Sky are reporting that Tony Blair has pulled out of his London book signing for security reasons and on the grounds of the expense the Police will incur.
Chicken.
What does it say about him that he can't even sign books without people wanting to berate him? It never happened to Margaret Thatcher... She would happily chat with bookbuyers and pose for photos.
Or perhaps I am being unfair.
It may be that we now live in a more hostile age, where people are less deferential and don't hesitate to have a go at ex-politicians in quite an aggressive way, even years after they have left office.
31 comments:
There's quite a difference between Thatcher and Blair.
Thatcher would be more than prepared to defend her view, to speak out even when so many vehemently disagree with her. She was a conviction politician in the true sense. I consider her a rather over-rated political leader, but that much I couldn't doubt.
Blair cannot be bothered putting himself before any proper scrutiny. Hence why he prefers to chicken out by not coming to signings in the UK - isn't it telling there was only going to be just one here in the first place, incidentally? - and appears on shows such as ITV1's new breakfast show Daybreak, where the best Adrian Chiles came out with was that he "kicked Gordon Brown when he was down". Pathetic.
It's a shame the Irish only threw shoes and cakes at him. The shoes I saw on the Irish news footage were trainers. Myself, I'd prefer to throw a size 12 steel toecapped boot at the ████.
* Before anyone asks, I "redacted" the last word as Iain wouldn't won't publish this comment otherwise. Can't use the C-word on here, not even when we're dealing with Tony Blair.
It's Blair and his cronies that have created the so called "age we live in" he should be forced to endure the "slings and arrows" of the high street unlike the armed forces who endure a lot worse on other peoples high streets
It's pretty harsh to label him chicken without knowing the nature of the security advice given to him by the police.
He's been perfectly willing to run the gauntlet of protesters in the past, and the criticisms that have come up in the past few days don't seem to have fazed him.
Wimpishness seems an unlikely explanation. I'd take his reason for pulling out at face value.
Shame how the 'anti-war' movement seem to be able to embrace violence when it suits them
Still the irony is probably lost on them
More hostile the world has become; Blair and Bush have made sure that happened.
Ohh, and ex-Politicians are nowadays milking the system even though they should go and have bread and water.
Grim Repear's comment is really silly. 'Blair cann't be bothered putting himself before any proper scrutiny'?
Like the Chilcot Inquiry?
Like the Hutton Inquiry?
Like the Butler Inquiry?
Like the Foreign Affairs SC?
Blair has faced more inquiries on Iraq than anyone else ever
I think it's a sensible decision. The cost of the policing is going up and up with all this protesting. It's a shame that protesting is so often associated with going a step to far. They undermine their message by so often crossing the lines of decency.
I don't think the man can win.
If he'd gone ahead people would have criticised him for burdening the police with huge expense and disruption all due to a self-serving book signing exercise.
I think there's much to criticise Blair about (not disposing of Brown sonner first and foremost) but I think you're being harsh here Mr Dale.
Maybe it is because we got to see her cry. We got to see her shoved rather than leave.
Blair cruised away scott-free and then rinsed the planet for massive bundles of cash.
It's not the age we live in; it's the type of people he's upset. Mrs T upset the miners, who (apart from an over-developed sense of entitlement) were mostly decent folk. Blair has upset the passifists. Ironically, along with the anti-hunting mob, this group seems to attract the most violent and illiberal elements of society.
I think Blair is worried about a bit more than being berated, given the events in Dublin. His concerns about the cost to taxpayers and the disruption are fair enough.
If people wanted to debate the issues with Blair, force him to defend and justify his actions and so forth, then I'd certainly think he was being a scaredy cat by pulling out.
But that's not what peope would have done - they'd have thrown their shoes at him (as middle-class English tosspots just love to channel Iraqi journalists), thrown abuse at him, thrown paint at him and so on. They're not interested in a debate, they just want to scream "WAR CWIMINAL!" at the top of their voices.
Shame the anti-war movement was ignored in 2003.
Good thing that Blair is ignored in 2010. He is obviously not wanted, so why doesn't he just clear off and vacate the pitch.
It suits the coalition that Labour parades its dinosaurs throughout the media interminably. They are after all the ones to blame, and should be paraded while they all scramble to shoft blame around each other.
But having to look at Blair especially makes me cringe. I turn away if he's on TV, switch off or go outside.
If anyone has it coming to them, that arrogant unapologetic piece of lying scum is he. He's not chicken. He knows the score. He's hated and people want him gone. He had his slot. His time is gone. Now move him on.
It's all those Brown eggs that were hurled at him in Dublin.
I bet Waterstones didn't want the bad publicity; and, the loss of a complete day's trading.
There is a world of difference between facing `committees and enquiries` most of which were run by stooges he had a hand in picking and facing his true critics...the ordinary Joe Public he was likely to meet in the street.Bliar was never a man of conviction and integrity.....just a plain and simple, old fashioned opportunist....
Mr Dale is very right!!!
Perhaps it was cancelled when they counted the applications and realised there would be more police and security personnel there than punters.
No Iain. It's because he's a shit and needs to be taken to court for the things he's done.
I particularly enjoyed his comment on the ITV early morning programme (which should now be renamed "Windbreak") that the Met would do "whatever we asked them".
Bit of a giveaway that one, Bliar.
But it really says it all when an ex-PM is too scared to appear in public.
Thatcher was not remotely guilty of war crimes. Neither did she destroy the Education system or the economy.
Spot the gap.
People who still think Blair was a good PM do so because the Labour Party and the BBC spent 13 years telling them he was.
Perhaps Blair is worried that armed police might "accidentally" shoot him. There would, of course, be insufficient evidence to prosecute anyone. Promotions might even be awarded.
" Matthew said...
It's pretty harsh to label him chicken without knowing the nature of the security advice given to him by the police."
I'm sure it's mostly egg-related.
Matthew Cain makes an excellent point, totalling demolishing Grim Reaper. As for Dale's comparison with Mrs T, who was it who had gates erected at Downing Street in the face of a security threat?
How about limiting protesters to one at a time of his own age and weight - preferably with no weapons except gloves under Queensberry rules - and see how many turn up?
None, I should bet - the "hard" left never tried anything physical with Colin (now Lord) Moynihan who had boxed at around 8 stone.
I categorically do NOT support Blair but why should anyone volunteer to have eggs and tomatoes thrown at them in order that their political opponents can obtain cheap headlines?
@ Scary Biscuits
Mostly agree with you - miners are decent by their own standards and while they might might put the boot into a blackleg they would shun anyone that they saw hitting a girl/woman. {My first couple of school years were in a mining village and spent the rest of my childhood/youth within easy cycling distance of another minefield).
However Mrs T also upset the BBC by complaining about the egregious waste.
More aggressive etc. etc. etc.?
Think Brighton bomb and the still ranting leftist scum that want to see her dead.
You are right, he is a wimp.
Just noticed that Play.com are selling his trashy novel for half price...yes already.....might have bottled it on account of no one turning up to buy it....Oh poetic justice
@Wrinkled Weasel:
"Thatcher was not remotely guilty of war crimes."
Not everyone's quite so sure about that.
He's been perfectly willing to run the gauntlet of protesters in the past,
No he hasn't..oh hold on you mean Rose Addis?
Blair spent all his years as PM being carefully put in front of a picked audience, much like Brown after him.
They aren't just wimps, they are cowards who don't want to be seen to be wimps.
Like the Chilcot Inquiry?
Like the Hutton Inquiry?
Like the Butler Inquiry?
Like the Foreign Affairs SC?
Blair has faced more inquiries on Iraq than anyone else ever
ROFLMFAO!!!! Matthew you say the funniest things, ooh, you were serious?
It goes to show the level of Labour when we have people coming on to say such utterly ridiculous things, and they even believe it and are supported by others!
@ P.Stable
Well, anyone with half a brain
Even the Commanding Officer of the Belgrano accepted that she was a valid target
Post a Comment