Anorak

Anorak News | Jail Tony Blair and other truth-swerving idiocy

Jail Tony Blair and other truth-swerving idiocy

by | 8th, July 2016

Tony Blair is “on the couch”, says the Daily Mail. There are questions over the former Prime Minister’s sanity, writes Stephen Glover. Blair is “delusional”. Blair “has some kind of Messianic complex”.  Blair is a “near lunatic”. Blair is “manipulative and devious”. Blair is “an extreme narcissist”.

 

Tony Blair insane mad

 

Vain, pushy, manipulative, self-regarding and self-absorbed. So what. He’s a politician, and one who, most worryingly of all, wore his god on his sleeve. The sadness is that the voters are now being portrayed as victims of  his sorcery and trickery. If you accept that he duped you, then you accept that you are easily duped. It’s the same narrative that infects the post-Brexit haze and seeks to portray the white working classes as ignorant scum.

 

Charles Kennedy the sun

Anti-war campaigners and LibDem leader Charles Kennedy before Chilcot

 

Charles Kennedy the sun

Anti-war campaigners and LibDem leader Charles Kennedy after Chilcot

 

Did we all believe Saddam Hussein could launch chemical weapons within 45 minutes? Did you believe in New Labour’s “ethical foreign policy”evident in Nato’s attack on Serbia over Kosovo in 1999 that established the rule of a humanitarian intervention? Blair called the Kosovo intervention “a battle between good and evil; between civilisation and barbarity; between democracy and dictatorship”.

Did you nod when Tony Blair, champion of “humanitarian warfare”,  said in 20014:

“…the notion of intervening on humanitarian grounds had been gaining currency. I set this out, following the Kosovo war, in a speech in Chicago in 1999, where I called for a doctrine of international community, where in certain clear circumstances, we do intervene, even though we are not directly threatened.”

 

Kosovo Daily Mirror

 

Did you feel good when Blair said in that 1999 address:

Looking around the world there are many regimes that are undemocratic and engaged in barbarous acts. If we wanted to right every wrong that we see in the modern world then we would do little else than intervene in the affairs of other countries. We would not be able to cope.

So how do we decide when and whether to intervene. I think we need to bear in mind five major considerations

First, are we sure of our case? War is an imperfect instrument for righting humanitarian distress; but armed force is sometimes the only means of dealing with dictators.

Blair was clear: if the United Nations failed to act, then individual countries should go it alone.

Were you one of the 412 MPs who voted to use “all means necessary to ensure the disarmament of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction”?

No matter if you did or did not. The Chilcot Report clears you of blame. This was Tony Blair alone. It was his “private war”. The political elite are in the clear. The Guardian says Chilcot can “restore trust in the process of decision-making in government”. The New Statesman says Chilcot will  “drain the poison that has built up in our national life since Blair took the calamitous decision to follow the US into invading a country that its president knew zip about”.

Invading Iraq was not a calamity of moral and ethical convictions, a horror show for the media and Westminster, a disaster fuelled by “sexed-up” political flimflam over substance. It was just the ultimate expression of mad Tony’s diseased brain.

Phew!

 

blair front pages chilcot

 

Now let’s hang the bastard and be made clean.

 

blair terrorist

 

“We are all tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime,” opined Tony Blair. If he’s the criminal what were the causes of his crime?



Posted: 8th, July 2016 | In: Broadsheets, Key Posts, Politicians, Reviews, Tabloids Comment | TrackBack | Permalink