And another thing…

“Obviously Tony Blair is eminently qualified for the job”

Yes, he likes a good trough. And the more unaccountable, the better.

Blair is guilty of the heinous crime of lying to Parliament, lying to the country and causing the deaths of scores of our soldiers in an illegal war.

Blair is also guilty of the henious crime of leaving the country in the hands of Gordon Brown.

Both of which should disqualify him from any sort public office in the future.

Not a fan, then?

I think you’re confused about needing the votes of Labour voters, Mr. MP. Labour managed to keep the floating middle on side for a while and if you’re honest with yourself that length of time was an anomaly. Your crumpled heap of a leader has done more to drive that middle to the Tories than Dave & Co.

As for TB, he’s obviously well-suited to the EU gravy-train. After all, he’s a pretty straight sort of a guy, right? Just ask Bernie Ecclescake.

Possibly that mixed in with Tony being far too pro-European for their liking?

Actually, as a natural Tory voter I had high hopes when Blair was elected. It’s fair to say that those hopes were dashed.

I can’t think of anything that Tony Blair really got right apart from spinning and covering up the truth. At the end of the day the results of 12 years of New Labour speak for themselves.

The only way to cast Blair in any kind of positive light is to stand him next to Brown.

People haven’t forgotten what a slippery, devious, lying war-monger Blair is, Tom.

Little Red Spiders: “After all, he’s a pretty straight sort of a guy, right? Just ask Bernie Ecclescake.”

I get it! “Ecclescake” (which is a kind of cake) sounds a bit like “Eccleston”! Comedy gold! Well done!

“Obviously Tony Blair is eminently qualified for the job..”

How will we know until the job specification is advertised. What? It’s not being advertised? Shome mishtake, shurely?

“You’d have to be pretty stupid to dispute that.”

Or at the very least not a New Labour supporter, but of course you believe the two to be one and the same thing, don’t you?

“…Blair is guilty of the heinous crime of smashing Cameron’s party at three general elections in a row.

All the more reason to appoint him, I would have thought.”

Certainly not of itself a reason to dislike him (there are so many other, far more compelling reasons for that) but hardly likely to convince Tories to throw their weight behind this particular bandwagon.

Granted it would be a peculiarly apt way of sticking two fingers up to the Tories as you depart office, but I’m afraid it is far too high a price to pay for even that brief moment of satisfaction.

Are you feeling well Tom? You’ve clearly lost all sense over this.
Blair swaggering around as President of Europe?
I’d rather leave not just the UK, but Europe than live under his rule. As for the cat killer of a wife he has….I hold her responsible for the death of the old cat she kicked out on No 10, when they moved in. Never trust someone who dislikes animals.

Might have something to do with the fact he knelt and prayed to a Christian God for guidance alongside George W Bush before declaring war in the Muslim world?

Note: I said IN, not ON.

Or, on a more parochial note, maybe the Tories feel that as EU President he’d have the ability to make life difficult for the likely new administration in the UK?

What the Tories do not want is an unelected President of Europe who will end up representing the Continent at every conference and policyfest. If the President of the Council is anyone that anyone has ever heard of that will be a serious risk. If it is a former PM of Luxembourg the principal players including Britain will continue to swank about in a meaningful way.
They do not want the job to even exist let alone be held by someone who could turn it into a real powerbase. That is why they don’t want Tony Blair.

Eminently qualified?

What is that qualification? Please inform.

It is certainly not a democratic qualification. We have no chance to elect our new president. In fact thanks to your clan Tom we can’t even vote on whether we want a president.

Maybe his qualification is his record in office?

Social mobility is way down. This will damage the class he was elected to represent more than any other factor. (Labour?! Why keep that word as your title at all?)

Under his regime we were given THREE THOUSAND new criminal offences. (BTW Tom, how does that statistic fit with your political sensibilities, was that what you thought you would do in 1997, does that achievement fill you with pride?)

Centuries of legal rights and heritage flushed with barely any consultation and little understanding.(Again, are you proud that we are so clearly less free than we were Tom?)

Removing the last connections between manifesto and policy? Essentially lying to the very people that granted you power over their lives.

The NHS? Something that decides on whether our people will live or die has seen massive reductions in productivity despite throwing flaming wads of cash at it. That has killed people. Clearly due to the policies of your government. Fancy some C-Diff anyone?

Maybe his foreign policy? Won’t go there, who has the time?

Maybe his honesty integrity? Sorry, a wet patch just formed around my crotch. I doubt very much you could make a worthy case for Blair’s honesty Tom or would choose to.

Perhaps his qualification lies in his wallet. How much has he made in the last couple of years whilst the wealth of the nation has been slashed at a faster rate than any peace time period in history? £10m, £15m. Seems right and fair. How much of that will he donate to Help for Heroes?

If Tony Blair was really qualified for the role let him stand for election and ask the populous of Europe to scrutinise his qualifications.

To call objections to Tony Blair becoming an unelected President of Europe as petty is comical.

Finally, that ‘playing the man not the ball’ malarkey is just retarded. This is a discussion about which MAN would be most suitable. The ball is not in play, if it were then we would be having a referendum (as in the manifesto you stood under, how do you reconcile breaking that promise Tom?) Which player is to kick it is the issue. A daft metaphor and a worthless assumption that has been made even funnier in light of Milliband’s insistence on exclusivly playing the man rather than the ball over issues such as EU party alliances. Especially when he doesn’t have the propriety to use the same process against his own allies.

Do you even profess to believe in democracy any more Tom? Or is it just another buzz word to use whilst the smart people decide what’s best for us?

This whole chapter is shameful.

The former great men of your party and movement have been shamed by the actions of this career personality. Great Labour traditions urinated on in a fit of self-righteousness and opportunism.

When you find yourself with very few colleagues next year, I hope it won’t be a surprise why.
The principles of our political and civil system are this nations greatest gift to the planet. They are our birth right. Never have they been held in lower regard, never has Westminster (ie our votes) been less important than it is today. Some qualification.

Yeah he is really qualified to be given more power. And no doubt a new watch worth more than the average annual wage of your voters.

“The people’s flag is deepest red…”

‘…ChaChing’

Oh dear, Tom . .

They sound like an ad for a radio 4 rework of Bleak Expectations, don’t they?

“Obviously Tony Blair is eminently qualified for the job and would do it well.”

I think so too – in fact, I said so on my blog a few days ago:

“Blair prepared the police state at home and so he is perfectly qualified to be Europe’s chief despot.”

I’m not convinced.

T Blair promised a referendum on the Euro constitution and then failed to deliver.

This makes him singularly ill placed to safeguard our national interests over the overweening desires of the Euro project.

And also I can’t stand the bloke.

Actually forget the first bit…

Actually David what the tories want is a lof of huff and puff about Europe but not actually doing anything about it. They realise that doing what their party wants would be disastrous for the British economy.

They also need Blair as president of the EC to have a convenient scapegoat. If they were unfortunate enough to have a candidate they wanted they would be unable to complain about him.

This wouldn’t arise if we were given an opportunity to ‘play the ball.’ Give us the ball and we will. All it needs is the Referendum you and the rest of Labour promised us on the EU Constitution aka LisbonConTreaty.

If Labour doesn’t play fair, it can hardly complain if others’ don’t either.

I think it’s time for hardball. What I would like Cameron to do is tell the EU that if Blair is appointed ‘President’ the UK’s contribution to the EU Budget will cease overnight, until we have held a Referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and renegotiated the UK’s terms of membership.

Providing we get that – the EU is welcome to Blair (for all the good it will do them).

Tom please tell me you are joking.

Chris upon Thames,

“Actually David what the tories want is a lof of huff and puff about Europe but not actually doing anything about it.”

Absolutely right. Because they too will go down the road of globalism.

“They realise that doing what their party wants would be disastrous for the British economy.”

Absolutely wrong. Our trade deficit with EU countries is a couple of billion pounds a month. Our EU membership fee works out at over £3 billion a month.

We don’t need to be in the EU for economic reasons and even if we did, I value freedom more than financial gain.

The EU is already a straitjacket. How much worse do you want it to get to maintain these mythical ‘economic benefits’?

Excellent post by Rodger Dodger.

As is so often the case on this blog, Tosh’ post is weaker than most of the responses.

Miliboy (yeah yeah did you see what I did there) believes that the prime quality an EC President needs is ‘the motorcade factor’.

Truly pathetic.

How far down Miliboy’s list do qualities such as competence and honesty come?

Maybe the tories simply object to an EU President in principle.

MPs, principle…

Forget what I just said.

Hmm how to explain it to a member of the Labour party.

Well suppose in 1997, there was a position for grand supremo of europe. Now suspose John Major’s predecessor got the job. Just how well do you think that would go down. Would the Labour party like it?
What would the public think after kicking the party out only to find John Major’s predecessor still driving the adgenda.

@Quietzapple: “They sound like an ad for a radio 4 rework of Bleak Expectations, don’t they?”

Yes, but it’ll be more like an ad for “High School Musical 8″ come next May

Having come up against your inability to argue the toss without falling prey to all sorts of schoolboy logical fallacies, I thought I’d bring it down to your level. (And besides – you always struck me as a Viz reader.)

Still, when you can’t rebuff a point and all else fails, why not employ evasion tactics? It’s the labour way, amirite?!

Little Red Spiders: “amirite?”

Yes. Yes, you are. I do indeed read Viz

The ever-increasing power of the EU is a very neat way for the Labour Party to retain control of the UK despite being booted unceremoniously out of office.

That’s good enough reason for me. And add Miliband the Incompetent to the brew; if he says it is a good idea, then clearly it isn’t.

As a Tory myself I can empathise with you on winning you 3 elections. I will even go as far as saying he did an adequate job on the economy, restraining Brown until he became PM to become a Trotskyite tax and spend maniac.

As Simon wrote, privately I hoped he was going to be an outstanding Prime Minister, his obvious intelligence and charisma shone through. On Iraq I am far less critical as I supported the invasion. History has taught me that the Muslim world thinks our desire to talk and negotiate is decadent, weakness and showing we are willing to fight and draw a line in the sand, I thought was correct.

However if a man has the abilty to say what you wanted to hear, took insincerity to the ridiculous, and could trough for Europe, I am not sure I could keep a civil tongue in my head.

In conclusion I loathe the man.

Will the taxpayer still get to pay for Imelda’s hair dos if he is appointed?

After all the largely fabricated trolling by all and her sundry re the Blair-Brown feud it so pleasant to note that Brown is backing Blair so well to become EU Pres:

blairsupporter
@BBCLauraK – you never know, I might end up being a Brown fan yet. Good for him. Hope they are listening.
1 minute ago from web in reply to BBCLauraK

BBCLauraK
Brown tells other EU leaders to ‘get real’ and that this is a unique chance to get a strong progressive candidate for euro president

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/6459083/Tony-Blair-should-not-be-EU-president-says-Charles-Clarke.html

The Times said something like,”Tony Blair is exactly the right sort of person to project a powerful image of the EU abroad. And that is also the reason why he is the wrong person.”

Though I’m a Blairite, I tend to agree.

I don’t want a powerful EU. (And nor, clearly, does the Conservative Party).

I prefer an independent UK in a European trading group.

Simon’s taste in what can only assume are US Hi Skule comedies is beyond the pale, and my comprehension.

I suspect that the EU Pres will be trying to grab a sack of ferrets and that Blair would be wasted on the role.

Far better that he is employed selling the case that Global Warming requires global action, and particularly to the americans with whom he connects most powerfully.

Of course I expect he can spare a day or so to wind up all the usual ‘visitors’ at All Hallows as we can see . . .

Switzerland and Norway seem to be doing just fine outside the EU, it seems to me.

Why do we need it, especially as it is totally unaccountable to us the people who apparently constitute it? Oh yes, the politicians, bureaucrats attending to them, and big business seems to do very nicely thank you – thanks to us, the taxpayer.

Free trade area. Yes. Political federation. No.

@Quietzapple “Simon’s taste in what can only assume are US Hi Skule comedies is beyond the pale, and my comprehension”

Actually “High School Musical” is a musical, rather than a comedy.

But it is a happier, more optimistic tale than anything Dickens wrote.

Simon:

You haven’t seen The Muppets’ Christmas Carol?

Oh? What?

Oh ok, inside knowledge . . .

I always find baffling those people who seem to think that payment to the EU are one-way traffic and that we do not get any services in return. e.g. how much more expensive would it be if we had to negotiate trade deals and tariffs with 180 other countries. And how much worse would the deal be without the backing of a very large trade bloc? I could go, a lot of our overseas aid is delivered through the EU, a lot of university research funding and a lot of infrastructure programmes. This money would have to be spent if we weren’t in the EU.

The level of trade deficit (which may or may not be true, figures do seem to be routinely plucked out of the air, rounded up and inflated) is not the issue. Unless of course you are proposing Albanian self-sufficiency.

Is anyone seriously proposing that the trade deficit with the rest of Europe would improve if we left???

The big point is that Cameron has to make anti-EU noises to placate the Flat Earth Tendency in his party. He will not do anything actually dangerous like destroy the Lisbon treaty or renege on previous agreements.

Your post has wind up written all over it, Tom!

I don’t want Tony as President. I don’t want anyone as President. I don’t want a President. I don’t remember being asked if I wanted one. I remember being promised that, if I voted Labour, they’d ask me. Then they didn’t.

Here’s a taste of what’s to come (God, they haven’t even the good manners to wait until the death warrant’s signed, sorry, the Treaty’s ratified). We can only hope that it’s untrue because it’s in the Daily Express:

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/136641/Secret-plan-for-Euro-income-tax

Chris upon Thames,

What I was getting at was that the EU needs us more than we need it.

If by “Flat Earth Tendency” you mean the wish to avoid being fully sucked into a corrupt and unaccountable club for Europe’s elite to suck the rest of us dry then count me as one of them.

Can you truly not see what is at stake here? You think the EU is a big cuddly caring club that wants what’s best for you?

The “Euro-sceptic” fallacy reminds me of the extreme Green position of the ’70s.

Adherents assume everyone wants to live on a hill with a goat.

Jay
Thursday 29 October 2009 at 5:48 pm
Your post has wind up written all over it, Tom!
*********************************************

Well, quite. When you go fishing usually you put a worm on the hook rather than a big sign saying hook.

Having said that, Tosh still ‘has it bad’ re Tony. Tony did after all give him a giant train set for Christmas but nasty Captain Insensible took it away and sold it on Ebay.

The quote unquote Blairites still aspire to get back onto Tony’s gravy train one way or another. But I’m afraid the love they feel is unrequited and there ain’t that many six-figure salaried jobs going in Tony’s faith foundation or his sports foundation or whatever else foundation the grate man has going..

I suspect like all discarded lovers the ‘Blairites’ will in the fullness of time cut the pictures down the middle, curse his name, realise they were well and truly taken for a ride, and will rue the day he crossed their paths.

SIMON ==> Blair is guilty of the heinous crime of lying to Parliament,

I assume you have the Hansard publication which shows his mentioning WMDs.

==> lying to the country

No he didn’t.

==> and causing the deaths of scores of our soldiers

Well, at least it’s the Westphalian attitude of one British life not being worth any number of Iraqis. If you hadn’t admitted to being a natural Tory voter, you’d get on well in the Stop the War – no! not that one! – Coalition.

Then again, considering they’re lowering the bar of entry even further to accomodate *European* fascists and national socialists, I doubt they’d notice.

==> in an illegal war.

Back to being stupid, I see.

PAUL ==> Might have something to do with the fact he knelt and prayed to a Christian God for guidance alongside George W Bush before declaring war in the Muslim world?

==> Note: I said IN, not ON.

You ain’t half as clever as you think you are. First off, Cameron supported the invasion (and it’s Cameron’s view on Blair’s candidacy which is being discussed, not your view on war which finished at least four years ago).

Secondly, you created the impression of a war on “the Muslim World”, so you’re now stuck with that association. Secondly secondly, even uttering the nonsense term “the Muslim World” pegs you as, at best, a silly person; at worst, a racial arsonist.

I would approve of pretty much anything which reduces the likes of Simon and Paul to a state of further spluttering rage.

SERGEANT PLODDER ==> Switzerland and Norway seem to be doing just fine outside the EU, it seems to me.

Just as with Snuppies who insist on comparing an fanciful independent Scotland to country X, Y or Z (but never a country populated by Scottish people), it beats me why third parties must always be brought into this.

Norway and Switzerland manage just finish trading and establishing reciprocal political agreements with the EU. Albania and Bhutan don’t manage all that well not being in the EU… aha! You didn’t consider that!

I should add that Roger Dodger’s assessment was spiffing. The points he outlined are going to go a long way to explaining whatever drubbing Labour gets at the next GE rather than a war which finished four years ago [cont. page 94].

I’d much rather we had an AWS Tom. Mary Robinson, Helena Kennedy, Glenys Kinnock, Neelie Kroes, Sarah Brown, Shirley Williams and so on and so forth. Plenty of people could do the job of chairing and championing Europe and it would be a VERY GOOD THING if the first pick was a woman. It is getting very irritating actually continually hearing so called progressive politicians talking about the “right man for the job”. In this case the “right man for the job” is in my view pretty likely to be a woman. And despite his being a class act and capable of doing a job of work Blair has more pies than fingers and should get on with some of his ten other jobs. IMO.

Obviously the fact he’s been a war mongerer and a my way or the highway bully would nudge any casting vote against him. If I had to get off the fence.

@Chris Paul

Mrs. Kinnock (well, he was staunchly opposed to the House of Lords, and tghe EU for that matter, so I am sure they won’t mind) has just lost her job – whatever it was – dealing with EU matters, as she was crap at it. Indeed, both Mr. & Mrs. (I’m sure they won’t object. being people of the people, eh?) were happy to go against their principles for the sake of a flash of ermine and even better “expenses” that the House used to provide.

Puke

Love your blog Tom but I have to put fingertips to keyboard to point out that Blair lied to Parliament and a lot of us think he is a war criminal. He is also as smooth as snakeshit.

Well, Sergeant Plodder, you too are seated on the fence here. Would you say you’d rather not have GK then? Is that it? How about the others? How about the idea that there is not and should not be anything inevitable that this is a job for a man, or that Britain’s nominee ought to be Blair. I can’t help thinking that there is some very desperate gaming going on here. Blair is not really in for this job. They expect a Czech or the like to get it. And D Miliband may then be in with a shout for t’other job.

I’d prefer an AWS for both jobs. See what you’ve made me do? I’ve escalated.

Blair deserves better than EU Pres in my book. It will be thankless and usually pointless, because few presently want the kind of leadership the role will one day bring.

The Left in the EU will want to make some sort of leftie point re Iraq and etc so Blair won’t suit them.

The right will mostly look for advantage for their own, and Blair won’t suit them.

I spent 2 years telling the Dully Teles that Blair was unlikely to get it if he wanted it, which he shouldn’t.

Disappointing that it seems he does/did.

Hey Ho!

I had high hopes when Labour came into power in 2007 (in fact I had a party). Some of Labour’s policies – especially the minimum wage and working tax credit – have helped me out immensely.

However, I never liked Blair, he was too smarmy for my liking.

I used to work for the Forces, my job was privatised to save money. I worked at Kinloss where we ALL knew that cuts were affecting safety. Ten of my friends died when that Nimrod blew up. So good to know Labour introduced the Corporate Manslaughter Act, which will hopefully give the MOD and Government “Business Managers” a good kick up the a**e

Blair brought us into a phony war, lied about it and has the blood of the UK Forces on his hands. When I saw him last Remembrance Sunday bowing piously in church I nearly put my fist through th TV.

However, the Tories can’t crow about Blair. Even though I can’t stand the man, I remember the 80’s and 90’s and can’t help but imagine that under the Tories the country would be in an even worse state.

Old Labour Till I Die

Aye Always,

Safety Fairy1

Tony Blair’s Government did a lot of good things, Surestart, the minimum wage, huge improvement in Primary schools (secondary still leave a lot to be desired). But he also did Iraq, and that overwhelms everything. Other people may have supported it in Parliament, but they did that under the impression that he was correct in what he was saying. The whole furore around Iraq – 45 minutes, dossiers described by Jack Straw as “horlicks”, WMDs, lack of planning, just the mere fact that nobody has any idea of how many civilians were killed and children orphaned – all leave a nasty taste, to put it extremely mildly. I also find it sickening when I think of his huge expensive flashy property portfollio. Whilst of course I completely respect his right to buy whatever he likes – it is breathtaking the way Labour feel they can yell Rich Boy and Toff at any Tory that crosses their path. He went to Fettes school in Scotland which is every bit as good as Eton – the school that seems to upset Labour so much. Although personally I can’t see why people are so upset at the thought of a PM having had an excellent education. It is a shame that such an education has to be bought, but look at the secondary schools round our way where the average non Grammar turns out around 35 percent of kids with GCSEs and weep. His education and wealth are his business, but the hypocrisy is clear. In my humble opinion anyway.

Safety Fairy 1: *Blair brought us into a phony war, lied about it and has the blood of the UK Forces on his hands”

All untrue.

Missiles and other WMD materials had been destroyed by the UN prior to Sadam refusing further inspections – glad I didn’t have to guess wether to follow the war line or run an unknowable risk of Britain or British nationals being attacked by same. (You don’t need a missile for a chemical or biological weapons attack)

Blair didn’t lie. If your referring to the Commons statement to which Alistair Campbell contributed his amendments hardly register, his claims for them are grossly exaggerated.

A pacifist might think that any national leader has blood on his/her hands but MPs, elected by the people, had an opportunity to speak when was was declared, and many of those who did oppose the war were chancers, with at least half an eye to position themselves to best political advantage.

Blair has been a remarkable public servant. Many of those who attack him may well have their merits on other grounds, many are unfit to address him, just tedious trolls.

@Chris Paul.

Thought I’d made it abundantly clear – none of them; I want out, I want the status back to what I voted for in 1975. The EU is a bureaucratic oligarchy, rapidly overwhelming us.

If you want to know what they have in store for us, that makes all New Labour’s nasty Stasi-style intrusion into business that is none of theirs, google INDECT PROJECT EU.

Would you do business with an organisation that has not had its accounts signed off for fourteen years? That has videos of its employees cheating for expenses on YouTube but does nothing about it? That pisses our money away as if we were rolling in the stuff?

You are welcome to subservience. It’s not my style.

@Alec “I would approve of pretty much anything which reduces the likes of Simon and Paul to a state of further spluttering rage.”

There is very little that actually reduces me to a spluttering rage, hence the tone of my posts, (I’m pretty sure I’ve never called anyone stupid, here or anywhere else). However, if you want to get a reaction from me, promise me you’ll improve education, and then after spending billions, lie about the results when your “improvements” fail; or promise you’ll imprve the NHS, spend billions on it, and lie again when you have failed; or promise me you’ll properly equip our soldiers before sending them off into yet another war, and lie about that; or promise me you’ll reduce the gap between rich and poor, and actually do the opposite.

As I said before, Tony Blair promised me and the rest of the country a lot, and the only “spluttering rage” I feel is brought on by a sense of disapointment in being let down yet again.

As a natural Tory voter, I have no sense of jealousy that Tony Blair has left his followers behind and earned millions on the back of his fame – good luck to him. But public office should be reserved for those who serve, not those self-serving.

Deftly avoiding (hopefully) fisherman Harris’ obvious wind up here, it is utterly pointless to get worked up about who will be the EU President, it’s not like we have any choice.

I note the principled fence-sitters – the Lib Dems – are opposed to Blair as President as well. Yeah, bit late now, they should’ve thought of that when they helped ratify the Treaty.

Personally I wanted Blair as President, for precisely the reasons why, I suspect, he won’t get it – he would be well-known and divisive.

But no instead the EU will appoint someone who is largely unknown – they don’t that EU elephant in the room to be too visible.

I see Brown has backed Blair for President. Thats good news as Blair has no chance now.

Brown’s successes d’estime re the G20 & much else may not commend his choice to Sarcozy & Merckle, but it will be the tradeoffs between and amongst the smaller nations which will make all the difference.

If France & Germany wanted to join Berlusconi in supporting Blair they likely wouldn’t just raise his flag before the contest is under weigh, would they, as Adam Boulton of the BBC points out on Twitter. Uk and Italy are not inconsequential in the EU, as Britain would become if Chameleon had his greased paws on the tiller.

I did think Blair’s cause was lost, but as Norfolk Jean says it is . . . it is obviously still alive.

Good to see John Sargent endorsing my line yesterday. We need the EU, we need the Lisbon treaty and any politician with a degree of common sense can see it.

My MP, David Cameron, knows this and as Sargent said the Blair for Presidency row is a fantastic way for Cameron to appear to be euro-sceptic without having to do anything real about it.

Likewise Cameron must be doing cartwheels now that the Czechs have endorsed the Lisbon Treaty. If they had waited until May,. he would have been forced to call a referendum. Now he can pretend that he is against it and that his hands are tied.

@Alec:
“You ain’t half as clever as you think you are. ” I kind of is.

“First off, Cameron supported the invasion (and it’s Cameron’s view on Blair’s candidacy which is being discussed, not your view on war which finished at least four years ago).”
Nope, this is about opposition to Blair’s bid (or anyone’s) for the European Council Presidency. Cameron and his views left the playing field a long time ago.

“Secondly, you created the impression of a war on “the Muslim World”, so you’re now stuck with that association. Secondly secondly, even uttering the nonsense term “the Muslim World” pegs you as, at best, a silly person; at worst, a racial arsonist.”
I explicitly made the point that it was not a war ON the Muslim world so that the association would not stick.
I also did not invent the term the muslim world, but when 90+% of the region belong to one religion and the people in control of the money, weapons and, inevitably, power are theocratic Muslims then I don’t see the problem with the term. Call me silly if you like. Do not call me a racial arsonist though, it is not me who wants to see the world burn.

Come on Tom. What are his qualifications?

Perhaps an undergraduate wrote a dissertation on the subject a decade ago that you can lift and publish as evidence.

“Pretty straight kind of a guy…”

Mr. Norfolk.

And so it came to pass.

Added to the Chief Rabbi of Poland kicking Miliband D up the arse, all in all a good day so far.

I want my government to make the laws under which I live.

I want my government to have the right to co-operate with other countries only when it chooses to do so.

I want my government to sign trade agreements with countries it freely chooses to trade with.

I do not want my government to submit to the Presidential rulings of any collection of foreign states unless it wishes to in its own interest and as an exceptional occurrence voted on by the populace.

I want my government to admit to this country only those numbers of immigrants it wishes to admit.

In this respect, it doesn’t matter to me which government we have. It only matters that it begins to govern us once more.

@ Chris upon Thames Likewise Cameron must be doing cartwheels now that the Czechs have endorsed the Lisbon Treaty.

I agree with that comment, if the Czechs do endorse the Treaty (and there’s still no guarantee Klaus will sign), I believe Cameron would like nothing better than the EU issue to go away – unfortunately for him (and other politicians) it won’t.

As for the; “we need the Lisbon treaty” comment, what we actually need and want is democracy and the Lisbon treaty does precisely the opposite of that.

>> I see Brown has backed Blair for President. Thats good news as Blair has no chance now.

Yup, it’s more effective than sending in Katie Adie.

>> Nope, this is about opposition to Blair’s bid (or anyone’s) for the European Council Presidency. Cameron and his views left the playing field a long time ago.

Maybe, but the point of Tom’s post can be summed up by five words – “so what are Cameron’s objections?”, followed by some stuff about domestic British politics.

Iraq wasn’t even on this field; even if it were, may I remind you that Cameron supported the invasion.

>> I explicitly made the point that it was not a war ON the Muslim world so that the association would not stick.

Indeed it can. Even using the term makes it so.

>> I also did not invent the term the muslim world,

Yet you’re perpetuating its usage.

>> but when 90+% of the region belong to one religion

It should be easy enough to discern the difference between the various confessionals of Christianity, so describing all those in Muslim-majority countries as being of “one religion” does suggest you believe there is one homogenous mass thinking as one.

By far the greatest war/death in Muslim-majority countries is being carried out *by* Muslims – and then it’s primarily against civilians, who often consider themselves Muslim, rather than combatants which is the purpose of Western military action.

Deeply misguided and potentially malfeasant the invasion of Iraq may have been, it’s but one small blip in Muslim-majority countries.

>> and the people in control of the money, weapons and, inevitably, power are theocratic Muslims then I don’t see the problem with the term.

That’s not what you said.

A more than usualy blatant exercise in deliberately missing the point.

The Tories do not want the job to exist, so why would they support a well qualified candidate (if, as you say, that is what Blair is) who might maximise its effectiveness?.

The “support Blair, he’s British”argument doesn’t wash either. There is absolutely no reason to believe that this man (he of the children with Irish passports) has British interests at heart. The Blair premiership did more long term damage to Britain than the Luftwaffe and all the Cambridge spies put together. The chances are, if he gets the job, he will act as a judas goat, seeking to lead the British sheep further and further away from independence. Then again, perhaps that’s why you support him?

If it’s not a full moon, it must be Hallowe’en.

Quietzapple: ‘Oh dear, Tom . .

They sound like an ad for a radio 4 rework of Bleak Expectations, don’t they?’

Is there a ‘radio 4 rework of Bleak Expectations’, Quietzapple? What’s it called?

Dear me, an oblique insult. I must immediately change my view.

>> There is absolutely no reason to believe that this man (he of the children with Irish passports) has British interests at heart.

What a disgraceful remark. Next you’ll be telling us that James Joyce wasn’t Irish.

Bridie McWilliwarmer:

It would be too complimentary to those to whom my remark referred to suggest that they compared to the Radio 4s “Bleak Expectations”

If Radio 4 rework it, possibly after privatisation, then the comparison would be valid. Perhaps with Johnson B and others in role.

I hope this clarifies the matter for you and your anxieties are suitably allayed.

A war criminal and traitor: is this all you have left?

I recall Flo as Andy’s missus . .

What do you think she’s on?

Tory bile?

One day rather more people will come to see Tpny Blair as a war hero, than now witlessly call him names.