Will Blair still be in a job come Friday??

[iGav]

It could go either way... if he resigns, then Brown will make a solid, if slightly uncharismatic PM... but if this swap over is going to happen, it's going to have to be now, to allow Labour to settle down before the next General Election in '06, because the last thing this country needs is the Thatcher Mk II Party to get back in, cos' we'll all be f**kin' doomed then.... :eek: :p :p

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3420161.stm

[wdlove]

Originally posted by iGAV
It could go either way... if he resigns, then Brown will make a solid, if slightly uncharismatic PM... but if this swap over is going to happen, it's going to have to be now, to allow Labour to settle down before the next General Election in '06, because the last thing this country needs is the Thatcher Mk II Party to get back in, cos' we'll all be f**kin' doomed then.... :eek: :p :p

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3420161.stm

I greatly admired Lady Margaret Thatcher. A great PM in the shadow of Sir Winston Churchill. I don't totally agree with the politics of Blair, but would hate to see him go. He has been a good friend to Bush and the US.

[kettle]

Life was sweeter under Margaret.

[iGav]

Originally posted by kettle
Life was sweeter under Margaret.

of course it was...

[kettle]

I was there and I was better off, I didn't watch the repeats on the Blair Broadcasting Corperation.

TV Licence = poll tax.

[Sayhey]

Originally posted by kettle
Life was sweeter under Margaret.

It was sweeter for whom exactly?

[MrMacMan]

You have to love how in the U.S I haven't heard a BLESSED WORD about this.

Geez... its like there is some massive censor around this country.


I don't even understand the situation... some report is going to discredit him or something?

¿huh?

[Sayhey]

Originally posted by MrMacman
You have to love how in the U.S I haven't heard a BLESSED WORD about this.

Geez... its like there is some massive censor around this country.


I don't even understand the situation... some report is going to discredit him or something?

¿huh?

The great thing about the internet is that the US-centric media cannot censor your access to news from elsewhere. A quick look at the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/), the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/), or innumerable other sites will give you the basics of this story or other news from the UK.

The report you are referring to is the coming findings of the inquiry into the death of David Kelly, a source of information about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and the possible exaggeration of that threat by the Blair government. It appears that he committed suicide in response to his exposure as the source of that information. Lord Hutton, who leads the inquiry, is set to give his report telling among other things, what the role in exposing Kelly the government (and Blair personally) played. That's it in a condensed fashion.

On a side note, I wish Gordon Brown all the luck in the world in the coming week.

[zoetropeuk]

The report discredit Blair, what a joke. He does a good enough job himself.
The guy is a spineless weasel who couldn't lie straight in bed if his life depended on it. Tony Blair would have to be the biggest asre licking yes man I've ever know in politics. So sooner he goes the better, although there is no one in British politics at the moment the deserves the job either.

The really sad thing though is, George Bush actually makes Tony seem rather intelligent.

It's about time the voting public to really stopped to think about the people that are running our lives. For god sake, how on earth did George Bush become president. I wouldn't hire the guy to run a meat raffle at the local pub let alone run a country.

The US needs a president that comes is confident, intelligent, and honerable. Not the weak boso character that George portrays, he has a hard enough time stringing a coherent sentence together.

[kettle]

Originally posted by zoetropeuk
So sooner he goes the better, although there is no one in British politics at the moment the deserves the job either.

I had a feeling I liked "Ian Duncan Smith" as a person and possibly as a leader, unfortunately he didn't have his tounge in the right number of arses so the "we're not sleazy" tories opted for a bloodless coo. It seems to me that the bloodless bit was because the government would rather have someone in opposition that they can find dirt on, than a generally nice bloke who at worse has employed his own wife in a P.A. type roll and a name that can sound like a disease if you make it an acronym.

Looks like we'll have Brown if Blair dosen't try to take him out on the way down.

I'm clean out of good ideas. Even the Raving Loonies are lacking good leadership.:(

[kiwi_the_iwik]

I gotta say - as a kiwi (and therefore, UNBIASED), and someone who has dealt with Mr. Blair on quite a few occasions - I find him a very upstanding and passionate man. He has his beliefs and his motivations.

Fundamentally, he's a good bloke. When you talk (or listen) to him, he TRULY believes in what he's saying. You can't fault him for that.

But fundamentally - he's also flawed...

You're only as good as the information you are given - his role was to sell it to the public. In his view, he was given CORRECT information by people whom he believed to be in a better position to know.

Mr. Blair is an EXCELLENT ambassador to the United Kingdom. However, he lets the side down on the Home Front. It seems that housing, hospitals, education or employment are not anywhere NEAR as important to him than saving the world from terrorism, or eradicating rogue leaders to reinstall democratic rule.

He's a righteous man - but relies on his cabinet to fill in the gaps where it really counts - at home. Without a watchful eye on his "underlings", things tend to fall apart rather rapidly - take transport, for example. The railways have been in a sodding mess for as long as I can remember - Alistair Darling can't undo years of neglect by John Prescott, so he just plunders on with the same lacklustre commitment that his predecessor did. Therefore we're left with an antequated rail network that shuts down in cold weather (snow) or Autumn (leaves on the line!).

And not just to pick on dear old Alistair - there's also the Education debacle - where it's become Government policy (thanks to Education Minister Charles Clarke) to plan to charge university students higher education fees - that may well run up tens of thousands of extra pounds...

So, the country's in a sorry state. But never mind - thanks to Tones & Co., we've rid the world of an evil dictator, and made it a safer one to bring up our kids in...

...if only we can AFFORD to do so.

:(

[kettle]

Originally posted by kiwi_the_iwik
...if only we can AFFORD to do so.

:(

That's the Badger!

[WinterMute]

We are in a bloody sorry state if Blair, Brown and ******** Howard are the best we can do, and people getting nostalgic for Thatcher is just another symptom of the political singularity whose event horizon we are currently below...

I was in the Poll-tax riots in Trafalgar Square, we gave as good as we got, and both sides were to blame, but we are apathetic now... Countryside Alliance? Is that really the best we can do.

Yes, Blair is passionate and believes what he says, yes, he's an oily little tyke and I don't trust him as far as I could throw him (quite a distance, granted) and yes he'll still be in post after this report, man's a born political survivor.

The very least you can say of him is that he isn't bent on raping the country for the benefit of the rich like Thatcher did for 15 years...

Better under Thatcher? Better off dead.

[zimv20]

i saw the (english) beat play in San Franciscso the day thatcher resigned. they brought the house down when they played "Stand Down Margaret".

it's the most i've participated in british politics

[Sayhey]

I don't know enough about Gordon Brown to say what kind of PM he would make, but if he is the only likely candidate to replace Blair in the Labour Party then, even as a temporary measure, he sounds like an improvement. I know you folks in the UK get too much advice from this side of the "pond," but how is Glenda Jackson doing these days? I know she is on the outs with Blair and his friends over the war, which sounds like a great recommendation for higher office.

Maybe the Labour Party should stop figuring out how to make students pay more and start figuring out how to keep some of its old Trade Union constituencies within the Party.

[toontra]

Originally posted by WinterMute
we are apathetic now... Countryside Alliance? Is that really the best we can do.


WM, aren't you forgetting the anti-war march in February and the anti-Bush march in Nov. The first was the largest protest march ever in the UK. Hardly apathetic. Were you there?

[WinterMute]

Originally posted by toontra
WM, aren't you forgetting the anti-war march in February and the anti-Bush march in Nov. The first was the largest protest march ever in the UK. Hardly apathetic. Were you there?

Over-hyped single-issue reactivism...:D :D ;) ;) ;)

Yes, I was there for the anti-war thing, and I thought it was a sham, the issues had been hijacked... again.

I personally believe that the war in Iraq was inevitable, and that Blairs only failing was not to wait for better indicators and rather follow Bush in a little too blindly.

The war isn't an issue, it a convenient stick to beat Blair with.

As for the anti-bush rally, what a waste of time, I'd rather march against Mugabe or against the rise of the far right in this country.

Where is the passion now? The Poll-tax and the miners are political legends, they still inspire and enrage. Under Thatcher this country bled, and the working classes bled more than anyone, we'll never see the like of those campaigns again.

All I saw were people bleating about not being able to go to the lav in Piccadily Circus, if the baton charges had started then, they'd have pissed themselved right smart.:D :D

We are apathetic now, no staying power at all, if there was, there would be demos against the war EVERY week, not just once. Politics isn't fashion, you can't switch it off like MTV.

[Pseudonym]

I think Blair will last the week out, but not the month. With the fees vote and Hutton report he could be dead in the water. I don't think he would a quick dramatic retirement though. More like a timely hand over.

But I could be wrong, and it would be more exciting if I was.

I've got to agree with kiwi though. I think fundamentally he is a good man, I'm just not sure a good man can survive surrounded by spin and the Whitehall machine.

[WinterMute]

Blair wins the vote by a majority of 5:D

democracy in action ladies and gentlemen.

There's a leak of the report due out tommorrow as well, in which Blair and the government apparently are exonerated...

Blair goes on to win next election...

Tories disappear up their own arses...

Students get shafted one more time...

No change there then.

[Sayhey]

Originally posted by WinterMute
There's a leak of the report due out tommorrow as well, in which Blair and the government apparently are exonerated...

Blair goes on to win next election...

Tories disappear up their own arses...

Students get shafted one more time...

No change there then.

Sorry to hear about the report. I saw the result of the voting on the BBC's site, but I was hoping you all would be able to get rid of Blair before we were able to unseat Bush. I guess there is still time and I can always hope.

[diamond geezer]

Originally posted by wdlove
. I don't totally agree with the politics of Blair, but would hate to see him go. He has been a good friend to Bush and the US.

For "good friend" read Bush's "Yes man" in Europe.

A betrayer of Labour.

Vote Lib Dem

:-)

[iGav]

Originally posted by diamond geezer
For "good friend" read Bush's "Yes man" in Europe.

A betrayer of Labour.

Vote Lib Dem

:-)

Lib Dem.... hahahahahahahahahaha.... we'll be truly doomed if that Ginger Nut gets in.... :p :p :p

The problem we have here is that we don't have a viable opposition to Labour, The newly regenerated Thatcher Party will totally ****** everyone over except, fat, old white, racist, homophobic bigots who'll continue to get richer, whilst interest rates go through the roof, unemployment goes back into the millions and we have a boom/bust economy every decade.... actually that would be a good thing, because so many people are countless thousands and hundreds of thousands in debt, so I should be able to pick up a cheap Loft in Shoreditch once the repossesions start! heheheh!

VOTE TORY!! heheh!

The Lib Dems are a better option granted though, but they never stick to their guns, opinions and policies and they need a charismatic leader as well, cos that Ginger Nut just doesn't cut it! :eek: :p :p

[toontra]

By moving so far to the right, Blair has effectively disenfranchised millions of voters whose natural sympathies are for socialist policies. Those people now have no-one to vote for in the UK.

That's what happens if you go down the "ends justify the means" route. OK, so Labour are in power after 20 years, but they've had to sell their soul to get there, and there's nothing left of substance worth giving a damn about.

I voted Labour and I feel betrayed. No top-up fees, well, er, yes actually, top-up fees, and a war which I doubt even Thatcher would have had the audacity to embark on.

[iGav]

Originally posted by toontra
That's what happens if you go down the "ends justify the means" route. OK, so Labour are in power after 20 years, but they've had to sell their soul to get there, and there's nothing left of substance worth giving a damn about.


but would it have been better for Labour not to make a gesture to those other than it's historic 'socialist' voting base, and let the Conservatives continue into yet another term and really messing things up to the point where it'd take a generation to even begin to fix eveything??

We certainly need some valid and realistic opposition, as that keeps governments on their toes, but they cannot be extreme in their views and proposals (a'la socialists etc etc) because the majority of people simply will not vote for them, and the effectiveness of it's opposition diminshes.

That Hutton report was a bit stinging on the BBC though... :p that Gilligan dude.... what a chump... :rolleyes:

[diamond geezer]

Originally posted by iGAV
Ginger Nut just doesn't cut it! :eek: :p :p

I've never quite understood the whole "he's a ginge" hangup you poms have.

I say, VOTE GINGE.

I voted Lib Dem, despite not even being a Citizen.

Turns out your electoral people are just as incompetent as every other part of British industry/government.

[Pseudonym]

Originally posted by toontra
By moving so far to the right, Blair has effectively disenfranchised millions of voters whose natural sympathies are for socialist policies. Those people now have no-one to vote for in the UK.


Before the last election the Independent did a thing on their website where you selected which policies you liked best. At the end of 20 or so questions they told you which party was the closest to your views. I got Lib Dem! And I'm a socialist! that showed me something.

Actually I live in one of the few towns with a Lib Dem MP (Cheltenham) and he does alright as far as I am concerned. But I know what you mean - voting Lib Dem just doesn't seem right!

[toontra]

Well, the ginger loon gets my vote next time. He's the only one who had the guts to stand against the war.

My local Labour PM (Chris Smith) who I met a few times and liked a lot, is resigning at the next election in disgust with Blair and his policies on health, education and the war, so I won't feel bad about abandoning him!

[WinterMute]

Originally posted by toontra
I voted Labour and I feel betrayed. No top-up fees, well, er, yes actually, top-up fees, and a war which I doubt even Thatcher would have had the audacity to embark on.

Oh come on, Maggie started the Falklands war entirely to divert attention from the ***** state the country was in, and it worked like a charm... it won her another term.

At least Blair thought he was doing the right thing, even if it was on dodgy intel.

The election pledge on top-up fees was "for the life of this Parliament", so they didn't technically lie...

...OK, they lied, but it was a political lie, so that's alright...:D ;)

[iGav]

Originally posted by toontra
Well, the ginger loon gets my vote next time. He's the only one who had the guts to stand against the war.


But what other stance was he going to take?? :eek: ;) :p

The Lib Dems always go the opposite way to what the (any party) Goverment decides to do... it's a party trademark...

I rather enjoyed watching Blair beat down that Thatcher clone in the Commons yesterday... :p

[toontra]

Originally posted by WinterMute
Oh come on, Maggie started the Falklands war entirely to divert attention from the ***** state the country was in,

Argentina had invaded a British dependency! What did you expect her to do?

Blair pre-emptively invaded based on dodgy intelligence.

Please admit there is the world of difference in these two wars (much as it galls me to defend the Thatch!).

[WinterMute]

Originally posted by toontra
Argentina had invaded a British dependency! What did you expect her to do?

Blair pre-emptively invaded based on dodgy intelligence.

Please admit there is the world of difference in these two wars (much as it galls me to defend the Thatch!).
I'll admit nothing of the sort....:p

Maggie could have solved that with diplomacy, hell, the US were already in the way, the Argies hadn't started a shooting war, no one had been killed, but yes they invaded sovereign territory...

Maggie went out on a limb for her own political gain, we very nearly got our red, white and blue arses kicked right back to blighty on that one, if Argentina had committed regular forces instead of conscript we would have lost, but they didn't, they knew they weren't going to be there long, and they really didn't expect to get into a shooting war. It was posturing on the part of a government in deep *****...

Maggie killed our troops for her own skin, Blair killed troops for what he believed was a neccesity, the easy thing for ole Tone to do would have been to shut up and keep still, he could have won much more political favour by staying out, but he chose not to against the political flow.

Blair still stands to lose on this, whereas winning gets him nothing, Maggies gamble was blind and cynical, I lost schoolfriends on that little jaunt, and all we got was five more years of arrogant, unfeeling, jackbooted Tory mis-rule.

Don't support Maggie, she was the worst leader we've had in recent years, Tony Blair followed his conviction against popular feeling, he is 10 times the leader Maggie was....

He's still to smarmy for his own good though.

Interestingly, the first calls for a second enquiry surfaced minutes after the leak broke, and were repeated often, an enquiry that damned Blair would have been more acceptable. he really can't win.

[iGav]

Originally posted by WinterMute
He's still to smarmy for his own good though.

Interestingly, the first calls for a second enquiry surfaced minutes after the leak broke, and were repeated often, an enquiry that damned Blair would have been more acceptable. he really can't win.


;) on both counts... :p

[kettle]

Originally posted by WinterMute
Blair killed troops for what he believed was a neccesity, the easy thing for ole Tone to do would have been to shut up and keep still, he could have won much more political favour by staying out, but he chose not to against the political flow. Interestingly, the first calls for a second enquiry surfaced minutes after the leak broke, and were repeated often, an enquiry that damned Blair would have been more acceptable. he really can't win.

WinterMute aka Peter Mandelson.:p

Isn't it remarkable how Mandy and Tony B keep on getting back together. I think they make a lovely couple.:D

[iGav]

Originally posted by kettle
WinterMute aka Peter Mandelson.:p

Isn't it remarkable how Mandy and Tony B keep on getting back together. I think they make a lovely couple.:D

but a threesome at weekends when Alli comes around.... :eek: :p :p

[WinterMute]

Damn, I though if I shaved the tache off, no-one would recognise me...:D

Listen , I don't like being Blairs cheerleader at all, but I think he's been dealt with very shabbily on the whole war/WMD/intel thing. Blair has a lot of faults, but he's a very honorable man (for a politician...) and his principles led him into an unpopular war... against Mandy's council if I remember rightly.

[Pseudonym]

I've got to agree with WinterMute on this one (amidst shouts of 'who asked you!'). As far as I can tell Blair is acting out of conviction. Whether you agree with him or not, he is doing what he thinks is right. Sure the intelligence may have been flawed, but you instinctively trust it. Well at least you used to:p

[kiwi_the_iwik]

Hell - if it's good enough for Bush Jnr. to launch an investigation into the ineptitude of his intelligence, it's good enough for Tones.

Not only does it divert attention away from the more important issues of Top-Up Fees, internal power struggles and the complete disgrace of the Hutton Report (what a Gimp HE turned out to be...), but it's also aimed to detract the publics' attention away from the REAL reason of the War...


...Oil.


REASONS:

GWBjr. didn't sign the Kyoto Agreement on the Emission Allowances of Greenhouse Gases. This is because the US is the SINGLE BIGGEST USER of fossil fuels on the face of the Globe. If they HAD signed, it would sound the death chime for industry in that country. In invading Afghanistan, there was an opportunity to utilise its' supplies of oil and natural gas - all under the ruse of terrorism. Sure, they took out the Taliban - but the Northern Alliance are just as bad, and Osama still goes on a-roaming...

Tony Blair sent troops there, not only because of the threat of Terrorism, but also because the statistics showed that the streets of Great Britain had been stained with the effects of Opium - all sourced from Afghanistan. In fact, the Taliban actually STEMMED the flow of Opium from their country. Granted, their human rights abuses were well documented and down-right nasty. However, are the Northern Alliance the lesser of both evils? They are basically made up of gangsters, who fight for the contol of the poppy fields, main arterial roads and airports - in order to export their deadly crops.

The little-known fact of the aftermath of the conflict is that Opium/Heroin trafficking into the UK has INCREASED by over 300% - and it's country of origin? Afghanistan.

So - that's the FIRST war against terrorism.

The Iraq war was something else. THEIR oil supplies were - and are - VAST. The SECOND largest supply on Earth, behind the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Oil prices have been rising constantly - and for a long time the OPEC countries had many Western nations "Over A Barrel", so to speak (excuse the pun!). Gain control THERE, and you can tell OPEC where to PUT their oil (I hear it's a great lubricant...).

Wasn't it funny to see that the first port of call by the US troops was to secure the Oil Fields? They were the Primary targets - everything else, Secondary. The idea was that the US government would control the oil fields, and just pay an "allowance" to the people of Iraq. To treat them in such a way is insulting their intelligence - as these people aren't dumb - many of them are not just BI-lingual, but MULTI-lingual (and speak Farsi, French, Arabic and English with ease) - and have a high level of education. Their only crime was to be caught up in the midst of a tyrannical dictator - and spent their lives in fear of recrimination and prison (or worse).

And all the while, Tones and Co. were all duped into believing that Saddam had a breathtaking arsenal of biological, chemical and perhaps NUCLEAR weapons - all poised at the ready. Donald Rumsfeld made it perfectly clear that he KNEW of their existance - after all, he'd PERSONALLY only sold them to Saddam a little over 15 years before...

Before the release of the Hutton Report, the BBC ran a program called "Panorama" - an in-depth current affairs show. The subject matter was, of course, the up-coming verdict. They DID, however, run a previously unseen interview with the now deceased Dr. David Kelly, whose response to the threat of Saddam's weapons was interesting, to say the least. He ADMITTED that there WERE reasons to be alarmed, and Saddam HAD evidence of WMD's - but needed between 24-48 HOURS to utilise them.

That's a far cry from the 45 minute claim of the Government.

And as Dr. Kelly was THE foremost expert on Saddam's weapons (he'd been a weapons inspector based in Iraq for a number of years...), he was also the Chief Government Advisor on such matters. Somewhere between Dr. Kelly and Tony Blair, the weapon readiness time had been changed.

That SUCKS.

Now, even Colin Powell has said that they may not find any WMD's - if, in fact, they were there in the first place.

It seems that any investigation is going to find there wasn't any threat to begin with. It doesn't matter though - the US got their Oil Fields, and the American construction giant Bechtel gets to rebuild Iraq.

Looks like everybody kicked a goal.

:mad:

Meanwhile, Tones looks like an idiot. He backed the winning side, but against what kind of enemy? The REASONS for going in have been clouded - and it may come to be that they never existed in the first place. Voters have a very vicious streak when it comes to their ideals - if they think they've been lied to, they'll turn. After all - they've been lied to by the best, so they'll want revenge when it comes to polling time.

My prediction is that Blair will survive as leader - and Prime Minister - and make it to another term. The old Labour "solidarity" will be an important image to pass on to the public. It'll hurt their numbers, but they'll get in again.

However, I'm also predicting that he'll resign anywhere between a few months and a year after regaining office - in favour of Gordon Brown. New Labour - New Term - New Leader.