and it certainly looks like he has been dishonest, but I feel sad about this. The possibility of a prison sentence will hang heavily on David Chaytor’s mind all over Christmas.

    OK, I admit I might be going soft.

    But it just doesn’t seem right to me when this Islamist inciter of jihad and hatred – Anjem Choudary – still roams free and is even given a Channel 4 TV slot to espouse his hatred of British democracy. And yet we lock up or at the very least criminalise a public servant who has NEVER incited violence towards anyone.

    PHIL WOOLAS

    After the High Court judgement Woolas said: "It is the end of the road - I am out."

    Another high-profile Labour politician has seen the inside of the High Court where he was appealing against an earlier decision on an election leaflet. He lost, and has now been banned from parliament and pronounced a liar. (Odd. I’m told that is compulsory!)

    Phil Woolas, former Labour minister has lost his appeal and has been banned for three years from standing for parliament for “lying” about his Liberal Democrat opponent in the May general election.

    Now, if you have had any experience whatsoever of the dirty tricks that Lib Dems use to win elections, this must be particularly galling.

    But worry not your little democracy-loving heads. This crowd – London Muslims – the equivalent of the other well-supported groups London Christians, London Jews and London Ba-Ba Black Sheepies – (what do you mean they don’t exist?) – will make sure Oldham has a real Labour candidate next time!

    England's £15million bid – spearheaded by David ­Cameron, Prince William and David Beckham – didn’t even get past the first round. It secured just two of the 22 votes by committee members of football’s world governing body Fifa in a secret ballot – one of which was cast by England’s own FA chairman Geoff Thompson.

    DAVID CAMERON

    And the smell of defeat.

    Another well-known politician is returning home not as a conquering hero like Tony Blair in 2005 (may he be remembered with eternal gratitude and deep affection as we sing at the 2012 Olympics – ‘OMG! WHAT DID WE DO?’ )

    Yesterday, the country’s present top-ranking Conservative, one David Cameron, one of the Three Lions, came back from England’s World Cup bid empty-handed. Worse than empty-handed. Knowing that only ONE vote of 22 available came England’s way (apart from their own). And that, despite it being widely agreed that England’s presentation was the best of the lot.

    DC had hoped to go down as TB Mark II after the Olympic Games Win in 2005.  Instead David Cameron has returned from Zürich licking his wounds, an impotent and puzzled “lion” after England’s failed World Cup bid.

    VINCE CABLE

    And yet another political entity, one who dances like a butterfly and stings like a bee, has been forced to search his conscience – sorry, search for a conscience on his OWN policy.

    Vince Cable has indicated he is minded to vote in favour of the tuition fees rise. Photograph: Sergei Karpukhin/Reuters

    The sainted Vince (Cable) – mayble he will, mayble he won’t  – has NOW said it’s “his duty” to vote for the tuition fee rise even if it is “difficult”.

    Well, it’d be even more difficult NOT to vote for the policy HE, as the Business Secretary, is responsible for.

    Nice one, Dave.

    LALA LAND, Vince?

    Of course some Liberal Democrats WILL abstain next Thursday in the vote, thus confusing us with Lib Dem consistency – a heady mixture of victorious sponge, mixed fruit cake and a dash of yummy rummy thrown in for the seasonal flavour.

    By the way, just so you realise there is no skullduggery in THIS honest, trustworthy, accountable, whiter than pale coalition, the vote that has the students yelling in anger will be held next Thursday. Thursdays are traditionally quiet days in the Commons. Many of the smaller parties don’t even bother to turn up. Well, it’s coming up to Christmas, shopping to do, trees to decorate, cakes to bake, snow-covered journeys to grapple with.

    And it’s a long way to Tipperary – sorry  – Northern Ireland, North Wales, Scotland.

    But it seems that some Lib Dems, like former leader Charles Kennedy,  are likely to vote against the Lib Dem/Conservative tuition fees policy. Hang on! What’s that I see? A flying principle? And a Scottish MP? From Scotland? A Scottish constituency? Where there is no such tuition fees rise? Isn’t that the kind of West Lothian question that they used to throw at the Labour party?

    Ahh, paler than white, the snowy Lib Dem heart, is it not?

    Oh the joys of coalition. The joys of government. The joys of decision-making. The bitter taste of unpopularity.

    Still, if you think this is a surfeit of bad news for the sweetie Lib Dems – hang on. It gets worse.

    MUCH worse.

    CONFERENCE POSTPONED. WRONG KIND OF SNOW STUDENTS ON OUR TRACK

    To cap it all, an entire political party has been bullied into submission by rampaging students idiots.

    The Liberal Democrats have called off their London conference tomorrow due to fears of violent students. (See – “Student protest threat forces Lib Dem meeting to cancel”)

    Protesters gather outside Kings Place in London and organise a mock hanging of Nick Clegg as he gives his Hugo Young Lecture in the building that is home to the Guardian. Even Tony Blair in his darkest days of Iraq war insurgency (from within his own party and some of the voters) never felt the need to cancel a party conference. Courage, mes braves!

    I really do feel sorry for these politicians, at a personal level. All of them, to some degree or other.

    But I feel angry that an idiot – a SCOTTISH idiot (and Scotland, I repeat, is NOT affected by these tuition fee rises in England) – yells this -  ‘Nick Clegg must die’. Listen to the video if you don’t believe me. These are anarchists, not democrats. Probably not even students.

    Politicians, you idiot, must not “die” for their political decisions. We vote them out.

    Next time, vote smarter.

    Back to top

    Click to Buy Tony Blair’s ‘A Journey’

    _______________

    Sign the Ban Blair-Baiting petition here

    Recent comments:

    “All countries need a leader who isn’t afraid to fight terrorism. I believe Mr. Blair did a necessary job in helping his allies. Are we all just supposed to lie down and wait for them to come for us, I don’t think so.”

    And - “Mr. Blair is one of the finest politicians to have had the privilege of serving the United Kingdom, and Britons are fortunate to have had him as their Prime Minister. Time will show that Mr. Blair’s approach to affairs in the Middle East were and remain correct. From a member of the Commonwealth, thank you, Mr. Blair, for your continued service to legitimate and lasting (and not convenient or politically expedient) freedom.”

    AND – “Tony Blair was the greatest Prime Minister since Winston Churchill and the only regret I have he didn’t get my vote as I live in Canada.”

    AND – “I am sick and tired of television and radio interviewers asking the same old questions over and over, regarding the decision to go to war in Iraq, presumably they hope Mr Blair will let slip some secret information which they would then use against him. History will show if the decision was the right one, (I believe it was) but people must accept that Tony Blair is an honourable man, and made his decision based on the known facts and not with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.”



    Free Hit Counter


    Analysis 2: Blair Vs Hitch & this earnest yet futile debate

    December 2, 2010
  • Original Home Page – And another very early post from this blog
  • Current Latest Page
  • All Contents of Site – Index
  • Sign the Ban Blair-Baiting petition here
  • Comment at end

    2nd December 2010

    Click to Buy Tony Blair’s ‘A Journey’

    Tweet me -

    THE MEN & ARGUMENTS AT THE CENTRE…

    … OF THIS SKEWED & FUTILE DEBATE

    I titled my previous post -“Blair/Hitchens debate (Ailing Atheist Vs Crucified Christian)” for a reason. The reason for that headline was to highlight the imbalance of the starting point for these two proponents of their corners of the religion good/bad debate. Tony Blair was not “crucified” even figuratively speaking on the night. Of course not. That job was done politically, years ago and is still, painfully, ongoing.

    But the effect of the groupthink which still pertains on politicians and perhaps particularly on Blair and his political decision on Iraq (even if semi-empathetic groupthink as in Toronto) was apparent to me when Blair said at around 4:20 into Video 3 -

    “So I know very well that you can point and quite rightly Christopher does to examples of where people have used religion to do things that are terrible. And that have made the world a worse place. But I ask you not to judge all people of religious faith by those people, any more than we would judge politics [pauses - audience laughter] by bad politicians. Or indeed journalists by bad journalists.”

    The audience guffaws seemed to imply – “bad politicians – like you, Tony?” (Of course the Canadians could have been thinking of their own politicians.) Their laughter was silenced with the next sentence when it was clear Blair was not referring to anyone there present. It goes without saying that he didn’t mean that Christopher Hitchens was a ‘bad journalist’, though perhaps his brother Peter, one arrogant and rotten journalist, imho.

    Let’s be blunt about this – Tony Blair has political baggage. The ‘evil’ baggage is mainly press-inspired. The good, like that of Caesar, has largely been interred – somewhere in the back of many minds.

    ASIDE: That, despite this new poll on the most successful government policy since 1980 (Source BBC):

    MOST SUCCESSFUL POLICIES SINCE 1980

    • 1. Minimum wage
    • 2. Devolution
    • 3. NI Peace process
    • 4. Privatisation
    • 5. Sure Start

    Did you notice that all but number 4 were Labour policies under Blair? And note too that Blair continued Thatcher’s privatisation policy. Numbers one and two were noisily not supported by the Conservative party. And the highly successful Sure Start project is under threat under the present Con/Dem government. Devolution is a done deal, and the Tories are fully onboard now. Now that they know it gives them a chance to re-establish themselves in certain parts of the country. The Northern Ireland peace process was completed by Tony Blair personally. Don’t let them tell you it was John Major or the late Mo Mowlam. They played their part. But like winning the 2010 Olympics in 2005, Blair’s leadership was essential. Perhaps Cameron should have asked the Winner/Master to help in the World Cup bid today in Zurich.

    My two/three observations on the debate:

    Why do I describe this debate as “skewed and futile”? And, would I have described it so if Tony Blair had won?

    To the level-headed, including Hitch, on the controversial issue of Iraq Tony Blair was largely right and even more right on other international issues. There is no doubt that many wanted to see Blair slammed into the ground in this debate, no matter their own religious interests or disinterests. They were fighting yesterday’s (lost) battles.

    My answer to my own thoughts on the ‘skewed’ question:  although necessary and a good exercise I conclude the Munk Debate on religion was skewed for these reasons:

    • Hitchens has spent his life damning religion. He started as a schoolboy and has become more convinced of his position ever since. He won’t stop criticising the concept of religion till the day he dies, which hopefully will be some years off. I am a great admirer of Hitch.
    • Blair found religion as a student at Oxford. He has spent most of his life in politics, not religion. He is not a scholar, yet, of religion.
    • Religion has not had a good press recently, viz abusive Catholic priests, Islamist fundamentalism.
    • It is grown-up these days, it seems, to be sceptical, especially of politics and religion. Blair falls into both categories. Two reasons, at least to be treated sceptically. A double whammy.

    And the debate was futile for this reason:

    It matters not one jot what the Toronto audience thought in the Munk Debate. The world is full to bursting with people who to some extent or other do believe in religion. It is estimated that 80% of the world’s population are ‘believers’. No two-handed debate between liberal-minded westerners in a western city will change that. Not in the short term, anyway.

    And if Blair had come out on top?

    I would still have felt it futile with regard to most of the world. If Blair had won despite the “skewed” effect of elements raged against him it would have been just as likely as that Russia [WikiLeaks - 'mafia'] and Qatar [no history of football] could have won the 2018/2022 World Cups!

    So, strange things happen in sport, religion and politics. (Not necessarily in that order.) Just as comparatively few outside Britain are all that bothered that England lost the 2018 World Cup today, few in the world have really noticed the Big Religion Debate.

    Perhaps because it fundamentally missed the point.

    To be continued …

    Also see Analysis 1 – Results of the Debate

    __________

    RELATED – REPORTS AND OPINIONS

    1. The Munk Debates site has sent round this report to those subscribed on the night.
    2. There is some audience reaction at Tony Blair’s Faith Foundation website
    3. BBC report & Video from Paul Adams
    4. The Canadian Globe & Mail reports
    5. Telegraph: “Tony Blair Defends Religious Faith”

    5. CHICKEN OR EGG?

    Which came first – the Huff or The San Francisco Chronicle ? It hardly matters. They are both singing from the same hymn sheet, as it were -

    ‘Former British prime minister Tony Blair said Friday his religious beliefs did not play a role in his decision to support the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq during a debate about the merits of religion in Toronto.’

    Again, it hardly matters, but it was The SF Chronicle.

    6. Paul Harris at The Guardian headlines with “Christopher Hitchens 1-0 Tony Blair”.

    While we cannot reasonably expect a return bout, at least Mr Harris does point this out:

    “Throughout the 90-minute debate Hitchens seemed to have the crowd’s sympathy. That might have been to do with his ill appearance due to cancer, but was far more likely to be down to the sharpness of his verbal barbs and the fact that 57% of the audience already agreed with his sceptical position according to a pre-debate poll, while just 22% agreed with Blair’s side. The rest were undecided.”

    He balances that by being the only British write-up on the debate pointing up this:

    “It even attracted a small but vocal knot of anti-Iraq war protestors accusing Blair of war crimes. Demonstrators unveiled placards that read “Arrest Blair” and “War criminals not welcome here”, proving that, as with the merits of religion, some arguments are unlikely to ever be settled with a single night’s debate.”

    Well, it IS the Guardian, after all. Don’t expect lack of agenda.

    Back to top

    Click to Buy Tony Blair’s ‘A Journey’

    _______________

    Sign the Ban Blair-Baiting petition here

    Recent comments:

    “All countries need a leader who isn’t afraid to fight terrorism. I believe Mr. Blair did a necessary job in helping his allies. Are we all just supposed to lie down and wait for them to come for us, I don’t think so.”

    And - “Mr. Blair is one of the finest politicians to have had the privilege of serving the United Kingdom, and Britons are fortunate to have had him as their Prime Minister. Time will show that Mr. Blair’s approach to affairs in the Middle East were and remain correct. From a member of the Commonwealth, thank you, Mr. Blair, for your continued service to legitimate and lasting (and not convenient or politically expedient) freedom.”

    AND – “Tony Blair was the greatest Prime Minister since Winston Churchill and the only regret I have he didn’t get my vote as I live in Canada.”

    AND – “I am sick and tired of television and radio interviewers asking the same old questions over and over, regarding the decision to go to war in Iraq, presumably they hope Mr Blair will let slip some secret information which they would then use against him. History will show if the decision was the right one, (I believe it was) but people must accept that Tony Blair is an honourable man, and made his decision based on the known facts and not with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.”



    Free Hit Counter

    Videos of Blair/Hitchens Religion debate (Ailing Atheist Vs Crucified Christian)

    December 1, 2010
  • Original Home Page – And another very early post from this blog
  • Current Latest Page
  • All Contents of Site – Index
  • Sign the Ban Blair-Baiting petition here
  • Comment at end

    1st December 2010

    Click to Buy Tony Blair’s ‘A Journey’

    IMG_3638

    Image by lars_o_matic via Flickr

    Yes I know I said I’d be writing more on my analysis of the speakers and their arguments, but you should see the videos first, or at least one of them, for the flavour. The debaters spoke for 90 minutes, and there are eight videos featuring their debate.

    Christopher Hitchens and Tony Blair – Munk Debates 2 (14:11)

    This is presently viewable at http://www.youtube.com/user/DailyHitchens22

    From there click the nine videos listed, starting with number two, since the first one is only an introduction to the event. As a paid-up subscriber for the Blair/Hitchens Munk Debate, I can view them all from the Munk Debates website. But their presence free on YouTube will likely be limited and/or intermittent due to copyright violations.  So, apologies if they are no longer viewable if you click through. [Video number 1 is an introduction by the founder of the Munk Debates]

    You can always read the transcripts here.

    SO DID HITCH ‘CRUCIFY’ BLAIR ?

    Not quite. Though it was near enough to be uncomfortable.

    Not quite Christopher Hitchens, not quite taking out Tony Blair

    Picture above thanks to Tim’s Wine Blog for “Hitchens – mitts off my wine”. Excerpt: Christopher Hitchens (portrayed with eerie accuracy above by excellent actor Ray Winstone) has some interesting things to say in Slate Magazine this week. He avers to a restaurant meal he was hosting where a waiter interrupted a conversation to re-fill wine glasses for the guests.’

    Right from the start of the debate it was clear why the physically but not mentally weakened Christopher Hitchens was likely to win in the end (regardless that he was in a leading position before the start) and why the physically fit Tony Blair was always likely to end up retiring hurt.

    Blair has history, good and to some, bad. Hitch has a following of argument addicts, and few dissenters as to his debating ability. He is arguably one of the best debaters of his generation. Blair is arguably one of the best politicians of his/theirs.

    But writers write, argue and opine. Politicians  – or rather politicians of any value, act. Thus the dissent.

    Hitch is hugely entertaining with an eloquence, turn of phrase and fascinating verbal dexterity which has the rest of us thesaurus scouring. Even the political communicator and wordsmith Mr Blair found it hard to match Mr Hitchens, so imbued was the latter’s spiel with the atheist historian’s assured certainties.

    Fundamentalist certainties, some might suggest.

    __________________________________

    ADDENDUM to this: Just spotted this -  “Tony Blair reflects on his debate with Christopher Hitchens”

    It echoes my thought also just published here on “atheist fundamentalism”. Not MY thought only. To be fair Mr Blair did allude to that in the debate.

    Excerpt. Blair says –

    “So in a sense the challenge for both people of all faiths and people of none is to create the circumstances in which those faiths can coexist peacefully in mutual tolerance and respect.

    In achieving this, the last thing secularism needs, is an attack on religion so extreme that it is almost a type of atheist fundamentalism. This, to be fair, Christopher avoided, at least in Toronto on Friday night!”

    The use of the exclamation mark at the end is Mr Blair’s, not mine. In other words, Mr Hitchens may not always be so generous/civilised/balanced/self-critical/thoughtful as to avoid a type of atheist fundamentalism.

    __________________________________

    Still, Hitch’s opening remarks (in the actual debate) were nothing less than damning, if politely so, laying down (faithfully) as they did all the reasons why not to have any faith in faith.

    When it comes to today’s all-knowing ‘liberal’ thinker, scepticism rules. OK? And in this sceptical, cynical world it is so much more ‘normal’ to sound all-knowing, especially about the unknowable.

    As I mentioned before this was not an even playing field, and not just because most of the audience were “anti” rather than “pro”.

    It was not an even playing field for several other reasons. More on those in a later post.

    __________

    RELATED

    Back to top

    Click to Buy Tony Blair’s ‘A Journey’

    _______________

    Sign the Ban Blair-Baiting petition here

    Recent comments:

    “All countries need a leader who isn’t afraid to fight terrorism. I believe Mr. Blair did a necessary job in helping his allies. Are we all just supposed to lie down and wait for them to come for us, I don’t think so.”

    And - “Mr. Blair is one of the finest politicians to have had the privilege of serving the United Kingdom, and Britons are fortunate to have had him as their Prime Minister. Time will show that Mr. Blair’s approach to affairs in the Middle East were and remain correct. From a member of the Commonwealth, thank you, Mr. Blair, for your continued service to legitimate and lasting (and not convenient or politically expedient) freedom.”

    AND – “Tony Blair was the greatest Prime Minister since Winston Churchill and the only regret I have he didn’t get my vote as I live in Canada.”

    AND – “I am sick and tired of television and radio interviewers asking the same old questions over and over, regarding the decision to go to war in Iraq, presumably they hope Mr Blair will let slip some secret information which they would then use against him. History will show if the decision was the right one, (I believe it was) but people must accept that Tony Blair is an honourable man, and made his decision based on the known facts and not with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.”



    Free Hit Counter



    Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 1,234 other followers