Skip to main content

Tony [The Pong] Blair

The audacity and greed of former Brit PM Tony Blair knows no bounds.

Having fought the revelation of Blair's pursuit of earning income from questionable sources - and lost - the British MailOnLine [that is, The Daily Mail] editorialises:

"Secret contracts, shady oil deals, foreign multinationals, Middle Eastern rulers and a former prime minister whose cosy relationship with the U.S. was bought with the blood of British soldiers.

Not, sadly, the plot of a racy novel but the true story of Tony Blair after Downing Street (though don’t expect to read it in his impending £4.6million memoirs).

For nearly two years, Mr Blair has been trying to suppress the truth about his advice to a South Korean company that was working on an oil deal in Iraq, and to the Kuwaiti government.

Now Whitehall’s business appointments committee has insisted on transparency, but Mr Blair still won’t explain exactly what services he is providing.

This is deeply troubling. Mr Blair’s greatest commercial asset is his close relationship with America, where many laud him for his support for their wars.

He is profiting from taking Britain into a war in Iraq that much of his country was dead set against, and doing so on the false premise that we were under threat from weapons of mass destruction.

No less profoundly disturbing is the way in which Mr Blair is using his official role as Middle East Envoy to drum up business in the region.

This is doing further damage to his own tainted image, but far worse than that it’s undermining Britain’s already tattered international reputation.

Thanks to Mr Blair we are associated with torture, with the abuse of prisoners, with an invasion under false pretences.

Now we must watch while our former leader prostitutes himself for money.

Mr Blair owes it to himself, and to the millions who voted for him, to stop demeaning the great office he once held."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...