I'm told by a source in the armed forces that there is incredulity in Iraq amongst our soldiers that the Prime Minister has found time to meet the families of the captured Israeli soldiers.
Every sympathy goes to them as fellow soldiers but this is the PM who has never attended a UK military funeral, visited an injured soldier in hospital (and there are many more than the Govt will admit too) and has never met with the families of UK soldiers either killed or injured in Iraq or Afghanistan. Smashing bloke eh?
50 comments:
that's a bit of a cheap point: you know that, since those kidnappings have triggered all that happened this summer, meeting their families has a political significance that no military funeral or hospital visit could have.
Not a cheap point at all.
Bliar has a duty of care to those he sent to pay the "blood price". He is too cowardly or too contemptuous to meet bereaved families or the war wounded.
This headline-chasing hypocrisy is indeed causing anger amongst the Armed Forces - as an ex-military man myself, it makes me furious to see these twisted priorities.
The distateful spectacle of backstabbing career politicians scrabbling for power at the same time soldiers are fighting and dying is another issue for another day.
"meeting their families has a political significance that no military funeral or hospital visit could have"
Well, let's find out, eh? Fuck the trip to Blue Peter. Let's have Blair make that visit to accompany the bereaved to the next funeral of a serviceman; or to see a soldier having his prosthetic limbs fitted. Then let him look them in the eyes and say it has been worth the sacrifice. Much as I hate him, I might actually give the man some credit.
The Israeli kidnappings were nothing of Blair's doing. These deaths and mutilations are entirely of his making. Iraq was a war of choice - of his choice. Unfortunatley he has never been in the firing line. (Even John Major got mortared in Downing Street.) Blair has just sent others to do the shitty stuff on his behalf - with inadequate kit too.
Now tell me that is a bit of a cheap point. Blair-apologist scum.
How do you know he's never visited the families?
People like you would be the first to accuse him of shroud waiving if he did go to the funerals in any case.
Contrary to yucca's assertion the point at issue is not cheap, only the discredited PM
Talking about political leaders and warfare - i spotted recently Harvard's Steve Hein's assesment of political leadership in the modern world;
Quoting -
"To get elected then, a potential leader need only tell the people what they want to hear. This process encourages the selection of insecure leaders for the following reason:
The candidate who is most approval-seeking, and most power-hungry, i.e. the most insecure, will be the most likely to mislead the public, and thus the most likely to get elected.
The long term effect of this is that countries will elect insecure leaders. Such leaders will also lack integrity since integrity and insecurity are mutually exclusive.
They are mutually exclusive because when one feels insecure, one feels constantly threatened, as if fighting for survival. And in the battle of survival, one does whatever necessary, and integrity is the first casualty.
Insecure leaders focus on filling their own needs and on generating "quick-fixes." They use the people who have elected them to feel powerful and approved of.
The greater the social problems, the more such leaders will address short-term solutions at the expense of long-term societal happiness. Such behavior is both counter-productive and highly inefficient from the perspective of overall happiness.
An extreme example of such inefficient behavior is the leader who sends his nation into battle in order to either (a) Distract the people's attention, or (b) Steal what the nation cannot produce on its own. They may also create internal battles (for example, the "war on drugs," "war on poverty," "war against teenage smoking").
The majority of battles, whether literal or figurative, are the result of extreme unhappiness. This unhappiness, an unmistakable sign of low EQ, may be on the part of the leader, the voters, or both.
- End Quote
Sounds like an indictment of Tony Blair to me.
"How do you know he's never visited the families?"
The closest he has been to the families was when Reg Keys visited Sedgefield last year. Families have requested meetings and have been rebuffed.
He has not visited the wounded, despite a typical non-denial denial by David Hill in the Guardian letters page some time ago. Downing Street have attempted to have their cake and eat it by claiming he flits anonymously to bedsides to avoid undue publicity. Absolute cobblers - I can assure anyone that if he had made such a visit, the information would be in the public domain. FoI requests for visit details have been rebuffed - because there haven't been any visits.
He has not been to any funerals, nor to witness any repatriations of the dead. Not all military families are against the war(s).
Ronald Reagan took the trouble to telephone the families of every soldier who died on his watch, EVERY FAMILY , any time of day or night he would make or return a call to to those families and give them as much time as they wanted, that is not propaganda , just the simple truth.
Blair isnt fit to dig a toilet for any british soldier.
ISTR a letter in the Guardian claiming that Blair had visited families.
I supported this war, but now I think the cost is too high and it has been prosecuted without due care for our service personnel.
The Americans respect the hell out of their armed forces.
Tony Blair has been such a disaster for this country's standing in the world. It is getting to the point where I can't bear to hear his voice.
Speaking as an ex military person myself, it doesn,t surprise me. Blair and that parasitic wife of his are just complete and utter arseholes in my opinion. Remember Mrs Blair's tears when that prospective, Gravy Train Driver, son of her's, went to university. How that contrasts with the monarch, whom Mrs Blair despises. Whether or not they will be put on the firing line, at least the Queen's boys are prepared to serve in a war zone. The nearest Leo gets to serving anthing, is cups of tea up a senator's arse.
Cheap point eh?
Not as cheap as the unarmoured Land Rovers in which so many of our soldiers have died or been seriously injured. Hey ho. At least the lads can go on patrol in Basra and Helmond tonight without having to worry about Mrs Blair on that tortuous trip to the hairdresser or "It was the Baby Guv" Gordon Brown on his way to the Andrew Marr interview. They are chuffed they have a £50K armoured Omega each. Methinks that meeting those Israeli families will have more of a political significance than you think. If nothing it has confirmed that the Lads have every right to spit with contempt at the now (sadly)routine condolences at the start of PMQs.
i said that it was a cheap point because it compared two things that have nothing in common: whatever are the reasons to go to military funerals, to visit soldiers in hospital or bereaved families, those are not the reasons for going to see the families of the kidnapped israeli soldiers. the reasons for doing the latter have to do with asserting, first of all, hezbollah's primary responsibility on what happened. second, to express full support to israel; third, to declare that israel was justified in trying to rescue those soldiers. i could go on, but it appears clear that the two things have nothing in common, and that therefore they mustn't be compared.
The Gulf War Syndrome men have not been treated well either.
This is one of those rumours without any truth in it. Tony Blair has visited servicemen in hospital and has spoken to families of servicemen killed while on duty. Just because it is never publicised does not mean it does not happen.
Yucca,
To say that visiting the families of kidnapped foreign armed forces has more significance than paying his respects to the families of those that he sent to war, is absolutely ridiculous.
This man has put the lives of British servicemen at risk, he has a moral duty to see that he looks after both them and their families.
Maybe if he attended the funerals and visited the injured in hostpital he would think harder about committing to war in the future, and more eager to end the ones he is involved in.
Thatchers war in the falklands was planned and well executed, Majors war in the Gulf did what was needed then he brought home the troops.
Blair has thrown the the lives of Brithish troops at risk with no thought for the future or clear plan of action, he should be made to see the results of his actions.
*claps* realist
lets also not forget that for all the slagging Prince Andrew gets he served in the Falklands, and, despite some shitty unfounded rumours, served with as much honour as everybody else.
Verity, why you (or anybody) supported these vanity expeditions is beyond me (I also speak as an ex soldier)
Every day I open my newspaper and see yet more photos of happy smiling young men who will be coming home in boxes while that dull eyed oaf Euan Blair prepares for Government makes me more determined to do something to see that arsehole of a father of his in prison for treason and war crimes. the question is how.
Yucca -
The fact remains that Blair is the PM of *this* country and his primary function is the care and well-being of its subjects. Scoring dubious political points by deluging Israeli families with his faux sympathy and compassion while ignoring equal grief at home is just disgusting.
If he wants to show solidarity by condemning Hezbollah or other terrorist groups he can do it here - starting by clamping down on sympathisers and fund raisers in the UK. It'd do a damn sight more good and might show that he was taking it seriously.
But that might lose him votes in some key constituencies. Better by far to swan off round the Mid. East getting his round of applause from Washington and pretending that he's an international heavyweight.
He's not. He's a slimy little shit who is willing to spend British Forces lives as the price for his personal grandeur. God rot him.
Blair not only lies to get us involved in a war but he also has run the armed forces down so far that reservists, part timers, have to be used to swell the ranks.
My local postman has done two tours of Iraq and one in the Balkans. Can these men possibly be as efficient as full time soldiers?
Bravo Mr Hitchens! Yes, how?
Billy said, "My local postman has done two tours of Iraq and one in the Balkans."
Love to know how many TA's are being used as regular soldiers by this government?
Got a relative who retired a few years ago after doing his full service.
He is presently on his 2nd tour of Iraq since joining the TA's!
Come on, lets face it, if you had had your legs and wedding tackle blown off by an Iranian built roadside bomb in Basra and were in hospital wondering how wou were going to cope with the rest of your life, the last thing you would want is a visit from that tosser.
Come to think of it, I'm wrong - the very LAST thing you would want is a visit from the aforementioned tosser, his odious Lady Macbeth of a wife and someone from the Guardian with a camera.
What do you expect from a Labour Govt, they couldn't give a damn about the armed forces.
Having said that, the last Tory one wasn't much better.
What a good idea (not) to shut all the military hospitals
Peter Hitchens - I didn't support the war as a "vanity expedition". I thought the reasons were well-argued at the time (and I must admit listening more to Bush that hissy Tony): Iraq was the only secular state in the ME and would thus be the easiest in which to promote democracy. The promotion of democracy and the weakening of the people in charge of supporting, through a hotline to their god, theocracies would be weakened, to the good of all of us.
I would now like us to say, OK, we deposed Saddam and Iraq has a legally, democratically voted-for government. Mission accomplished. Now we are leaving.
I want blair to rot in hell for everything destructive he has done to my country over the last nine years. That includes letting in hordes of primitives who believe in an alien diety that has nothing in common with our Christian and Judaic tradition and browbeating us for resisting. It includes the destruction of education (including the non-teaching of our glorious history and the spread of our glorious language), and the creation of a new favoured class of people: criminals, aka "underprivileged". The destruction of the family with tax flim flam should go near the top of the list.
It was all as obvious as a road map on the day Blair, with his moron's empty grin and his moron's way with words, latched onto "Cool Britannia" and declared to all the millions of OAPs watching their tellies in their cold flats that they can't afford to heat comfortably, "Britain is a young country!" Remember that? As he rode that wobbly bike in Rotterdam or wherever it was for the TV cameras when he first slithered in? Where is that bike now, I wonder? In the attic of No 10, along with all the other cheap carnie props?
I honestly hope that the man whose nickname at Fettes was Emily, and whose nickname in Charles Falconer's chambers was Miranda and who came to power in Britain as Bambi will go out as Calamity Jane.
This is just what you would expect from him.
To busy infighting and poncing about the world.
Hey Yucca
What world do you live in. How can you possibly say its a cheap point.
ITS THE TRUTH.
verity
"bite my shiny metal ass" (+:
How on earth did you ever convince yourself that blair was telling the truth?
I saw him for what he is before he was elected, maybe it takes a bullshitter to spot one, but I knew he was full of shit the moment I saw him.
I also spotted "Dubya" as a sock puppet way before 911.
You're a bright lass, wake up.
Whenever something happens, good or bad, sit back and wonder who gains in the end.
The UK military has no place in Iraq and should be withdrawn immediately before any more young men are killed and/or maimed. What happens to Iraq will happen anyway sooner or later and a few 'coalition' military personnel pretending to be policemen will make no difference at all. Personally I believe that one British life lost in Iraq is worth more than the entire population of that awful country. Let Iraq have the civil war they have wanted for so long. That will clear the air a bit...
The fact is Iain that our armed forces have always been treated badly.
I agree that Tony should have met the families of the Israeli kidnapped soldiers to show tea and sympathy if nothing else.
What I can't understand is his refusal to do anything for our own boys.
Perhaps it is his conscience playing on him?
Verity, the reason why Iraq is so bad now is that the resource to do the job was not there at the start when it counted, as covered in my blog. Donald Rumsfeld is a fool. What is more is that we do not have the troops to sort Afghanistan.
We need an army that numbers over 200,000, yet we have about 100,000. The Lebanon has 70,000. (OK they are nothing like as effective, but then the Lebanon has a population of 4,000,000 as opposed to 60,000,000 and we have more cash).
Verity, you said it all @ 11:04p !
We should also get the hell out of Serbia. The UN, Nato, and the EU have absolutely no right whatsoever to be in a democratic and sovereign state.
If you watch what is happening there consider a yorkshire or bedfordshire in 100 years time.
As far as I can see the UN with eu and nato support is saying to Serbia that it should allow a massive chunk of its own sovereign teritory - defended with the lives of millions in both world wars and the Balkan campaigns of earlier years - to be given away to a load of bandits - just becuase there happens to be a high percentage of muslims living there who claim that they can not live side by side with Serbs.
The Serbs have been fighting a 'war on terror' way longer than the decadent west. And yet we allow the terrorist KLA to effectively take control of a 2 million strong province.
And let's not forget that Serbia was on our side in both world wars - and lost more men than we did. Yet we have never given them any credit or support.
And of course when Russia wants to deal with its own islamic terrorist threat in Chechnya - again sovereign Russian territory - the west is outraged.
Yet we have thousands of troops in Iraq - a country that posed absolutely no threat to us whatsoever and which we had under complete submission curtesy of the no-fly zone - ostensibly because of the 'war on terror'.
Our foreign policy is the definition of incoherent, indefensible and it is not even our own!
So farewell then
Iain Dale
You were amusing once
Now, you've just become an unpleasant B list Tory Boy
The Old Days are back
Blue Peter
Verity said-could someone please explain to me and the world why Tony Blair was nicknamed Emily at Fettes + Miranda in chambers. If the answer is what I think it is, this could explain alot about the hold 2 Jags has over him!
Mentioning the war on Serbia; not many people know that Bin Laden backed KLA with money and yet the americans effectively worked with the KLA against serbia in the shady double re-drafting of the ramboillet 'peace treaty'.
oh and just like iraq - u.s. and British intervention made the situation much worse - before the nato attack - refugees were flooding INTO kosovo - it was only after hte bombing that large scale ethnic cleansing took place and there became a refugee problem.
The u.s. and presumably britain also ignored secret service advice - here specifically relating to the likely reaction of serbia.
In effect we had all the problems that went into iraq taking place even before 9/11. The u.s. is a war-mongerer and we are too weak or stupid to resist.
Writing as ex Forces and secretary of my regimental association I can tell you that neither Blair NOR ANY MEMBER of his government /MoD etc have visited any of the lads injured or the families of those killed in our unit. Selly Oak Birmingham is where many of the injured end up - have you noticed how the government fought tooth and nail to keep the place secret and also how many WERE injured?
humph/yucca - you KNOW the truth is that Blair and Brown as well as 'Buff'Hoon and his minions have NOT visited the wounded at all. Don't give us the spin doctor line of keeping these visits quiet - had they happened at least one person would have spoken out to prove they had but no-one has! "Thanks for your support for Blair but not the troops"
I see that the IoS was reporting Cherie had been urging Reid to run against Gordimmo.
It's a pity she did not urge her "husband" to attend the coming home of those coffins from his deceitful and disastrous ventures in the Middle East.
As to verity's statement, I had often wondered about Teflon & Gordimmo partnership.
Perhaps the fat little cocktail sausage was the bit of rough in this threesome?
Ian what are you doing allowing this fascist Serb nonsense on here? It showsd your commitment to free speech? bravo!
Has David Cameron ever vistied or been invited to a UK military funeral?
"This is one of those rumours without any truth in it. Tony Blair has visited servicemen in hospital and has spoken to families of servicemen killed while on duty. Just because it is never publicised does not mean it does not happen. "
Cr@p! The military medical community was canvassed informally around the time of the Guardian letter and the consensus was that Bliar has neither visited the wounded nor bereaved families. There are only a few medical facilities left (thanks to cutbacks) so it can't be that hard for himto pull his finger out.
There are a number of possible reasons:
1. He is ashamed.
2. He lacks the moral courage.
3. He is scared of bad PR.
4. He thinks he can get away without making a visit and pretending that, like a latter-day Florence Nightingale, he flits from bedside to bedside incognito.
Iain,
Israeli families would publicly thank the great Leader for showing such courage (with other people's lives) and leadership (by unquestioningly following George Bush), where as British soldiers would tell him a few home truths about (a) why the war in Iraq is such a bad idea and (b) why it is an even worse idea to fight a stuipid war when not equipped properly!
Who would you visit?
Hmmm - let me think!
And, when one is now looking for a new job, perhaps something 'internatinal' that involves being 'statesmanlike', then this is just the ticket!!!
Anon 8.04! Believe me, if Blair had gone, we would know about it. His press officers would have breifed someone (complete with an interview with a suitably emolient bereaved family saying 'how kind of the PM to break his busy schedule to share our grief - he really is the people's Prime Minister y'know'!
Can you also list the nicknames for the dear leader's wife, Verity?
Iain, what's the word on what the post-No 10 future hold for the aspiring Judge Booth (apart, that is, from autographing and flogging on e-bay anything indoors that's not screwed down)? Once Blair's power of patronage has gone, can we hope for some home truths from her legal fraternity/sorority and, indeed, other 'friends'?
Anon @7.19. If you where to ask Peter Madelson, Chris Smith, and the other high ranking gay Labour MPs, they might be able to tell you.
I was once told - and I have no idea how true it is - that Blair was once 'done' for being naughty in a gents toilet (this was before he was a MP), and went to court, but gave his name as 'Anthony Lynton', ommiting the Blair bit!
Probably an urban rumour. I am sure it would have been rumbled long before now.
But if it's true, it would mean that he would be unfit for office, disbarred as a barrister, and would have set the cause of gay equality back.
I think that after Michael Portoilo's admission, then MPs whould be OK about admitting their homosexuality/bi-sexuality!
It really is a non issue - unlike lying about it, which is a BIG issue!
The lies do not only encompass supposed visits to the wounded. Their very existence is suppressed by MoD. The claim is that no central data is held. This is a lie. Casualty notifications are copied widely, including to the Ministry of Defence.
Now, one would think that a FoI request would generate the required information. Not so. The excuse of the MoD will be that it is intended to publish the information in due course. It doesn't take a genius to work out that "due course" will be under the next administration.
Wounded and deceased soldiers are viewed as a dirty little secret by those in Whitehall and the Labour party.
If I were a wounded serviceman in hospital, the last person I would want visiting me is the shit who caused me to be in Iraq or Afghanistan in the first place!
Yucca, you are a moron and imbecile.
All that happened this summer did not affect us or our Prime Minister at all, except for a pence or two on petrol.
You want the PM to visit foreigners and think they have more significance than our own soldiers?
Why is he there anyways? Isn't it the Foreign Secretaries job?
He is a grandstanding incompetent that needs to be thrown from office.
You are a moron for not recognising that and standing up for him.
Any visit to the armed forces members being treated in Selly Oak hospital by any member of the current administration, i.e. those responsible for sending the wounded into harm's way with inadequate euipment etc., would be reported in the Birmingham Post. Using the Post's search engine with all ki nds of variant requests to elicit news of such a visit yields zero, every time. ANYTHING that happens in Brum that is of interest to Brummies (and the armed forces most certainly are) is in the Post.
Anonymous - blue peter wrote: "Verity said-could someone please explain to me and the world why Tony Blair was nicknamed Emily at Fettes + Miranda in chambers."
No, sweets. Verity didn't say. You seem to be a drooling illiterate. What I wrote is: "I honestly hope that the man whose nickname at Fettes was Emily, and whose nickname in Charles Falconer's chambers was Miranda and who came to power in Britain as Bambi will go out as Calamity Jane."
Anonymous Blue Peter 7:19 plunges on: "If the answer is what I think it is, this could explain alot about the hold 2 Jags has over him!" Wow! With a revelatory exclamation point!!!
Don't try to pervert other people's posts to your puerile purpose.
Go back to the sandbox and crayon out a hundred times: "I must not alter other people's posts".
BTW Anonymous Blue Peter, it is not Verity's style to write, "Could someone please explain to me." What is this blog? Amateur Night in Dixie?
Old Benjamin, the Blairina doesn't just autograph and flog anything that isn't screwed down. Let us not forget her habit of avoiding Customs, loaded down with thousands of pounds worth of gifts as she clumps through the Green Channel.
Written Answers, Defence:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm060904/text/60904w2254.htm
"John Penrose: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many visits by Cabinet colleagues to soldiers in hospital as a result of injuries sustained in overseas missions his Department facilitated in 2006. [87973]
Des Browne: The Ministry of Defence facilitates visits by the Prime Minister to soldiers injured on operations. These are treated as private occasions and we do not release details of such visits.
The MOD facilitated a visit by the Secretary of State for Health (Ms Hewitt) to injured soldiers at the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine in Birmingham in June 2006. This was part of a wider visit to Selly Oak NHS hospital.
The MOD has not facilitated any such visits by other Cabinet colleagues in 2006."
The lame excuse that Bliar makes his visits in private is not tenable. There are a handful of military medical establishments and any such visit would have attracted attention. The only visit made to the wounded during 2006 was by Hewitt, who was visiting NHS Selly Oak anyway!
These "people" are beneath contempt and certainly not worth shedding blood for.
Post a Comment