Skip to main content

Yo Blair!

Although watching Galloway and the Hizbollah fascists that he supports does significantly raise my blood pressure, am I alone in thinking that the British government have been "a bit crap" on the Middle East?

The utterly craven relationship between Blair and Bush that was revealed in their open mic session last week makes my blood boil too. Yo Bush - the worst President since Warren G Harding and Yo Blair- an unprincipled failure.

It is simply not good enough- Israel are in the wrong: punishing the innocent as vengeance against the guilty can not work. The UK, as a critical friend of Israel, has a duty to speak out. However as the "Yo Blair stuff" showed- the UK is regarded by everyone, the USA included, as a poodle.

The totally spineless way that this government has reacted to the Middle East crisis is not acceptable. For sure, with the history that Britain has in the region, we should be slow to make any comment. However the only reason that we do not criticise Israel now is because Blair is psychologically dependent on this tenth rate American President.

Yo Blair- "You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, GO!"

Comments

Tristan said…
You've managed to articulate what I've been trying to say.

The situation between Blair and Bush seems like the way that to criticise the government in the US is portrayed as unpatriotic, whereas surely the patriot should criticise where they see mistakes being made.
The same goes for the friend. It can be hard, but a real friend would do speak up.

The other thing is that refusing to speak out and following the US lead is putting British people at risk, from terrorism and the increasing support for the fascist left in the form of Galloway and the fascist right in the form of the BNP and their ilk.

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...