Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Tony Blair

1246

Comments

  • edited February 2017
    .
  • What's just as bad as Blair is the BBC providing him over the top coverage of this.

    I just happened to be in view of the lunchtime BBC news - wouldn't watch it by choice - and of course they couldn't get enough of Blair. They then followed it up with one of Trump's advisor's quitting apparently.

    There's not much more can be said about the lying spineless traitor but the BBC are just as bad in my opinion acting as his mouthpiece attempting to brainwash as many as possible who believe everything that spouts out of the BBC.

    I can't wait to see Blair's face when Brexit actually begins and hopefully it'll be the last Blair's seen or heard of.

    Couldn't have put it better myself.

    I just have to see the man's smug face on the screen and the channel is changed quicker than any thing else in the whole world.

    We brought our kids up to try not to hate and to look for the good in people but that condescending, patronising, lying, conniving f*ckwit is THE exception to the rule.

    As for the BBC, I don't know how they get away with their politically driven, negative, misery chasing, propaganda machine.
  • Chizz said:

    iainment said:

    Chizz said:


    Chizz said:

    You either agree that people should be allowed and encouraged to voice their opinion (even when the vote goes against them) or you don't, though

    Of course, and it's been done to death on the Brexit thread.
    But you didn't just posit a viewpoint for debate, you introduced Tony Blair into the equation and now you are feigning surprise that people are focusing on the messenger instead of the message.
    Chizz said:

    Imagine what this country would be like if people weren't allowed to stand up for what they believe in. We'd be like Putin's Russia, Kim's North Korea or, even worse, Trump's United States.

    Oh for heavens sake pull yourself together!
    I didn't introduce Tony Blair into the equation!
    I think it was me that introduced Tony Blair into the equation. As anyone can see from the thread title! ;-)
    Ah yes, schoolboy error. Solly Chizz.
    I think my point still stands though as regards the message being tainted by virtue of the messenger.
    My view is this: those people that concentrate on denigrating Blair yesterday, seemed tacitly to admit that they didn't have a counter-argument to the view he was putting forward.

    I am certainly not surprised that lots of people have leaped forward to throw oprobrium in his direction. But, in doing so, they've ignored the argument.

    I am not saying I agree with the argument that he's become the most important person in Bitish politics, again (as some have put forward). But it's an interesting and timely intervention. Because he's stirred up the debate by diametrically opposing the views Theresa May has been putting forward since she switched sides in June. And he's doing it much more effectively than the "real" opposition.
    If only I could bring myself to listen to the man, I might know what you are talking about.

    Apologies for my ignorance but I've no intention of ever giving that man the time of day.

    How much of the pain, agony, displacement, terror, loss of life, rise of Isis and international terrorism and general world instability is down to Blair and Bush?
    How many years has this tragedy been ongoing and will it ever end?

    When our great, great grandchildren are reading the history books in years to come, there will be few world leaders, inclusive of monarchs, despots and tyrants, over the centuries whose ill-informed and misguided decisions have had such a major and damaging effect on our world.
  • I agree with everything he said.

    As for Corbyn giving advice to a former Labour leader who won 3 elections.......??? WTF!

    After reading the deluded frothing at the mouth, 'fake news' , 'alt-fact' nonsense written on this thread about Blair I have just re-read Alastair Campbell's blog/article in response to the Chilcot report to remind myself of the facts.



    http://www.alastaircampbell.org/blog/2016/07/06/many-mistakes-yes-but-no-lies-no-deceit-no-secret-deals-no-sexing-up-and-ultimately-a-matter-of-leadership-and-judgement/
  • Can't stand the little worm.
  • whatever you think of Blaire his profile is damaging to this cause, he should leave well alone, stupid
  • Chizz said:

    iainment said:

    Chizz said:


    Chizz said:

    You either agree that people should be allowed and encouraged to voice their opinion (even when the vote goes against them) or you don't, though

    Of course, and it's been done to death on the Brexit thread.
    But you didn't just posit a viewpoint for debate, you introduced Tony Blair into the equation and now you are feigning surprise that people are focusing on the messenger instead of the message.
    Chizz said:

    Imagine what this country would be like if people weren't allowed to stand up for what they believe in. We'd be like Putin's Russia, Kim's North Korea or, even worse, Trump's United States.

    Oh for heavens sake pull yourself together!
    I didn't introduce Tony Blair into the equation!
    I think it was me that introduced Tony Blair into the equation. As anyone can see from the thread title! ;-)
    Ah yes, schoolboy error. Solly Chizz.
    I think my point still stands though as regards the message being tainted by virtue of the messenger.
    My view is this: those people that concentrate on denigrating Blair yesterday, seemed tacitly to admit that they didn't have a counter-argument to the view he was putting forward.

    I am certainly not surprised that lots of people have leaped forward to throw oprobrium in his direction. But, in doing so, they've ignored the argument.

    I am not saying I agree with the argument that he's become the most important person in Bitish politics, again (as some have put forward). But it's an interesting and timely intervention. Because he's stirred up the debate by diametrically opposing the views Theresa May has been putting forward since she switched sides in June. And he's doing it much more effectively than the "real" opposition.
    As one of those you are most likely referring to as denigrating Blair yesterday my counter-arguement to his view he put forward is this.

    Blair, Corbyn or anyone else are entiled to an opinion but can Blair back his claims up with hard evidence which suggests people who voted to leave didn't know what they voted for? I voted for leave, I knew exactly what I was voting for and i'd vote leave again if I had to as would the majority of the country - again. Opinion polls say people just want us to get on with Brexit whether they voted for it or not.

    Perhaps we can erase the whole Blair PM reign from history, make him pay back his salary earnt and all the perks that came with it given that in hindsight with his lies people didn't know what they were voting for in 1997 given the events that would subsequently follow throughout the Blair reign.
    I didn't mean you - or anyone on here - when I referred to people being opposed to the person, rather than the argument he made. But you deserve credit for responding anyway.

    You've posed a question, ie "can Blair back his claims up with hard evidence which suggests people who voted to leave didn't know what they voted for?" I would have thought the answer to that is plain and simple.

    You - and anyone else who voted Leave - might well have had the foresight to see through the lies that were said at the time of the referendum (eg the £350m a week for the NHS). But no-one who voted Leave (or Remain) knew what the outcome of the vote would be. Because, eight months later, and with Article 50 still not triggered, no-one knows what the outcome of the negotiations will be.

    - Will we continue to bepart of the Single Market as people like Daniel Hannan positively, certainly and catergorically affirmed?
    - Will we fall back onto WTO tariffs? (Most of our imports come from EU countries - if we have to pay tariffs on those, what will the effect be?)
    - Will we have more, fewer or no immigration from the EU?
    - What will the status of British citizens living in the EU be? (Example: someone who has sold up in the UK, bought a place in France and settled - what will their status be?)
    - How will the border between Northern Ireland and the Reuplic of Ireland be secured? (We were told we would be "taking back control of our borders" - how will this happen in the island of Ireland?)
    - To what extent will "passporting" be accommodated for Financial Services workers?

    I don't have the answers to any of these questions. And that's the point. No-one knew at the time of the referendum. Not just because we were lied to, but because the questions could not have been answered at the time.

    So in answer to your question, Blair could back up his claims that we didn't know what we were oting for (or against) simply because no-one knew; and still no-one does.

    That doesn't mean that you're wrong to vote in the way you did. But it does mean that there is a risk that some people voted for something they're not actually going to get. And it's totally reasonable to raise that issue, to suggest that people are given the chance to find out more facts and - if some of those people determine that we're heading in a direction they didn't want at the time of the vote - to allow people a voice to register their concerns.

    If Blair's intervention results in more clarity, certainty and transparency; if it ends up with all of us knowing what the end position will be; and if it ends up with the vast majority of the population being happy, well-informed and prepared, then that's surely a good thing. Isn't it?
  • Sponsored links:


  • iainment said:

    iainment said:

    Next up to support the anti-Brexit campaign
    Gary Glitter and Rolf Harris.

    You're well out of order pal.
    [removed]
    You really are an unpleasant toad aren't you.
    iainment said:

    iainment said:

    Next up to support the anti-Brexit campaign
    Gary Glitter and Rolf Harris.

    You're well out of order pal.
    [removed]
    You really are an unpleasant toad aren't you.
    You clearly have more tolerance of child molesters than me.
    By your definition I'm proud to be an unpleasant toad.
    What an earth are you trying to say?
    I don't have any tolerance for that. You linked remainers to paedophiles. And that is just beneath contempt. And now you are carrying on with this. You need to take a good look at yourself.
  • DA9 said:

    Delivered regularly to a site two doors down from his london home in Connaught square a while back, two armed guards permanently outside and one patrolling around the back.
    Oddly, his neighbour is Claudia winkelman, the BBC must pay well.

    She comes from quite a wealthy background, the BBC salary is probably just the cherry on the top
    Yes, her forefather was the first ever wet fish stall holder and the nickname stuck. Rumour has it, she gets a quid for every pint (or 0.47 litres in new money) of shell fish sold and you get a fishy wiff if you're ever caught down wind of her
    You're getting confused with Claudia Winklepicker
  • edited February 2017
    .
  • edited February 2017

    I agree with everything he said.

    As for Corbyn giving advice to a former Labour leader who won 3 elections.......??? WTF!

    After reading the deluded frothing at the mouth, 'fake news' , 'alt-fact' nonsense written on this thread about Blair I have just re-read Alastair Campbell's blog/article in response to the Chilcot report to remind myself of the facts.



    http://www.alastaircampbell.org/blog/2016/07/06/many-mistakes-yes-but-no-lies-no-deceit-no-secret-deals-no-sexing-up-and-ultimately-a-matter-of-leadership-and-judgement/


    I sometimes watch the video back of Campbell and Adam Boulton having a row, still hoping that Boulton is gonna park him up and stand on his windpipe.
  • iainment said:

    iainment said:

    iainment said:

    Next up to support the anti-Brexit campaign
    Gary Glitter and Rolf Harris.

    You're well out of order pal.
    [removed]
    You really are an unpleasant toad aren't you.
    iainment said:

    iainment said:

    Next up to support the anti-Brexit campaign
    Gary Glitter and Rolf Harris.

    You're well out of order pal.
    [removed]
    You really are an unpleasant toad aren't you.
    You clearly have more tolerance of child molesters than me.
    By your definition I'm proud to be an unpleasant toad.
    What an earth are you trying to say?
    I don't have any tolerance for that. You linked remainers to paedophiles. And that is just beneath contempt. And now you are carrying on with this. You need to take a good look at yourself.
    He seems to be saying Campbell is untrustworthy not remain voters
  • edited February 2017

    iainment said:

    iainment said:

    iainment said:

    Next up to support the anti-Brexit campaign
    Gary Glitter and Rolf Harris.

    You're well out of order pal.
    [removed]
    You really are an unpleasant toad aren't you.
    iainment said:

    iainment said:

    Next up to support the anti-Brexit campaign
    Gary Glitter and Rolf Harris.

    You're well out of order pal.
    [removed]
    You really are an unpleasant toad aren't you.
    You clearly have more tolerance of child molesters than me.
    By your definition I'm proud to be an unpleasant toad.
    What an earth are you trying to say?
    I don't have any tolerance for that. You linked remainers to paedophiles. And that is just beneath contempt. And now you are carrying on with this. You need to take a good look at yourself.
    He seems to be saying Campbell is untrustworthy not remain voters
    No he isn't. He's carrying on with his obsession with associating remain voters with paedophilia, like he has done on other threads.
  • iainment said:

    iainment said:

    iainment said:

    Next up to support the anti-Brexit campaign
    Gary Glitter and Rolf Harris.

    You're well out of order pal.
    [removed]
    You really are an unpleasant toad aren't you.
    iainment said:

    iainment said:

    Next up to support the anti-Brexit campaign
    Gary Glitter and Rolf Harris.

    You're well out of order pal.
    [removed]
    You really are an unpleasant toad aren't you.
    You clearly have more tolerance of child molesters than me.
    By your definition I'm proud to be an unpleasant toad.
    What an earth are you trying to say?
    I don't have any tolerance for that. You linked remainers to paedophiles. And that is just beneath contempt. And now you are carrying on with this. You need to take a good look at yourself.
    He seems to be saying Campbell is untrustworthy not remain voters
    No he isn't. He's carrying on with his obsession with associating remain voters with paedophilia, like he has done on other threads.
    I have never said remainers are paedophiles.

    Its just that all paedophiles are remainers wanting more unaccompanied children in the country.

    Its funny how remoaners love suggesting brexiters are racists but get so upset when it comes back at them.
    Hey @AFKABartram - the other week you gave me a very public dressing down on here for questioning someone's mental health.

    I think the comments above are just a touch more serious and a tiny bit more offensive than anything I said.

    Your move.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Now that he has come out of Bush,s back pocket to preach to us, can he crawl back in so my missus can sow it up.
  • I missed that, what thread was that on then? I'll go and "like" it
  • edited February 2017

    iainment said:

    iainment said:

    iainment said:

    Next up to support the anti-Brexit campaign
    Gary Glitter and Rolf Harris.

    You're well out of order pal.
    [removed]
    You really are an unpleasant toad aren't you.
    iainment said:

    iainment said:

    Next up to support the anti-Brexit campaign
    Gary Glitter and Rolf Harris.

    You're well out of order pal.
    [removed]
    You really are an unpleasant toad aren't you.
    You clearly have more tolerance of child molesters than me.
    By your definition I'm proud to be an unpleasant toad.
    What an earth are you trying to say?
    I don't have any tolerance for that. You linked remainers to paedophiles. And that is just beneath contempt. And now you are carrying on with this. You need to take a good look at yourself.
    He seems to be saying Campbell is untrustworthy not remain voters
    No he isn't. He's carrying on with his obsession with associating remain voters with paedophilia, like he has done on other threads.
    I have never said remainers are paedophiles.

    Its just that all paedophiles are remainers wanting more unaccompanied children in the country.

    Its funny how remoaners love suggesting brexiters are racists but get so upset when it comes back at them.
    I just think you need to look at your obsession with paedophilia. You've obviously done lots of research.
  • Glad Facebook turned on the 'bellend' emoji especially for Tony Blair's speech today

    image
  • JonnyK said:

    So Tony how can you square up sending our young men and women into Iraq and Afghanistan in order to introduce democracy to their populations and now suddenly you need to overturn the democratic process in the mother country?

    Inconsistent or a messiah complex?

    Cameron overturned the democratic process in this country by calling a referendum. We are a Parliamentary democracy and yet there are people who don't want Parliament to approve or not the deal we make to leave the EU.
  • So Blair is one person that Brexit benefits, if only we could find someone else other than politicians or media moguls
  • iainment said:

    iainment said:

    iainment said:

    Next up to support the anti-Brexit campaign
    Gary Glitter and Rolf Harris.

    You're well out of order pal.
    [removed]
    You really are an unpleasant toad aren't you.
    iainment said:

    iainment said:

    Next up to support the anti-Brexit campaign
    Gary Glitter and Rolf Harris.

    You're well out of order pal.
    [removed]
    You really are an unpleasant toad aren't you.
    You clearly have more tolerance of child molesters than me.
    By your definition I'm proud to be an unpleasant toad.
    What an earth are you trying to say?
    I don't have any tolerance for that. You linked remainers to paedophiles. And that is just beneath contempt. And now you are carrying on with this. You need to take a good look at yourself.
    He seems to be saying Campbell is untrustworthy not remain voters
    No he isn't. He's carrying on with his obsession with associating remain voters with paedophilia, like he has done on other threads.
    I have never said remainers are paedophiles.

    Its just that all paedophiles are remainers wanting more unaccompanied children in the country.

    Its funny how remoaners love suggesting brexiters are racists but get so upset when it comes back at them.
    Hey @AFKABartram - the other week you gave me a very public dressing down on here for questioning someone's mental health.

    I think the comments above are just a touch more serious and a tiny bit more offensive than anything I said.

    Your move.
  • After the lies that took us into the US/Iraq war he has the cheek to say the British public have been misinformed. The irony.

    It would be ironic if he was unaware the decision to join in the Iraq mission was rooted in dishonesty.
    His association with any idea or proposal taints it fatally. Which is a real shame in this case, because there is much of merit in his latest emission, worthy of considered debate. Whoever picked him to be the mouthpiece this time needs a checkup and probably a new job.
  • edited February 2017

    After the lies that took us into the US/Iraq war he has the cheek to say the British public have been misinformed. The irony.

    It would be ironic if he was unaware the decision to join in the Iraq mission was rooted in dishonesty.
    His association with any idea or proposal taints it fatally. Which is a real shame in this case, because there is much of merit in his latest emission, worthy of considered debate. Whoever picked him to be the mouthpiece this time needs a checkup and probably a new job.
    No, I think if he himself had been lied to his response would at least have had some integrity even if you disagreed with it. Even if you felt that no excuse was good enough to go into a war when we did not have to. However his dishonesty in that case renders any public brandishing of concern for keeping the public informed disingenuous at the least. Hence the irony. I agree that he has either misjudged the extent to which he is mistrusted in the UK, or this is a career statement underlining his commitment to Europe and one intended for corporate European ears, in which case the impact on article 50 is neither here nor there.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!