If Tony Blair looks ‘old and sick’ – I’m a Tory party member AND I’ll vote Lib Dem!

by
  • 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. “He’s not a war criminal. He’s not evil. He didn’t lie. He didn’t sell out Britain or commit treason. He wasn’t Bush’s poodle. He hasn’t got blood on his hands. The anti-war nutters must not be allowed to damage Blair’s reputation further. He was a great PM, a great statesman and a great leader.”
  • Comment at end

    1st May 2010

    SO THIS IS ‘OLD’ AND ‘SICK’?

    TONY BLAIR YESTERDAY IN HARROW, LONDON

    Before I get started – NO, he hasn’t got AIDS, nor a wasting disease, nor a terminal illness, nor a broken spirit damned by God (More where that came from.)

    Right, where was I?

    Some of the papers are having an over-excited song-and-dance about one of the photographs of Tony Blair taken at Harrow yesterday; this one (right).

    It was not the most flattering of the photographs taken, true.  So, naturally many of our evil opportunity-minded papers ran with it. In fact ALL the other pictures taken on that day were far better. I’ve used a few of them here. Sourced from DayLife, same place as the press, no doubt.

    If I thought some of our opportunist journalists and their repulsive commenters at The Telegraph were capable of answering anything honestly, I might ask:

    Have YOU never had a bad picture taken? One which caught you in a bad light? One that picked up your worst features, highlighted your shortcomings? Or are you all photogenic feasts for the eyes? Like the rest of us average individuals on the average British street?

    I’d also ask these obnoxious press analysts and their ugly commenters a supplementary question:

    Dug out a picture you don’t like yet? Did the awfulness of the one bad picture you might admit to actually mean anything seriously awful? Did it indicate that you were suddenly old before your time? Or that your evident weight loss meant you were suffering from AIDS with maybe a year or two left on this earth? Or did it mean that you were now being punished by the Almighty for your “evil doings”?

    I’d ask, if there was any point in it. There isn’t, when it comes to the deranged.

    Like pointing up Mr Blair’s money, his friends in high places, his kudos worldwide, his attraction as the Blair Brand, his top-of-the bill drawing power at speaking events, his not being a Tory, his being the most successful Labour leader ever, his being an unbeatable leader, their fuss has nothing to do with anything real.

    It’s all wrapped up in their self-justification for their irrational hatred of the man. For that, these people should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.

    THE TELEGRAPH SOUNDS BALANCED, UNTIL YOU READ ITS COMMENTERS

    Two articles at the Telegraph/ Torygraph, caught my eye. This article is useful for the video, so you know what he sounded and looked like.  But this one is even more interesting for the commenters – “Why does Tony Blair look so old and frail?”

    The Blair hating insanity is on display here for all to see.  He’s either sick or old, usually both, and being punished by God for his ‘sins’ thrown in for good righteous measure. Righteous ignorance is all over the British press. In fact it’s a requirement to work or comment on most of them.

    HE HAS LOST WEIGHT, I’LL GIVE THE HATERS THAT

    I too have wondered recently if Mr Blair with all his travels and various duties, has been eating enough. That’s between him, his weighing scales and his doctor.  MOST of us are overweight, not underweight.

    BUT WHAT IF HE IS ILL?

    I am sure he is perfectly fit and well, but let’s play a game of “what ifs”.

    I wonder if these critics ever wonder if their comments are in any way fair, right, empathetic or even balanced? They’re certainly not humane or considerate. What if he IS ill? What if he does lie awake at night reflecting, worrying, struggling with his conscience? What if he is suffering from some sort of breakdown resulting from their constant words of hate. The words that result in him and, to an extent, his family being unable to walk unaccompanied by security in their own land? What if he is even suffering from something terminal?

    These careless bastards wouldn’t answer such “what ifs”, except perhaps with a shrug, and a “well deserved”.

    But what if it had been a Tory prime minister who had taken us into Iraq, or had introduced laws the haters didn’t like, or had been running the country since 1997? Would they still hound him in this way? You know the answer.

    I’ve listed a few typical comments from the Telegraph just so you know the sort of people who might well be running our country – by the end of next week.

    CHOICE COMMENTS FROM CHOICE TELEGRAPH READERS

    WE KNOW YOU ARE GUILTY

    “Mr Blair, I arrest you for crimes against peace and being an accessory to the murder of Dr David Kelly.
    Please come with me to a police station where you will be fingerprinted, photographed and have your dna taken (and stored forever).
    You are not obliged to say anything because we know you are guilty.”

    They KNOW, you know.

    EARLY GRAVE

    “In fact if you don’t mind we’ll just enjoy the spectacle of watching Blair slide into an early grave. That will give us something to cheer about anyway.”

    Very pleasant.

    SOMETHING FATAL

    “Gratifying to see that Yo Liar! is ageing incrementally. Disappointing, though, to note that the recent orange hue of his complexion seems to have faded only to a shade of unhealthy yellow – I was hoping it might be something fatal.”

    And I’m sure he sends you his kind regards, too.

    FATAL “INJUSTICE”

    “Why?

    Guilt. Lots of it.

    And it would be absolute injustice, if he escapes justice with an early medical death.”

    For God’s sake! Grow up!

    AIDS?

    “Could he be in the early stages of AIDS?”

    Jesus wept.

    WASTING

    “I do not think I can possibly add to Velocity’s comprehensive characterisation of this perma-tanned little shit. Perhaps he will has some terminal wasting disease. Unlikely, life isn’t fair.”

    Clearly life is unfair. As when they handed out the braincells in your little incursion into existence.

    CYANIDE CAPSULE?

    “Too much sun.

    Not enough sleep.

    Too much looking over his shoulder and wondering if he’d be better off with a cyanide capsule than being had up as a war criminal.

    Wondering too if protecting BAE ‘in the national interest’ will backfire on him.”

    Keep taking the tablets, Mr Cyanide. You and your fellow Telegraph travellers.

    DEAD WITHIN 2 OR 3 YEARS?

    “He definitely doesn’t look well and has certainly degenerated rapidly in recent years. I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s dead within 2 or 3 years by the look of him.

    Good riddance. Thieving, lieing, deceitful, crooked, traitorous, ruinous scumbag! And that’s putting it mildly.”

    Oh, FGS!!!

    SIN?

    “The wages of sin?”

    Comes to all of us, even the rich and famous. We are, so they tell me, all sinners.

    UNDERLYING HEALTH PROBLEMS?

    “They say too much sun is seriously aging for the skin.

    I will not dwell on his sins/crimes that others are doing a good job on, but agree that the dramatic change suggests he has a serious underlying health problem, which he discovered 3 years ago hence his rapid departure, he didn’t need the stress of GB, PM duties, and project managing the whitewashing/deeply interring of all the skeletons he had in legions around and behind him.

    He really does deserve time in a cell, and cell mates, Mandelson, Campbell, Prentice and Brown. Now that would be justice, and next door, Straw, the sillibands, Harman, Balls and Malik.

    Next door to that lot, Smith, Beckett, Blears, Scotland and the authors wife.

    Overcrowding, yep, but then that is what they deliberately engineered for the prisons and others and the result would be true justice for the crimes against the country.”

    What *ollocks. This comment and ALL of the above Telegraph comments.

    What mean-spirited, nasty-minded, inhuman commenters hang out at The Telegraph. And folks, these are supposed to be the intellectually capable element of the press’s readership.

    Where do these idiots get all this junk? The drip-drip-drip of rumour, innuendo, lies and misrepresentations put about year in year out by THE PRESS, of course.  Destroying people’s reputations and thus destroying people seems to be the fallback position when they cannot be beaten through rational argument or at the polling booths.

    Click to go back to top

    Another video from Mr Blair’s Harrow visit here (Sorry about the ad at the start. It is the Daily Maul, via ITN)

    By the way, did you realise it was 13 years ago today – 1st May 1997 – when Labour swept all away in the first of their landslide victories.  Mr Blair looked like this, then. (Tony Blair, Wikipedia). No, I didn’t vote for them. I would now for sure, if…

    It’s hardly arguable that Tony Blair looked a lot younger in 1997. But it was 13 years ago. And though he was almost 44 he was at that time 10 years older than he actually looked.  What intrigues me is how dependent Labour was on him personally, and how much he was then valued.  His picture graced the cover of their manifesto.

    How does this compare to other manifestos, then and now?  Brown? Cameron? That deserves a separate post.

    I also wonder what he’ll be thinking and feeling at the next election? It happens to be on his birthday  – in 5 days time.

    Thursday, 6th MAY 2010

    Perhaps I should wish him a happy birthday NOW. Just in case he doesn’t get the result he wants on Thursday.


    More DayLife photos here – Just put in the name you are looking for to get the latest news pictures.




    Free Hit Counter


    Advertisements

    Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    35 Responses to “If Tony Blair looks ‘old and sick’ – I’m a Tory party member AND I’ll vote Lib Dem!”

    1. » If Tony Blair Looks ‘old and Sick’ I’m a Tory Party Member & I … Save Gas, Eat Beans! Says:

      […] As when they handed out the braincells in your little incursion into existence. CYANIDE CAPSULE? Too much sun. Not enough sleep. Too much looking over his shoulder and wondering if he’d be better off with a cyanide capsule than being …Continue Reading […]

    2. kate Says:

      Old or not, sick or not, there is a lot to question about his premiership. He has taken this country down a very slippery slope and it will take generations (if at all possible) to put the UK back on track. As to Kelly – we all (or nearly all) question how, if somebody is going to commit suicide, that they decide to walk something like 6 miles in order to do it. People like Blair have no conscience! Well he is loaded now and if he is indeed sick, which I seriously doubt, he certainly has the money to get help unlike a lot of the people in the UK. Our national health system if used by all comers and not for the people who have paid into it. Sadly nasty people rarely get their just desserts!

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        Go on Kate,

        Don’t keep us all in suspense. And don’t be shy. Which particular slippery slope are you referring to?

        As for Kelly, if you seriously think that Blair or any British politician had his hands on his death, you understand even less than I think you probably do.

        The NHS issues – well, yes, I think I know what you’re getting at here. So did Blair, thus he introduced PFI.

        Decades ago it was clear to many of us that with everyone expecting to make 100 these days it couldn’t go on as it was. Changes were started under Blair and will continue under whichever party takes over from Brown.

        And yes, TB is fighting fit.

        So there we are. We agree on a couple of things.

    3. kate Says:

      At least I post my REAL name whilst you hide behind some sort of forum. I am not shy – not at all. Facts are facts: 1997 Labour comes into power and are shown on tv with Prescott, Blair and someother equal idiot – though idiot is not really the case because they are conniving and lying. Interviewer says “well, you have inherited a very good economy” (ie from the Conservatives) just in case you don’t understand. Prescott, being his usual smarmy self says “have we?”. Everyone laughs. Well now we are 13 years on and not only the coffers are bare but we are borrowing money left right and centre. Shame on you for sending me an email telling me, in so many words, that I am an IDIOT. I pray for your children, your grandchildren and your great-grandchildren – the sins of the fathers are reaped upon their children and that is the way you are going. THAT dear Sir is the slippery slope that you are all on currently. If this country continues to attach itself to the EU then you can expect more of the same.

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        Frist of all, Kate, I didn’t actually say that you were an idiot. Just that I think you understand less than I think you probably do.

        Secondly, the reason that I use an alias is actually to protect my other half from embarrassment. Like a lot of couples we don’t agree all that much on politics. And when one of you is involved in a political party, well, it might be kinder for the other not to make too much of a fuss. So I’m acually being considerate here. Apart from that I used to be involved in another of the main parties myself once. And it wasn’t Labour.

        On the lying business you reel off so a-la Daily Mail Maul style – REALLY now.

        I’m kind of odd, I know, in that I think that most politicians are NOT liars and cheats. And I mean most polticians of all parties. I hav known a few and I am often impressed by how much work they try to fo for others, and by how high are their moral values and desire to do good.

        The fact that we may not agree with all of them on things – and I even differ with Blair on a few things, shouldn’t turn us into demented hate-mongers determined to show that the opposition are all liars and cheats. That’s the press’s job!

        But we are not all persuaded by the press’s various agendas, thank common sense. That’s democracy for you.

        Getting a little hyseterical now, aren’t we, Kate? The “sins of the fathers” etc?

        Btw, I don’t think Brown did it all right as chancellor. And of course, I don’t think he has done much right as PM. But I may be wrong. As may you be.

    4. kate Says:

      Plus your comment that “changes will continue under whichever party takes over from Brown” is very telling. That is how I see it too. Why? Because I believe Cameron has infiltrated the Labour party and the Labour party has infiltrated the Liberal Party. As for me? Well, like a lot of English people I shall probably exercise my right to leave the UK to its own business because I do not agree with it; do not like it and do not wish my grandchildren, in the future, have to put up with PPC and a lot of other things. I absolutely hate the EU – so I will not be going to European shores. BEST OF LUCK~!!!!

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        No-one has “infiltrated ” any other party, Kate. Though Blair moved them all onto his territory. And it is also true that Thatcher moved Blair’s New Labour onto hers.

        That’s the way things have gone since the social market model has been accepted and followed worldwide. The model which allowed us to have an increasingly valued, if expensive NHS AND London as the centre for financial services (under Labour, NOT the Tories.)

        It’s been several decades now, since “them and us” politics was started to be buried.

        Not that it’s completely dead yet, of course.

        I don’t hate the EU, though I have my questions. But I can see where you are coming from. Anyone for UKIP?

    5. kate Says:

      Statement slightly wrong. I believe that Cameron has infiltrated the Conservative party ie he is in fact LABOUR in sheeps clothing! Strange, is it not that Hague (the innocent) and Ian Duncan Smith who was branded as facist were unable to retain their positions are party leaders. When Cameron came along, Labour gave their ascent – are they ROYAL BLOOD? Hence your comment – I absolutely agree with you but I feel very sorry for the people of this country as a result.

      WHAT WE NEED IS A MARGARET THATCHER OR A WINSTON CHURCHILL AT THIS JUNCTURE. Note also that some crass Scot wrote on a blog for the Scotsman that he didn’t care who came to power as long as he got his giro – says it all really doesn’t it. Blair and his cohorts just want to prance on the world stage – HOPE THEY GET BITTEN EVENTUALLY.

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        You mean Blair Mark2 is really the genuine thing? He IS Mark2? See my thoughts on that in the previous response.

        It isn’t strange that IDS or Hague couldn’t retain the leadership of their party. They just didn’t have the telly appeal that Cameron (aka TB Mark2) had. That was ONE thing they lerned from TB. Sort of. The Tories couldn’t go on with unelectable leaders forever! Not if they wanted to WIN again. And anyway they agreed with Blair on much of what he was doing. And where they didn’t agree – for instance, on devolution – they do now. It was only devolved parliaments/assemblies which allowed them ANY representation in any form of government out of the town/city halls. Especially after being completely anihilated in 1997, losing every seat in Wales and Scotland.

        Labour gave their “assent” to Cameron? What are you reading, FGS?

        Why do we need a Thatcher or a Churchill, exactly? Do I sense another issue upon which we agree?

    6. kate Says:

      Well sins of the fathers – just tripped off the tongue so to speak. But if you believe they really care. What you don’t realise either is that I have been shoulder to shoulder with a lot of ministers over the last, say, 20 years and I know exactly what they are like. I’m afraid you can’t win me over on that one. I am anti-EU anyway and have good reason to be so. Lived in France have you – well I have? The French hate us but love us to be on board – I wonder why? Sadly, it would take more than a mere blog for me to express all my thoughts, experiences and now woes regarding the EU and the next election. Think this though! I was right in 1997 about the Labour party and I am sure to be right about the future of the UK. Someone is not doing a lot of thinking about how this will all affect us in the future and they are running things……

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        No, I haven’t lived in France, but I hear what you say.

        I didn’t vote Labour in any of its three wins, but now I think they were probably more right than wrong. Still have doubts, of course, on various issues. And that’s to be expected.

        Well it’s to be expected of those of us who DON’T see ourselves as the founts of all wisdom. Those who think they KNOW IT ALL should stand for parliament and try to change things, not moan about those who DO stand.

        Cue, Kate?

    7. kate Says:

      Hi Tony. How can you say that Labour was more right than wrong? I do not set myself up to be the font of all knowledge but I have more than some! However, I am not concerned about images whether it be sleek Blair, or posing Clegg or the upstart Cameron. Fact is the only party that has been in power recently has been Labour. I mean do people want eg: more immigration, more politically correct stuff, criminals not doing the time they should, EU controlling us vis a vis our laws? These are issues and people should be shouting them out but are not. By the way, during my time in France, I would often go back and forth ie Calais/Dover – Dover/Calais. Between 2000 and 2007 in particular night time border controls did not exist at all. No-one there – just drive through – where were the border police – they had gone night, night. So much for keeping immigration at acceptable levels. What level?? I am not MOANING about who is standing but merely that those who have STOOD have not been doing what they should be doing. Economy? Blair/Brown have no idea, either that or the EU are their masters? OVER TO YOU TONE!!!!! LOL

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        Good points, Kate. Btw, I’m not Tony. He did vote Labour in 1997 etc, as far as I know.

        But you and I do agree, perhaps surprisingly, on a lot of things.

        Immigration – yes, a major issue of concern. But NOT those from Eastern Europe, who are the only ones being mentioned by any of the parties right now. Imho, that kind of immigration is NOT the problem.

        PC stuff – yes. Absolutely agree with you. I am a proud non-PC-er these days.

        Criminals doing the time – yes, if we could build enough prisons, get tough on miscreants and firm up the law and the courts’ spines. But the liberal left – now much of Labour and most of the Lib Dems – control the “care in the community” agenda right now, via the Guardian/Independent etc. THAT’S a pity.

        Border controls were loosened up under the Tories. It is a leaky boat, as it were. Perhaps they think there is no option in reality. The responsibility of power. Right or wrong.

        Until, coincidentally, just after Blair left office Britain’s economy was flying high, and we benefited from it, despite some easily identifiable errors by Brown. After that, the American property collapse kicked in. I imagine many people saw this coming, since this country’s economy had been largely built on the domestic housing market since Thatcher gave us MIRAS. Not so easy to jump off a floating ship when there are no evident holes, AND when global links mean there is nowhere else to bale into.

        But of course YOU, hindsight or foresight will have and must have had all the answers, I’m sure.

        Is this where I place my cross of the illiterate for Kate?

    8. kate Says:

      Speaking of border controls, yes, I know they were ‘loosened’ but there is a huge difference between loosening them and leaving them absolutely wide open! As far as the economy is concerned, we were already in trouble even before Blair left except all one could find in the news were small snippets here and there but basically no-one wanted to emblazon the facts on the banners of newspapers! Wait until Gordon takes over no-doubt!

      “Between 1999 and 2002, Mr Brown ordered the sale of almost 400 tons of the gold reserves when the price was at a 20-year low. Since then, the price has more than quadrupled, meaning the decision cost taxpayers an estimated £7 billion, according to Mike Warburton of the accountants Grant Thornton”.

      December 12th 2005 (lost the name of the newspaper!). However, I copied part of the article as follows ““When the Chancellor inherited the economy from the Conservatives he was a very lucky Chancellor indeed and his fiscal policy was, initially, very sound,” says Ruth Lea, director of the Centre for Policy Studies. But that was then and this is now. Old Labour allegiances have crept to the fore and, concludes Lea, “under his stewardship economic and productivity growth have slowed, the balance of payments figures have worsened, private-sector employment growth has fallen, the fiscal situation has deteriorated and international competitiveness has fallen”.

      So just how bad are things? Here we look at a nine-point check list of economic ingredients to assess Gordon Brown’s performance as Chancellor. We’ve given him a score out of ten for each one. Our conclusion? History isn’t going to give him the same accolades that he gives himself. ”

      All this BEFORE Blair left as Prime Minister. Over to you….

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        Yes, Brown did sell off gold at the wrong time, true.

        I also know Ruth Lea’s political leanings.

        So I agree as we all do NOW, that this was a wrong move on his part. Hindsight is 20/20. We can imagine that he wouldn’t have sold them at that low if he’d known it was the lowest for 20 years. And don’t say he SHOULD have known. We all make educated guesses in any and every walk of life, but soothsaying is not a requirement in any. He may well have expected gold to drop lower still, given that we were then still in a bull maket, when historically gold decreases in value.

        My point on the collapse being just after TB left was not to imply that it collapsed because he was no longer there. But just to show that there had been TEN years when it had struggled by reasonably well. I think to discount that fact on the economy is frankly unfair and biased.

        The collapse may never have happened if the American mortgage market hadn’t gone. Hard to be sure, though, I concede.

    9. kate Says:

      Concerning immigration I agree, in part. Yes, of course, whilst we are in the EU it stands to reason that people within the EU will move around for work. The problem lies though with too many people coming from poorer countries from the EU creating even more unemployment with our own homegrown nationals. It is a sad fact that there are many of our own who cannot obtain work and I do not mean the giro accepting layabouts of the UK! Example: Man loses his job, looks for work but no vacancies and why: because a European has taken the job. I have no problem in allowing this type of movement if there is a skill required that we do not have in the UK. Here, again, we need more controls. If Gordon Brown were to read my blogs he’d probably denounce me as a BIGOT!!! LOL

      In France, it is almost IMPOSSIBLE for an Englishman to obtain work! Why? The French look after there own ie they must place a Frenchman for the job first and, in fact, they do not like employing foreigners unless it is low paid etc….

      Another very worrying aspect of all this, and I think you will agree, is Turkey – this is likely to happen no matter who is elected in our General Election – the main three WILL eventually give their consent, I’m fairly sure of it…

      Personally, I feel now that, yes, I would like to give UKIP a chance because they at least could make some very necessary changes but this country seems to be full of Coronation Street/Eastender viewers plus all the propaganda that those programmes dish out. My daughter who is at Uni currently thankfully does not watch them!!!!

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        I DO agree that we now have to look after our own. There was a time when our economic need was seen as increasing our reputation as the centre for finance. The world’s centre. We got there, and are still there, more or less.

        Different times demand different strategies and reactions.

        Turkey in the EU. A tough one. I can understand the geo-political reasons for its entry, but it is way off beam as far as having a truly secular government and aproach to TRUE freedom. When I was there last year I was surprised to find I couldn’t get interenet access to YouTube. So there is still a “let’s keep the natives subdued and ignorant” approach more suited to Iran and China than to an EU state.

    10. kate Says:

      We seem to be the only one’s blogging. I realise that you are my moderator!! LOL. However, as I am up rather late tonight, I might as well comment – hope you don’t become too bored!

      It is true that we were seen as the centre for finance but, as I understand it, things have changed and not so long ago. I read somewhere that our financial prominence had moved to Germany or France – can’t remember which?? As to Turkey, again from what I have read, particularly vis a vis Libdems ie that if they were elected that would welcome them?

      Re my earlier comment about finances. Let me play Devil’s Advocate here. Can you imagine if Thatcher, for example, had been the one to have dealt with our finances the way Gordon did, it would have been daily news for months and years on end. Frankly, I think Gordon escaped lightly. As far as our Gold is concerned, this is something which one can’t second guess and, frankly, there was no good reason for selling it. Why was he selling it? To shore up our slowly depleting finances?? If you then tell me that it was due to Gold being unnecessary for a country’s economy, I can’t accept that. Further Pensions – what about those? I’ll deal with America tomorrow – far too tired now plus I may end up losing the plot…. SNZZZZZZ.

      By the way, what is it that you do apart from mediate this particular blog – just curious.

    Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

    WordPress.com Logo

    You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

    Google+ photo

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

    Connecting to %s