Blair Haters



I had a great laugh to myself the other day when I heard that Tony Blair had won the award for 'Philanthropist of the Year 2014' from GQ magazine.

Because I could just imagine all the Blair haters in the UK queuing up to denounce the man who was Labour's most successful leader ever, winning three general elections in a row, on the basis that as Prime Minister he led the country to war in Iraq, as if the rest of the Labour Party, and the Tory Party for that matter, had nothing to do with this decision back in 2003.

Now as I've said before on the blog site the only Westminster politician who resigned as a mater of principle over Iraq was the then Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, but the rest of our MPs including 'big beasts' like Boris Johnson and Gordon Brown all went through the voting lobbies as well - and they weren't tricked or deceived, as they would have everyone believe now.

I heard a little bit of Sky New the other day where two journalists cum commentaries, Andrew Pierce (from The Mail) and Kevin McGuire (The Mirror), were waxing lyrical about how Tony Blair 'cosies' up to despots these days including the President of Kazakstan, whereas Tony Blair is, in fact, the official Peace Envoy to the Middle East in which capacity he represents the United Nations, European Union, United States and Russia.

Now the 'Tory boy' and 'Labour boy' (as they're referred to on Sky News) had fun by suggesting that Tony Blair was helping the President of Kazakhstan put a positive 'spin' on an alleged massacre of civilian protesters in that country.

Whereas I suspect the advice someone like Tony Blair would give is how to bring a country like Kazakhstan (previously part of the Soviet Union) into the 21st century so it might join the family of modern, peaceful, democratic states.          

So while the Blair haters are all choking over their cornflakes here's a more balanced assessment of Tony Blair's legacy from John Rentoul in The Independent - and the reference to Two Minutes Hate, by the way, is from George Orwell's famous novel Nineteen Eighty Four and the ritual denunciation of declared 'political enemies' by the party faithful.

All I can say is that I'd prefer an hour of Tony Blair's company any day, if the alternative was talking to these two idiot journalists from The Mail and The Mirror.   

Tony Blair had every right to win the GQ award for philanthropy, but try telling that to the haters

Even in ‘1984’, the Two Minutes Hate lasted only two minutes. This goes on and on

By JOHN RENTOUL - The Independent



For a decade now I have tried to understand Blair rage. Here is one of Britain’s most successful prime ministers, whose government helped make the country a measurably better place, who has devoted his post-political life to further public service, yet who is hated and abused.

On the facts, the award by GQ magazine of the title “Philanthropist of the Year” should be merely descriptive. He has given millions to charity; runs three charitable foundations that promote inter-faith dialogue, development in Africa and sport in north-east England; advises governments around the world; and works, unpaid, as the representative of the international community in Palestine. But all this only intensifies the loathing of him by people who ostensibly disagreed – many of them after the event – with one part of his foreign policy.

Those who opposed the invasion of Iraq in 2003 are entitled to be angry, although they generally did not oppose it on the grounds that 170,000 people would die, mostly in the sectarian conflict that was an indirect result.

Much of the venom, however, comes from the persistent belief that Tony Blair made the case for military action dishonestly. Again, this makes no sense on the facts. As George Bush has pointed out, it involves inventing an pretext for war, namely weapons of mass destruction, that would quickly be discovered.

But I think something else is going on. Part of it is people’s annoyance with themselves for, as they see it, having invested so much hope in Blair in the first place. Part of it is people’s pathological reluctance to take responsibility for the compromises of politics: far easier to blame a malign individual for the failure of the Promised Land to materialise.

Part of it is the British suspicion of making money. Never mind that Blair himself makes no money from the most controversial of his contracts, to advise the Kazakhstan government. Never mind that he employs 200 people in his various enterprises. He lives well.

This is intolerable to many. People want a former prime minister to live in a shed on the Isles of Scilly and drive around in an Austin 7. And they admire John Major, who made a lot of money working discreetly as a director of Carlyle group, a US-based global asset management firm, and whose chances of being nominated as philanthropist of the year are remote.

Popular posts from this blog

SNP - Conspiracy of Silence

LGB Rights - Hijacked By Intolerant Zealots!