Part 3: “Grotesque”. Despots and Druggies with Royal “relationships” at William’s wedding


Comment at end

Or –

28th April 2011

Previous posts on the Royal Wedding



The Daily Mail is finally on my wavelength.  For the last few days The Mail has been increasingly outraged about the failure to invite Tony Blair and Gordon Brown to William and Catherine’s wedding while a number of questionable characters or ambassadors from despotic regimes have had the compliment of an invitation.  If the Palace had not been stupid enough to fail to invite the two previous Prime Ministers there might have been little said or done about these questionables. But, despite squeals of “non-political” event the Palace and the Foreign Office and David Cameron have made it so by their combined naivety.

The Mail’s campaign seems to have been partially, but only partially successful. The Foreign Secretary has now uninvited the Syrian ambassador in light of current murderous rampages against citizens in Syria. So that’s one gone. The room for Blair & Brown is increasing. Can we lose the Bahraini, or the Zimbabwean, or the Iranian ambassador by the end of the day? All three and Cherie Blair and Sarah Brown could pop along too.

Aside: [See – Sharp rise in Iran executions]

Here are some of the characters The Mail has been watching:


The Syrian ambassador Sami Khiyami received his invitation to the wedding a month ago. It has today been withdrawn.

Who is the man in the picture above? He is the ambassador for Syria. Yes, THAT Syria. This man was called to  the Foreign Office on Tuesday evening regarding his country’s vicious attacks on its citizens. And after the ticking off the wedding invitation still stood. Until today when William Hague saw the light.  UNBELIEVABLE!

You might ask – “William Hague?” So why didn’t the Foreign Secretary, if he had this sort of say, suggest Blair & Brown as invitees at an earlier stage in planning? Indeed. You might well ask.

Now, since the whole event has been politicised by excluding Blair & Brown, what about UNINVITING the Bahraini ambassador, the Iranian ambassador, the North Korean ambassador, the Zimbabwean ambassador and  envoys from other hard-line regimes including Saudi Arabia, Oman, Swaziland, Kuwait, Qatar, Brunei and Abu Dhabi?


Read more at The Mail:
Syrian ambassador meets the Queen on an earlier occasion

Syrian ambassador meets the Queen on an earlier occasion

Also at The Mail:  Labour MPs said the attendance of Dr Sami Khiyami – while former prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown have been excluded – ‘bordered on the grotesque’.

The Syrian government has been warned it faces war crimes prosecutions and last night ordered in more tanks to crush an uprising said to have cost the lives of 400 peaceful protesters.

The presence of its ambassador at Westminster Abbey tomorrow has further stoked the anger of Labour MPs, already at loggerheads with palace aides over their decision to exclude Mr Blair and Mr Brown.

There are protests that seven more royal ‘tyrants’ or their envoys from around the world are on the guest list despite records of repression and torture.

Read more – Syria’s despots invited, but not our former PMs


Who is he? Only the bride’s Uncle Gary!

Exclusive Pictures. 25/04/11. Gary Goldsmith, the controversial uncle of Kate Middleton getting a pre wedding fake tan near his Marylebone, North London home this morning. It has been confirmed that he has been invited to Kate and William's wedding this week. The self-made millionnaire has had many reported drug problems and been a huge embarrassment to the Middletons and the Royal family. He was also sporting the word 'Wills' on his T-shirt, an 'Aubin and Wills' designed T-shirt. He spent less than 15 minutes in the Electric Beach Tan Centre before heading home via his local Waitrose supermarket. Noble Draper Pictures. **BYLINE: NOBLE/DRAPER**



More here on the black sheep of Catherine Middleton’s family who, nonetheless – he’s family y’know – deserved a place at her wedding far more than either of the country’s previous two prime ministers.

Also see – “Riffraff at the Royal Wedding  but no Tony Blair”


Mugabe's ambassador to Britain, Gabriel Machinga, will be at the Royal wedding. So far he has not been 'uninvited'.

See  – Mail:  “I’m no Tony Blair fan but this is an insult to democracy”

Also – reported at ‘Zimbabwe Situation’

‘Tony Blair and Gordon Brown will not be among the  1,900 invited  dignitaries filling the Westminster Abbey in London, but Gabriel Machinga will be at the wedding of  Prince  William and Kate Middleton.

“It is not merely unclear but mind-boggling that  Messrs Blair and  Brown should have had to yield to men such as Gabriel  Machinga,  Zimbabwean Ambassador to London, a loyal servant of President Robert  Mugabe’s murderous and kleptomaniac regime,” fumed Daily Mail columnist  Stephen  Glover.

Glover said  it was “highly regrettable” that Blair and Brown had  been overlooked while  “some pretty unsavoury foreign leaders, as well  as some rackety private  individuals” got invites.

Newspaper  reports are highly critical of invitations extended to  King Mswati III of  Swaziland, Salman bin Hamad al-Khalifa, the Crown  Prince of Bahrain and Saudi  Arabia’s Prince Mohamed bin Nawaf bin  Abdulaziz and Princess Fadwa bint Khalid.  The Bahrain Crown Prince has,  however, declined the invite to escape controversy while  Libya’s  ambassador had his invitation rescinded.

In a news  report, The Independent newspaper said: “Despite Zimbabwe   having withdrawn from the Commonwealth in 2003, and Robert Mugabe being  subject  to a travel ban and sanctions, Zimbabwe’s ambassador to  London, Gabriel  Machinga, remains on the guest list because the two  countries retain ‘normal’  relations.”’

The Zimbabwe Vigil has written a letter of complaint about Mugabe’s ambassador’s invitation to the wedding


Just in case you forgot – THESE TWO MAN HAVE NOT BEEN INVITED.

Former British prime ministers Tony Blair (R) and Gordon Brown chat before the arrival of Pope Benedict at Westminster Hall in London September 17, 2010. REUTERS/Christopher Furlong/POOL (BRITAIN - Tags: POLITICS RELIGION)

And they scrub up quite well, and don’t exactly look like they’re likely to cause any trouble.

Mail quote:

“What conceivable reason could there be for not inviting these former democratic leaders to a wedding which, though not an official state occasion, bears an awfully close relationship to one in its size as well as its splendour?”

Read more


Toby Young suggests that Prince William himself would have decided not to invite Blair. Brown’s lack of invitation was, presumably an obvious, unfortunate side-effect. If so, the Prince has lost my respect. Mr Young suggests too that the Prince may come to regret this decision.

So far nothing has persuaded me that the exclusion was other than Prince Charles’ doing, for this reason (as I wrote about here with video, the other day) –

Tony Blair delivers his ‘people’s princess’ speech (Photo: PA)

In my humble opinion, and who knows what they were discussing at this event just before Blair left office, the facial expressions here are telling.

Related News Items
Blair’s punishment for the fox-hunting ban? Something he regretted, and something hunters get round.

Tony Blair and Gordon Brown royal wedding ‘snub’ row BBC News
Snubbed Cherie ‘will watch wedding on TV’ – although Guy will go (but who actually … The Daily Mail
Royals reject claims Blair and Brown snubbed by not making the guest list Irish Times
A butcher, barman and estate agent: But no room for Blair and Brown on the … The Daily Mail
Royal couple face rogue’s gallery of despots in Abbey’s front row The Independent

According to a poll here at The Spectator, Blair’s and Brown’s lack of invitation is supported. Different results from my poll, but it just goes to show how narrow is public perception and understanding of the complexities of this issue. And how far The Mail has to go in its campaign of understanding why Blair & Brown, love them or loathe them should have ben invited. It also show the success of the press campaign against both these former prime ministers. Way to go to undo the damage, The Mail. As to the question regarding the response if Mr Sami Khiyami name’s had been included, I imagine he would have received a positive view. The likely response? – “Who? OK, he’ll do.”


Last thoughts on the reason for not inviting Blair & Brown.

Someone has just suggested to me that their exclusion may be an appeasement towards Muslims, especially since the  ‘Muslims Against Crusades’ group were going to demonstrate until they called it off the other day. If that is so it is very worrying. But then we are expecting the “Defender of All Faiths” to inherit the throne from his mother.


Meanwhile Mr Blair has said this morning that his lack of invitation it “not an issue”.

Back to top

Click to Buy Tony Blair’s ‘A Journey’


Sign the Ban Blair-Baiting petition here

Recent comments:

I am staggered by all the hate directed towards our former Prime Minister. I believe that Tony Blair made the Iraq decision in good faith and is most certainly NOT a war criminal. If anyone should be tried at the Hague it should be those in the media for totally misrepresenting the information and facts. The media are to blame for fuelling this hatred as it is purely driven by them. (UK)
The greatest and most successful leader the Labour Party has ever had with the courage to fight the Islamist terrorists who really would like to kill us all, and you never hear a good word about him. The herd of independent minds, commentators, activists etc who have never had to make a difficult decision in their lives drown out all debate with their inane chants of war crimes and blood on his hands. Defend him at every chance. I just wish more people would do it. (Glasgow, UK)
Blair was the greatest Labour Prime Minister. It is a disgrace that the party has turned away from his legacy. Shame on Ed Miliband and his so-called ‘new generation’.


Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

21 Responses to “Part 3: “Grotesque”. Despots and Druggies with Royal “relationships” at William’s wedding”

  1. Lévay Atilla Says:

    The above sentence could also apply to Mr. Blair’s four hour visit to Budapest on the 17th of February 2006 giving a blanq cheque type of support to the illegitimate Goverment of Ferenc Gyurcsany less than two months before General Elections were due to be held in Hungary.

  2. Promote your stuff Says:

    […] Part 3: “Grotesque”. Despots and Druggies with Royal … […]

  3. Peter Reynolds Says:

    I have to say that it is appallingly rude not to have invited Tone, I was rather looking forward to bumping into him at tomorrow’s shindig .

    As for the other, miserable incompetent, I think it is a most appropriate and well-judged snub.

    Shall I see you at the Abbey in the morning?

  4. BIBA42 Says:

    Blair/Brown tantrums demonstrated by the media makes matters even worse. All well and good us categorizing others as “despots”, killers of innocent civilians, demonising other leaders, by urging them to stand trial for their crimes, when YOU BLAIR together with your buddy Bush created a genocide in Iraq then Afghanistan with over 1 million deaths the majority civilians including children.

    It is you who should stand trial for your crimes. Unfortunately, you have manipulated your way through all this to suit you and your favoured friends. YOU and your likes are the ones who have created a terrorist network worldwide, to warn you and your likes that you could be targeted at any moment.

    Perhaps, this time will come, but meanwhile, I do not envy your vulnerable position, at any price.

    • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

      @ BIBA42 –

      Changing the subject I see – as is to be expected of those of you with myopia. This is not about the Iraq war, with which it is generally agreed the royal family supported – Prince Harry even served there, and William wanted to but was prevented for obvious resons.

      You seem to have no undertanding AT ALL that whether or not Britain had gone into Iraq with the USA and others people would still have died. Blair did not commit a crime, dullard. (excuse me but I am running our of patience with this regurgitated nonsense.) It was a democratically taken political decision. Saddam was the war criminal, but YOU did not notice! Or you did not care then. For 10 years Saddam ignored the UN’s mandates, whilst killing his own people. If we had acted on him when we should have thousands might have been saved. Instead we allowed him and various insurgency groupings to grow and THEY, yes, THEY caused the after-invasion carnage in Iraq.

      There was a terrorist network worldwide LONG before the Iraq war. You, my innocent, did not know, notice or care. It was NOT, repeat NOT created by Tony Blair.

      As for Blair’s vulnerable position – the price of principle.

      Please note – verifiable facts are required before commenting here. This isn’t an opinion place for those who wrongly believe that Tony Blair is a criminal, of any sort. You can go to the Guardian or the so-called Independent for that.

    • Peter Reynolds Says:

      I have to say BIBA42, though I am far from an uncritical supporter of Blair and I think Bush was the worse US president ever, your gibberish is just absurd.

      You totally destroy any validity in your position by your quite ridiculous suggestion that Blair/Bush created genocide in Iraq or an internatinal terrorist network. I would be ready to agree with you that there have been grave errors of judgement that have backfired on the West but with a numpty like you spouting ignorant, ludicriously inaccurate nonsense, well thank God you’re obviously far too stupid ever to have any influence on world events.

      Where do you get the idea that your preposterious opinion has any value, relevance or worth to anyone?

      Crawl back under a stone, do some reading, educate yourself before you make such an embarrassing public display again!

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        Well said, Peter. Trouble is this kind of view is widespread among those who think they “know”.

        How are you anyway, my ol’ mate? I’m working on a post or three, to publish later. Me and my re-found semi-republicanism! With grateful thanks to their gracious highnesses.

  5. BIBA42 Says:

    @keeptonyblairforpm: Blickered as you seem to be. all this is inter-related. If you read my comment, you would have realised that this whole issue relates to your adorable Blair (who does no wrong, and the sun shines through his ****. I do wonder what you really know of IRAQ, Have you ever been there, whilst Saddam was in power!! Have you seen the transformation achieved from a dependent state to a fully self-sufficient one, have you had the opportunity to talk to people, the education standards, health standards, unemployment, etc etc etc… If you really want to seriously comment as a learned person, I suggest you jump off the Blair wagon and do some research. Listening to media info. has been demonstrated to be nothing but barainwashing propaganda used for decades to favour opinion polls.

    Yes, Blair did make his issue when he went on a crusade following his newly formed friend G.W.Bush. If your statement above as to a democratically taken a decission to go to Iraq, then I suggest once again you read the transcripts of his confession…

    Finally, calling me a dullard just proves your inability to remove your blinkers, and I therefore suggest you crawl back into Blair’s backside for protection.

    Sad that we still have some knowalls who believe the rubbish that is being dished out by a few.

    As you have the priviledge to delete this from your own blog, I shall make sure it is spread thru the rest of the WWW.

    P.S. You can rest assured that this issue will haunt Blair for the rest of his natural life.


    • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

      NONE of this relates to Tony Balir’s non-invitation to the wedding. Not one bit of it.

      I really do wonder what YOU know about Iraq. How often did you visit that country when Saddam was killing tens of thousands? Have you seen the transformation there TODAY since the invasion? Have you read the polls where most people are supportive of the invasion to rid them of Saddam, despite the ensuing deaths? The ensuing deaths caused mostly by jihadists, local insurgents and Iranians/Syrians/Saudi Arabians?

      Listening to media brainwashing would have us all believe that Blair is as bad as Saddam. That’s likely your position. Yet I seem unable to recall Blair killing his own people.

      If you really think that under Saddam things were better in Iraq you might benefit from a brain transplant.

      Er… which confession? You can add links here to back up your opining. Or would that be asking you to do some unwanted homework?

      It was no ‘crusade’ from Blair’s point of view, although I concede that Bush used this word.

      Please do send this around the web.

      “Labour” Day? Yeah right.

      Some of us never stop labouring.

  6. BIBA42 Says:

    Peter Reynolds: Another expert that sprouted from the shadows of knowledge. If I follow your reasoning, I’ll be the ignorant dumbo you want me to be. If your claim is worth what it means, then why did the UK supply chemical weapons to Iraq during IRAQ-IRAN war!! NO MENTION of any mass killings by the Iraqis in Halabja!!, nor the suppression of the Kurds in the North!! No demonising of Saddam Hussein! None of that… Just some fruitful negotiations that will benefit our industry!! (Correct me if I’m wrong!)

    Then come Kuwait (an internal disagreement that should have been kept Internal), but NO, Kuwait has huge investments in the US, and therefore just the right ploy to send 600,000 troups to the area at a cost of billions $, that can be re-imbursed later in oil revenues, plus further lucrative contracts in the region vis a vis military hardware!!

    Unfortunately Blair’s role in this was based on a share of the honeypot, which did not materialised. Later, when Bush Jr. befriended Blair, the lies, deceipts were soon to come to light.

    Just to clear my opinion of you both, keeptonyblairforpm and Peter Reynolds. Can you tell me if you have actually lived or even visited IRAQ.!

    • Peter Reynolds Says:

      So you turn from an assertion that Blair/Bush “created genocide”in Iraq to an enquiry as to the UK’s arms sales to Iraq?

      Such is your convoluted idea of cause and effect.

      Then we have the BIBA42 (were you once a boutique on Kensington High Street?) State Of The World definition which , I’m sorry, I think few would subscribe to.

      I agree with you that there is much to be concerned about both UK and US arms sales and political meddling in the Middle East. The biggest problem is America’s slavish dedication to the Israeli state despite its criminal persecution of the Palestinians.

      I have never been to Iraq but I worked in Kuwait for a period between the Gulf wars.

    • Peter Reynolds Says:

      Don’t start me off now ktpfpm!

      I only popped in for a little light relief. (Where is Julie by the way?)

      How about “the oppressed people of Gaza and all those from whom land has been stolen and to who the Israelis deny their legitimate rights”.


      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        Eyes off Julie, now, Peter, me ol mate me ol’ chum!

        I have written on this before – probably several times – but it depends how far back you want to argue the “whose land is it” argument. I find the Palestinians – whoever THEY are – invariably move the goalposts. Moving it as far back as history allows – a couple of thousand years, it is clearly the land of the Jews. You clearly don’t even agree with the arrangements we Brits made in the last century – twice.

        Did I ever show you the comment I had from a Gaza resident who works in Israel. He said something to the effect – “please do not put sanctions on Israel’s products. Many of us work in Israel and it keeps us alive”.

  7. 3 REAL reasons Tony Blair was not at William & Kate’s wedding: Diana, Diana, Diana « Tony Blair Says:

    […] Tony Blair The good name of Tony Blair, former British Prime Minister. « Part 3: “Grotesque”. Despots and Druggies with Royal “relationships” at Will… […]

  8. Julie Says:

    Spot-on BS and Peter!

  9. “Obama is Awesome” – Eagle Eye Says:

    […] to Blair Supporter for finding this fabulous YouTube film entitled “Coworkers Compare Iraq and Libya”. Satirising […]

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s