Tony Blairs booky wook

OhNoYouDidn't

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

So you are opposed to the concept of protest

McDougal

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You obviously never read "Homage to Catalonia" where he stated his desire to kill at least one right winger.

And Blair (Eric Arthur that is) approved of banning fascist organisations and the internment of the blackshirts. You haven't a clue what you are talking about.

Denerick

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

So you are opposed to the concept of protest

Do you understand the difference between peaceful protest and mob violence?

You're so deep in it you've completely lost your ability to reason.

Wolfe Tone

Denerick wrote: »

Do you understand the difference between peaceful protest and mob violence?

You're so deep in it you've completely lost your ability to reason.

So if they just chanted and shouted you would have no problem with it?

Denerick

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

So if they just chanted and shouted you would have no problem with it?

None whatsoever. In any shape, sense or form.

Eliot Rosewater

McDougal wrote: »

Orwell must be turning in his grave with all these right wing nuts quoting him. If he was alive he would have been on the protest against Blair with us.

All the "right wing nuts" have been doing here is defending a man's - any man's - basic human rights, in particular his right to speak freely and publish freely. Blair has aided evil wars, but it is a sign of our tolerance and our noble ideals that, despite this, we still extend to him these fundamental rights.

As such, within the context of this thread, I can only take being called "right-wing" as a compliment.

Denerick

McDougal wrote: »

.

And Blair (Eric Arthur that is) approved of banning fascist organisations and the internment of the blackshirts. You haven't a clue what you are talking about.

The man has read more books than you've had hot dinners.

OhNoYouDidn't

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I'm saying that I didn't see or hear of these missiles. If there is any footage of the incident I will of course be proven wrong.

And yes, the press and plod do on occasion make things up in relation to dissent.

Wolfe Tone

Denerick wrote: »

None whatsoever. In any shape, sense or form.

So do you reserve you condemnation for those who threw things and not others who did what I said?

OhNoYouDidn't

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

All the "right wing nuts" have been doing here is defending a man's - any man's - basic human rights, in particular his right to speak freely and publish freely. Blair has aided evil wars, but it is a sign of our tolerance and our noble ideals that, despite this, we still extend to him these fundamental rights.

As such, within the context of this thread, I can only take being called "right-wing" as a compliment.

But he has published and spoken freely. Its quite the stretch to suggest that the protesters wish to censor.

Denerick

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

So do you reserve you condemnation for those who threw things and not others who did what I said?

Frankly I think that given the small numbers present, the vast majority were engaged in petty thuggery; throwing missiles, attempting to break the lines, hysterical intimidation and the like.

It goes without saying that if they had been peaceful then this thread probably would have ended after 3 pages.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Byron85

Denerick wrote: »

Do you understand the difference between peaceful protest and mob violence?

Ok, this is getting ridiculous on both sides.

First off, it wasn't mob violence. It was bunch of people throwing bottles, eggs and shoes. I wouldn't call it a mob but I wouldn't call it peaceful either.

Secondly, the fact that they did throw things was rather stupid as it takes away from the fact that they have a legitimate legal right to protest peacefully. I think the way that Kate proceeded was a good way to approach things. She queued peacefully, told Blair he was under citizen's arrest and was then led off by the Gardaí. It was relatively peaceful, she made a point and it likely lasted less than 20 seconds.

As for the 32CSM, they're nothing but thugs hiding under the guise of democracy. Again, they completely take away from any form of legitimate protest by simply being present.

Eliot Rosewater

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

But he has published and spoken freely. Its quite the stretch to suggest that the protesters wish to censor.

...

20Cent wrote: »

Result!!
Nice one protesters.

Tony Blair may cancel London book signing

ANarcho-Munk

Denerick wrote: »

Do you understand the difference between peaceful protest and mob violence?

You're so deep in it you've completely lost your ability to reason.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Wolfe Tone

Denerick wrote: »

Frankly I think that given the small numbers present, the vast majority were engaged in petty thuggery; throwing missiles, attempting to break the lines, hysterical intimidation and the like.

It goes without saying that if they had been peaceful then this thread probably would have ended after 3 pages.

Ok, so how many people threw things then? How many protesters were there?

Denerick

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Ok, so how many people threw things then? How many protesters were there?

I don't know. I do know what you are doing. It doesn't wash.

Wolfe Tone

Denerick wrote: »

I don't know. I do know what you are doing. It doesn't wash.

If a few people threw things, should everyone there be tarred with the same brush?

20Cent

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

...

Thats not what censorship is.

Denerick

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

If a few people threw things, should everyone there be tarred with the same brush?

Not everyone should be tarred with the same brush. Thats why I distinguish them by labelling them as a diverse bunch of caricatures. I was very careful to include dullards and animal rights activists along with dissident republicans.

Wolfe Tone

Denerick wrote: »

Not everyone should be tarred with the same brush. Thats why I distinguish them by labelling them as a diverse bunch of caricatures. I was very careful to include dullards and animal rights activists along with dissident republicans.

What is your beef with animal rights activists?

A Dub in Glasgo

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

What is your beef with animal rights activists?

They don't eat it

Denerick

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

What is your beef with animal rights activists?

None. I'm a big animal lover. They are just part of the diverse menagerie who turn up to these kinds of events. Most people are too busy with their lives and having a lie in to care enough to actually go to these things.

Wolfe Tone

Denerick wrote: »

None. I'm a big animal lover. They are just part of the diverse menagerie who turn up to these kinds of events. Most people are too busy with their lives and having a lie in to care enough to actually go to these things.

I think they should be commended for getting up off their asses and speaking up for their beliefs, especially animal rights activists.


Anyway, I will ask again, has anyone read the book yet?

A Dub in Glasgo

Denerick wrote: »

None. I'm a big animal lover. They are just part of the diverse menagerie who turn up to these kinds of events. Most people are too busy with their lives and having a lie in to care enough to actually go to these things.

Don't you fall in that kind of mindset as well? You must have posted about 20 times in this thread alone over the last couple of days. Most people are too busy with their lives to care therefore you are just like those who you dispise, the only difference is moving your fingers instead of your feet.

OhNoYouDidn't

Is it true that a number of bookshops in England have been placing this book in the Crime section?

I do hope so!!

Nodin

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Is it true that a number of bookshops in England have been placing this book in the Crime section?

I do hope so!!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/sep/05/tony-blair-memoirs-facebook-group

No reason it couldn't go into Fantasy or Alternative History as well.

AlekSmart

Denerick posted....

They are just part of the diverse menagerie who turn up to these kinds of events.

Perhaps diverted from outside Barnardo`s the furriers for the event.....:)

Another thought,perhaps OT...Perhaps not....Does anybody find it unusual to hear this continual reference to the throwing of shoes...ok..even Flip-Flops

It`s just that it jars completely to my cloth-like Irish ears....so...erm....un IRISH a method of protest.

All very suspicious,as there are no reports as yet about people limping home in the rain or indeed anybody else matching Domnic Behans descriptive "Boots for the Footless"... :eek:

Essexboy

Blair does not even know where Bloody Sunday happened.

Blair notes in the memoir: "To assuage Nationalist opinion and under pressure from the Irish, I also ordered an inquiry into the Bloody Sunday shootings in 1972, when British troops had opened fire on protesters in Belfast, killing a number of people."

http://www.derryjournal.com/journal/Blair-book-puts-Bloody-Sunday.6515733.jp

A Dub in Glasgo

Nothing to do with seeking justice then?

WakeUp

Tom McGurk's thought's in the Business Post on Poodle's book and his lasting legacy upon the world are fairly interesting in my opinion, for anybody who is interested here is the article in full :

Blair is a lifer in the prison of his dark past

Tony Blair’s bloody legacy in Iraq and Afghanistan has made it impossible for him to go unguarded anywhere in the world

It is tempting to speculate whether Tony Blair has been condemned to some Faustian fate. He looks old for his age; physically shrunken beyond his years. His face seems to owe its gauntness to more than just the passing of time. In a word, he looks ghastly.

The boyish barrister-with-political-charisma look of the early years has long gone, to be replaced by that of a shrivelled and introspective man.

However, he is now a very rich man, private-jetting across the globe (commanding fees of up to $25,000 for major speeches and public appearances) and owning nine properties in places as diverse as London, the Bahamas and New York. Indeed, he is now so wealthy that he intends to donate all the earnings from his autobiography, The Journey, to the British Legion, the charity for British servicemen and women.

He may have a personal fortune of anything up to £60 million - the vast bulk of it earned over the three years since his retirement. But there is a price to pay. For the rest of his life, he and his family will have to live with unprecedented levels of security. He can probably never again stroll down a high street and wander into a coffee shop, browse in a book shop or enter any building that has not be screened in advance. Essentially, anywhere and at any time, the public around Blair can’t be trusted.

Fittingly, for a man who presented himself more as a president than a prime minister, he is now condemned to live his life under the security regime a serving US president has to put up with. Blair has become a prisoner of his past - without any hope of remission.

His autobiography gives a comprehensive account of his three terms as prime minister. It is full of anecdotes and is, at times, a deeply self-serving narrative. However, it avoids answering the single most important question of all. It’s the ‘why’ question of course - the only one we really want to hear Blair answer.

Why did he back the US invasion of Iraq? One wonders if, as he circles the globe getting richer and richer in his five-star celebrity cell, he stares at the walls and asks himself the same question.

His attempt to answer it is self-serving garbage about having ‘‘no regrets about taking out Saddam’’; being ‘‘deeply sorry about the loss of our soldiers’ lives’’; and little mantras like ‘‘there’s left and right, but there’s also right and wrong’’.

In a huge volume which comes complete with an extensive array of figures and statistics, one figure is consistently missing: the numbers of Iraq civilians who have died during, and since, the Bush and Blair-led invasion.

Since it was deliberate US policy not to count ‘‘enemy dead’’, as they were termed, the figure now varies from 200,000 to close to a million. What a lot of dead men, women and children an ambitious young barrister from Islington can leave behind if he mixes in the wrong company. That mountain of bodies now overshadows any of Blair’s political achievements. He is doomed to the graveyard shift for the rest of his five-star days.

In the decade since the Blair/ Bush invasion of Iraq, the crisis they created has deepened dangerously. Perhaps the most sinister legacy of their foreign policy is that, what was originally a quasi-nationalist/territorial-inspired conflict across the Middle East - largely about oil and traditional rights - is now, for younger generations in particular, becoming a religious war.

Al-Qaeda, Hamas and the Taliban are the advance guard of a conflict that is now more about religious idealism than about political forces.
No matter how many times Blair, in his autobiography, denies the notion of a war against ‘‘the Muslims’’, tell that to the villagers of Afghanistan as they creep out to bury the dead and rebuild their houses.

I suspect few copies of the autobiography will find their way to the reading rooms in the madrassas of Pakistan, where an age-old refrain has come to dominate the scholarship.

The bottomless pit that is the war in Afghanistan is radicalising thousands of people across the Muslim world. They have been whipped into a frenzy at the mere mention of the west, with its materialist obsessions and values, its fracturing societies and families; posturing about terrorism and making war against some of the poorest people in the world. Even worse, when Nato forces have had enough and finally withdraw - claiming mission accomplished, as usual - the defeat inflicted on the west will have the same impact as the defeat they inflicted on the Red Army in the 1980s: a huge fillip for the radical cause.

What Blair and Bush began as the ‘War on Terror’ has, for more and more people, become a war of civilisations. In the aftermath of the Iraq invasion, the world has become an infinitely more dangerous place.

Iraq itself cannot create a government and could slip into civil war; Iran continues to assert its nuclear sovereignty; and one wonders whether the new Middle East talks opening in Washington last week are really to allow Israel to get all its ducks in a row, before striking at Iran’s nuclear facilities? Every day, the war in Afghanistan is threatening the security of nuclear-armed Pakistan.

The very publication of this book, and the sight of its author touring the world on the celebrity junket, is bizarre. What does it all say about popular culture? Blair always wanted to be famous. Now he joins a unique western club - among whose other members are Bush Junior and Henry Kissinger - which is reserved for those in whose names thousands across the Third World have died or been maimed in western-inflicted wars. The little players from places like Africa and the Balkans go to court in the Hague, while the really big ones go to the club lounge on the top floor . (link)

losthorizon

I see Tony Blair has bee accused of "lifting" some of the lines from the film The Queen. Very odd.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/celebritynews/7987064/Peter-Morgan-accuses-Tony-Blair-of-plagiarising-lines-from-his-film-The-Queen.html

Denerick

Have any of you 'critics' read the book?

20Cent

Its half price already.


http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/009192555X/ref=s9_pop_gw_ir02?pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_s=center-2&pf_rd_r=01H0VJ1HBPC2MP6ZTQTR&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=202007167&pf_rd_i=468294

Wolfe Tone

Denerick wrote: »

Have any of you 'critics' read the book?

Have you read it yet?


I'm waiting for it to come into the library... or I may "acquire" a ebook version if there is one.

Mr.Micro

20Cent wrote: »

Its half price already.


http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/009192555X/ref=s9_pop_gw_ir02?pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_s=center-2&pf_rd_r=01H0VJ1HBPC2MP6ZTQTR&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=202007167&pf_rd_i=468294

The yellow coward has canceled another signing at the Tate Modern ......probably run out of blood.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Denerick

Mr.Micro wrote: »

The yellow coward has canceled another signing at the Tate Modern ......probably run out of blood.

Yeah. Yellow. Imagine wanting to prevent a carnival atmosphere for a load of unrepresentative twats, a huge security bill, and a whole load of intimidatory nonsense? What a coward. He should turn up naked, piss over the protesters, and challenge the ringleader to a swordfight. That'd prove he is a real 'man'.

Denerick

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I'm going to buy it just to piss off OhNoYouDidn't.

Wolfe Tone

Denerick wrote: »

Yeah. Yellow. Imagine wanting to prevent a carnival atmosphere for a load of unrepresentative twats, a huge security bill, and a whole load of intimidatory nonsense? What a coward. He should turn up naked, piss over the protesters, and challenge the ringleader to a swordfight. That'd prove he is a real 'man'.

In fairness they represent themselves.

20Cent

The issue isn't really to do with the book itself. Its Blairs attempting to whitewash his legacy. If the book sells a lot that is of no consequence to the protest.

Wolfe Tone

Denerick wrote: »

I'm going to buy it just to piss off OhNoYouDidn't.

Lol! Im sure he will be delighted to see that he wields such influence over you that he can make you part with your cash!

I'm gonna read it because I am sure it will be interesting.

Mr.Micro

Denerick wrote: »

Yeah. Yellow. Imagine wanting to prevent a carnival atmosphere for a load of unrepresentative twats, a huge security bill, and a whole load of intimidatory nonsense? What a coward. He should turn up naked, piss over the protesters, and challenge the ringleader to a swordfight. That'd prove he is a real 'man'.

Blair is no real man but a cowardly little poodle.

Denerick

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Blair is no real man but a cowardly little poodle.

That makes a good protest chant for adolescents still struggling to get past Marx, but his wife I'm sure will testify that he has the whole package.

Mr.Micro

Originally Posted by donegalfella
The protests certainly don't seem to be hurting sales of Mr Blair's book:



If anything, the protests have kept Mr Blair on the front pages and helped to further publicize his book. The publishing industry must be delighted!

Dan Brown sells millions of books but the content is still s*it, as no doubt those reading Blair will find out as they go back to Dan to read something more factual.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

20Cent

Why are the protesters always portrayed as "lefties"?
Aren't there many right wing and neutral people against the war also?

Just because SWP are there doesn't mean everyone there is a "lefty".

invinciblePRSTV

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

:rolleyes: somehow i doubt it's the book that the SWP are protesting. Nonetheless this post is a revealing insight into your psyche.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

karma_

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Do they object more to bombs or eggs?