"In the first place, you understand what it means to believe. What you often find is that you immediately have something in common with another person of faith, even if he belongs to a different religion." Tony Blair

An “Apple” and an “Orange” are both “fruits” too…

I know…”Sharks” and “Goldfish” are both “fish”….

And to think this guy was Prime Minster of a once great power. If anyone 1,000 years from now wants to understand why western civilization went down the tubes (if it does) all they need do is read this quote…

What the hell is he talking about?

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at December 25, 2008 1:00 AM

Matto da legare.

Posted by: Hugh at December 25, 2008 1:10 AM

Yup, Tony Blair is stark, raving mad!

And to think this fool was not taken out to pasture and shot!

Posted by: boneshack at December 25, 2008 1:20 AM

He said the Prophet Mohammed had been "an enormously civilizing force."

No, Mr. Blair, exactly the opposite.

The Islamic prophet Mohammad has been an enormous civilisation destroying force, and is attempting to do it again, thanks to oil revenues, and must be stopped at all costs. If we have any money left.

Posted by: dsinc at December 25, 2008 1:37 AM

Blair is simply sucking up politically to try to further the peace process.

Posted by: stickman at December 25, 2008 2:29 AM

I don't think Tony is stark raving mad........
I simply think Tony is completely full of,________________________________________________

(You fill in the blank)

Posted by: Deus_Vult! at December 25, 2008 2:56 AM

He said the Prophet Mohammed had been "an enormously civilizing force."

Civilizing is as civilizing does - the prophet Forrest Gump

Posted by: sainte at December 25, 2008 3:04 AM

Blair, on what he knows about Islam - http://www.box.net/shared/x9nn8pjen9

Posted by: Rogster at December 25, 2008 4:19 AM

He said the Prophet Mohammed had been "an enormously civilizing force."

-

Just as Hitler was good to European Jews, Pol Pot was good to Cambodians, Omar al-Bashir is good to Sudanese blacks, Mohammed Atta was good to New Yorkers... Well, I guess I don't need any more such examples to get my point across.

How seditious, dishonest, delusional, "dhimmi-fied", meretricious, deceiving and treasonous does one have to be to make such a statement? It's just about the same as Nicolas Sarkozy saying that Arabic is the language of science, modernity and the future. Simply disgusting, simply unbelievable... Though we all shouldn't get surprised by now when such fools and sell-outs utter that kind of nonsense.

It would only be surprising if they stopped lying in order to protect and promote their stupid "religion of peace."

Posted by: Proud_Kafir7908 at December 25, 2008 4:24 AM

Not too hard to see why England is going the way it is with politico stupid, ignorant people like Blair stating these knids of statements. I bet Blair and Colin Powell must read the same sanitized version of the qur'an and as mentioned, gloss over those very popular verses that exhort muslims to kill Jews and Christians.

Faith is vital to undetstanding the ME, BUT one also has to see the forerst for the tress and Blair does not. It takes wisdom, courage and a
willingness to study islam and speak out against the horrors that are islam. The dangers that are inherent inside the qur'an,that come from islam's pervert mohammed, and his dedication to allah. Blair is a mainstream idiot and the world does not need him as enjoy to the middle east.The only equal islam has is hitler, stalin, mussolini. Tony Blair, a true idiot on the world stage and a muslim apologist to boot. No wonder the sun is sinking in Britainiitan.

Posted by: PatriotUSA at December 25, 2008 4:43 AM

If, as the 'peace envoy', he thinks that reading the Qur'an is essential to understanding the Arab POV, why doesn't he think that reading Jewish scriptures is essential to being fair to the Israeli viewpoint, if not understanding it?

Posted by: Infidel Pride at December 25, 2008 5:45 AM

I wonder why he would read the Koran nearly every day. What for? I have a copy of the beastly book, and sometimes refer to it because I am trying to fathom Islam, and I am making headway. But Blair? Nearly every day seems suspiciously excessive; did he say this to curry favour with certain people? It is such a ridiculous image, Blair the civilization-destroyer sitting down for his daily "civilizing" Koran-reading session.

Weird.

Posted by: PG at December 25, 2008 7:09 AM

Blair's words are what a quisling says when he is running scared from his own people after it becomes apparent that he has been collaborating with the enemy. It's the "never say you're sorry" strategy.

To see how disturb Blair's mind is, see this photo of his filthy grin as he shakes hands over a deal with Gaddafi, the terrorist freak who murdered hundreds over Lockerbie, Scotland on flight 173. All of Britain must be zombified in fear if they do not literally tear such leaders to shreds for perpetuating such a humiliating shame.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1553044/Blair-Gaddafi-and-the-BP-oil-deal.html

Posted by: Max Publius at December 25, 2008 7:26 AM

Tony Blair is a wanker -- to repeat what my UK friends tell me.

The problem is that so many accept what he says as truth and wisdom.

Blair is going to do a lot of damage.

Posted by: Always On Watch at December 25, 2008 8:20 AM

"I regularly read the Koran, practically every day," Blair told the interviewer. He said the Prophet Mohammed had been "an enormously civilizing force." -Tony Blair

I don't believe that for one second. He doesn't read the Koran! Liar!

Concerning his Mohammed comment, you've got to be joking! The whole reason the Middle East (except Israel) is still Barbarian is because of Mo!

Posted by: darcy at December 25, 2008 8:35 AM

"To see how disturb Blair's mind is, see this photo of his filthy grin..." --Max Publius

I looked at the photo. You are right. A truly revolting "grin" standing next to the Barbarian. Very creepy. Very disturbed.

Posted by: darcy at December 25, 2008 8:38 AM

"I wonder why he would read the Koran nearly every day. What for?" --PG

He's lying. He doesn't do that! I'd bet money, and I'm not a money-betting person, that he's NEVER opened the "beastly book." NEVER.

Posted by: darcy at December 25, 2008 8:41 AM

Blair is a lily-livered snivelling coward with no redeeming features. An absolute abomination. He gives faith a bad name.

Posted by: johndoe at December 25, 2008 8:42 AM

He said the Prophet Mohammed had been "an enormously civilizing force."

-

Just as Hitler was good to European Jews, Pol Pot was good to Cambodians, Omar al-Bashir is good to Sudanese blacks, Mohammed Atta was good to New Yorkers... Well, I guess I don't need any more such examples to get my point across.

How seditious, dishonest, delusional, "dhimmi-fied", meretricious, deceiving and treasonous does one have to be to make such a statement? It's just about the same as Nicolas Sarkozy saying that Arabic is the language of science, modernity and the future. Simply disgusting, simply unbelievable... Though we all shouldn't get surprised by now when such fools and sell-outs utter that kind of nonsense.

It would only be surprising if they stopped lying in order to protect and promote their stupid "religion of peace."
Posted by: Proud_Kafir7908 at December 25, 2008 4:24 AM

Excellent post.

And Sarkozy? My God what a HUGE disappointment. Gigantic. Enormous. Colossal. I remember thinking after hearing the news that he had beaten "Sego," - Yay! France is saved!" As it turns out, however, he's only going to bring France down more. What irony.

Posted by: darcy at December 25, 2008 9:07 AM

Tony Blair is a man of straw. He is a coward who ran away leaving an absolute mess of a country for other men to sort out.( or try to....) He knows he is responsible for untold deaths and is immersing himself in religion ( any religion ) looking for an absolution that will never come. He is not "The Coward of the County" he is " The Coward of the Country. "

Posted by: rookie at December 25, 2008 9:14 AM

If Muhammad were living and preaching his vile ideology today, he'd be ground into the dirt, along with his inane followers, just like so many destructive cults are done in now.

What can one think when the "Tony Blairs" of the world say such ridiculous things?

It's so surreal, so bizarre and damn near nightmarish.

Welcome my friends... To the Matrix!

Posted by: Aiken Bryce at December 25, 2008 9:25 AM

"If Muhammad were living and preaching his vile ideology today, he'd be ground into the dirt, along with his inane followers..." --aiken bryce

inane or insane?

Both!

Posted by: darcy at December 25, 2008 9:29 AM

Matto da legare.

Posted by: Hugh at December 25, 2008 1:10 AM

Posted by: Shy Guy at December 25, 2008 9:53 AM

I don't notice anything different from seeing tony blair with ghaddifi than i saw with bush and the saudi bhander bush. or for that matter all saudi and islam apologists. all i see is money and legacy. morality goes right out the window.

Posted by: desidude at December 25, 2008 10:32 AM

Robert wrote, "...No answers to these questions are likely to be forthcoming from Mr. Blair..."

There are no answers forthcoming because no one, and i mean no one in the UK dare ask them!

How can he understand the Qur'an without reading the accompanying ahadith. Blair is actually patroning and condescening to the Muslims. He says he reads and understands the Qur'an every day, but he never says he reads the ahdaiths to give the verses context. Wouldn't a Muslim want to know how he can understand the Qur'an without them? I guess not, since it might dissuade his dhimmified, politically correct mantra.

Merry Christmas to all!!!

Posted by: Sir Oinks Alot at December 25, 2008 10:56 AM

From Article: Blair, 55, said his own Catholic beliefs helped him in his current role as envoy for Mideast peace.

You see, we never really get rid of these people.
In the US, worn out politicians, and high appointee's, upon leaving office get 'other' high positions, usually in industry, as a CEO somewhere, or roles like 'envoy', or 'consultant'. Bill Clinton has no official titles other than X, or XXX, but we are not rid of him yet.

Apparently Blair has just rolled from one authoritative position to another under the 'good old boy' system.

From article: But when asked if he planned to convert to Islam, he smiled and said, "No, let's not start on that," Die Zeit reported....

The second part of that question should have been, 'If Islam is that swell, why not'?

Give us your reasons for NOT converting...

Posted by: duh_swami at December 25, 2008 12:44 PM

He is just a liar. He didn't open Qur'an.

Posted by: LazarOfSerbia at December 25, 2008 1:00 PM

What "koran" did he read?
If you read just a sample of the text you will find murder, looting, torture.
How in the hell is that civilizing?

Posted by: interestinconundrum at December 25, 2008 1:26 PM

This power that has the world in it's foul mouth...powerful delusion, that even the very elect will believe a lie.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at December 25, 2008 1:33 PM

Fair is foul and foul is fair.

Posted by: johndoe at December 25, 2008 3:33 PM

.how do people get to be so stupid?

Posted by: ploome at December 25, 2008 4:04 PM

.how do people get to be so stupid?

Posted by: ploome at December 25, 2008 4:17 PM

How do people get to be so stupid?

Posted by: ploome at December 25, 2008 4:17 PM

I agree. I don't get it. And, how do "Leaders" get to be so stupid?

Shame on you, Tony Blair. You Liar and you Dhimmi to the Islamic Barbarians.

Posted by: darcy at December 25, 2008 5:07 PM

Interestinconundrum: I had a conversation with a very pleasant young man in Sudan; I knew him quite well already as we lived in the same place. He was telling me how "civilizing" Islam is, (and how, by the way, the South was comparatively "uncivilized"). Thinking of Muslim aggression in Darfur, the war with the South, etc, I puzzled over this.

It is true that in the Muslim, Sharia city of Khartoum the people have very good manners, there is little crime, etc. Everyone was civil to me, the men were gentlemanly and I did not feel unsafe ever.

(Yes, I did: some Muslim GIRLS one night harrassed and frightened me - I think they would have robbed me if I had not run to safety.)
Of course the "dark" side of this "civilized" world revealed itself to me eventually - unwanted babies put in the street for the dogs to eat, for example.

Yet none of that "dark" side is much more than the dark side of human nature generally.

What I think is DISASTROUS is the mixing of the religious groups, they and us. It DOESN'T WORK.
That young man was happy enough to live his life there in a homogenous society, happy with his culture and rituals, and probably in denial about the bloodier aspects of Islam.

But if he came here to the West, I know what would happen. He would look around, feel uncomfortable, start to think the girls here are immoral, shake his head over the sexualized advertising, listen to more radical Muslims, feel superior to us in a more focused, more immediate way, start to miss his homogenous Islamic world, but probably get used to a better income here, certain freedoms, clean streets, whatever, and make the illogical assumption that if only Australia could be Islamized it would be PERFECT.And then thinking that such a dream is not outside the bounds of possibility...
And so on.

And I am talking about a nice, friendly type, who for now rather likes Western people.

I am tired of people telling me that "the immigrant experience" shows that Muslims will adapt, just like the Greeks and Italians did. The religion, the culture, the psychology, and the latent (becoming less latent) agenda make them a risk that was always too dangerous and that all evidence shows to be increasingly dangerous.

We MUST stop tempting them with the idea of immigration to the West. If they are happy enough in their culture, leave them there. If they think Islam is civilized, let them enjoy being civilized their way.

Posted by: PG at December 25, 2008 5:42 PM

From the article:

'"I regularly read the Koran, practically every day," Blair told the interviewer. He said the Prophet Mohammed had been "an enormously civilizing force."'

'An enormously civilizing force'...

Now for a reality check.

One of the books I was given for Christmas was Canon Dr Patrick Sookhdeo's "Global Jihad: the Future in the Face of Militant Islam".

On page 158, in a chapter entitled grimly "the practicalities of jihad", in the section discussing the Muslim penchant for beheading and throat-slitting, Canon Sookhdeo includes a bloodcurdling description of the following utterly typical Muslim atrocity:

"When 8000 Armenians [i.e. Armenian Christians] were killed by Ottoman Muslims in Urfa in December 1895,

" *the young men were killed by the traditional ritual Islamic method for slaughtering animals* {my emphasis added: dda}.

"They were thrown on their backs, held by their hands and feet, and then their throats were slit while a prayer {and we all know to whom...'allah' the war god of the Arabs - dda} was recited".

{source, given by Sookhdeo, is Lord Kinross, The Ottoman Centuries: The Rise and Fall of the Turkish Empire, as published in New York in 1979, pages 559-560}.

EIGHT THOUSAND people mass-murdered in one go. Muslims slitting HUMAN throats while reciting 'prayers'. That may be 'religion' but there is a name for it: HUMAN SACRIFICE. I don't want to 'understand' 'what it means to believe' that one may gain one's ticket to paradise by butchering a helpless fellow human being in the most sadistically cruel way imaginable. I don't want to enter into the unholy ecstasy that possesses the Muslim jihadist performing such an abominable ritual.

Does Tony Blair really want to endorse religions that, like Islam, regularly perform ritual human sacrifices on the grand scale, as here described in this ghastly all-too-typical incident from the jihadist genocide against the Armenian Christians?

Does he REALLY want to praise the man whom Muslims believe to have set a permanent and forever-to-be-emulated example for atrocities of that sort, by the mass beheading of the surrendered, defenceless Banu Qurayza POWs, as 'an enormously civilizing influence'??

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at December 25, 2008 7:08 PM

Muhammed was/is an "enormously civilizing force, eh? Let's see...Islam, as propounded by Muhammed, the Last Prophet, the conduit of Allah's commandments, authorized:

1. Permanent warfare and subjugation of unbelievers, who are then subject to discriminatory taxes and institutionalized codes of humiliation and abuse (see the Pact of Umar, e.g.)
2. The rape and enslavement of women, the enslavement of children, the looting and pillage of property as fey (war booty), the burning of crops, and the murder of all combatants and their supporters who fight the Muslims
3. Lying and assassinations in the service of jihad
4. In the case of those not fortunate enough to be members of the Ahl al-Dhimma (People of the Revealed Scriptures), the choice of either conversion or death.
5. The proscribing of representational art, as well as music and dance
6. The viewing of women as inferior to men in temperament, intellect, and moral character, the consequence being that they will outnumber men in hell.
7. As a corollary to #6, the viewing of women as chattel, who must submit to their husbands' sexual demands at all times, lest they be beaten or divorced for their disobedience.
8. The destruction of the history and culture of pre-Muslim civilizations, considered worthless, as jahiliyya (pre-Islamic period of ignorance).
9. The overweening role of obedience/submission to Allah's will, the absence of any semblance of the Golden Rule being salient.

The fruits of Islam are obvious to anyone who has eyes to see - murder, strife, internecine warfare, political instability, intellectual and economic stagnation, civil disorder, terrorism, fanaticism, institutionalized brutality, and the destruction of Greco-Roman/Judeo-Christian civilization extending throughout western Asia, Persia, north Africa, and the Middle East. Compare increasingly prosperous India to the pestholes that are Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bengladesh. Indeed, all of these afflicted, blighted, benighted nightmare lands have one thing in common - they have all received the blessing of Islam, the world's great civilizer, according to Tony Blair.

Posted by: commonsense at December 25, 2008 10:54 PM

Sorry - the second sentence of my post should have read "...Islam, as propounded by Muhammed..authorizes..."

Nothing's changed. Islam is immutable, eternal.

Posted by: commonsense at December 25, 2008 11:00 PM

One of the reasons some prefer to be atheists. There are highly religious and motivated persons like Blair et al. They shame the well meaning religions as well.In fact they read nothing other than their bank-balances statements of various sources. And feel victorious and proud.

Posted by: Kash225 at December 25, 2008 11:16 PM

If there is another attack on London or in England in general, the British people know who they must find and beat to death, just like we know here in the US.

Find him and fix him. Such a weak, Cambridge/Oxford hippie must be made to pay for his weakness and liberalism when it is shown that it has gotten people killed.

Posted by: No More Ham, Ed at December 25, 2008 11:23 PM

How is it then, Mr Blair that you have become such a wuss after reading all that man and Arab superiority text....oh never mind. Dhimwitted cluck.

Posted by: Jewel Atkins at December 25, 2008 11:28 PM

BLairhead.

He reads the Koran every day like I climb Mt. Everest every Tuesday.

A liar and a fool.

Posted by: profitsbeard at December 25, 2008 11:57 PM

First of all I'd like to say that I often link to your website, and am very grateful for the information you provide. You're doing a great job.

I too was not happy about these comments by Mr Blair, and I have high regard for him, as you can see by the very existence of my blog.

http://keeptonyblairforpm.wordpress.com/2008/12/26/ahmadinejads-alternative-christmas-message-on-british-tv-c4/

When he was PM he never shrank from identifying the cause of what he referred to as "this terrorism". In fact his determination to help us in Britain understand that today's terrorism was "not OUR fault ... not the consequence of foreign policy" contributed to his early departure from office. His party were wrong, VERY wrong to want to replace him. Having said that not even the Conservative party in Britain wants to tackle the problem of THIS TERRORISM.

There are other factors too which impacted on Blair's position when PM. Other factors, as well as Iraq, of course. Britain is now under control, in many parliamentary seats, of Muslims. He was seen as threatening this by the Left, even some NOT of the Left in Labour. They saw his stance in failing to attack Israel over Lebanon, August 2006, as evidence of his 'anti-Palestine' position. It was always more complex than that, but not to those who wanted rid of him. There is a strong pro-Palestinian cause in Britain's Left and in the press. In September 2006 he announced he would be leaving office and did so within 9 months - June 2007.

So having been vilified as pro-Israel, he left to become the Quartet's Middle East Envoy. He then launched his Faith Foundation to try to bring faiths together.

It may seem at times that he has gone native in his search for Middle East peace, and in his belief in belief. But he also knows that if togetherness fails, a clash of cultures/civilizations is the alternative, perhaps at international conflict level.

There is no Third Way open today while Islamicists are uncontainable by any high level within Islam, and we know that is not how Islam works. A child can preach to a man. (Odd how a creed which seems to lay no overall authority on POLITICAL democracy as we know it, allows brainwashed kids to brainwash others.)

But that's what Tony Blair is dealing with. Middle East conflicts, wars, threats of nuclear proliferation. Meanwhile he knows and meets many good Muslims who abhor all of this, but their religion forbids them the space to speak out.

He's more or less damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

But if he said that Islam was as Churchill thought Mohammedism was, do you REALLY think that would he helpful in today's climate?

And Ahmadinejad now is emulating Blair in trying to appeal across the board to religious people on "values". On that comparison, there are NO points for the Iranian leader, the holocaust denier and sponsor of execution for adultery. But it is interesting that he is spooked by Blair's appeal across religions.

Personally I have no religious faith, but I consider myself a secular christian. Mr Blair and I don't agree on everything. I am NOT his mouthpiece. But I DO think that he is a good man who means to extend the hand of friendship to moderates worldwide, perhaps to stir them to debate from within their ranks.

The jury is still out as to whether he has committed a crime most damnable by this statement on the koran. Personally I am not overjoyed by it, but he has mentioned in the past that he reads it. Perhaps he understands it better than we do.

Look at his record supporting the USA on OUR values and the price he paid, and then accuse him of being wrong-headed in this approach.

To me he is still the politician most able to get to the core of issues and instigate grass-roots change. I hope sincerely that he will prevail, whatever diplomatic language needs to be used.

Posted by: BlairSupporter at December 26, 2008 7:02 AM

"Does Tony Blair really want to endorse religions that, like Islam, regularly perform ritual human sacrifices on the grand scale, as here described in this ghastly all-too-typical incident from the jihadist genocide against the Armenian Christians?"

"Does he REALLY want to praise the man whom Muslims believe to have set a permanent and forever-to-be-emulated example for atrocities of that sort, by the mass beheading of the surrendered, defenceless Banu Qurayza POWs, as 'an enormously civilizing influence'??"

Yes, he does.

Posted by: johndoe at December 26, 2008 7:06 AM

He [Blair] then launched his Faith Foundation to try to bring faiths together."
-- from an admirer of Tony Blair above

Oh for god's sake. He "launced his Faith Foundation" for the greater glory of Tony Blair, just the way Clinton "launched" his Clinton World Initiative or whatever he calls it. Then these goddam foundations become vehicels for self-aggrandizement, and an excuse for meeting the world's rich, who then not only pay into the foundation or fund run by the blairs and the clintons and so many others just like them, but also end up, amazingly, paying separately for speeches for Blair, for Clinton, e tutti quanti.

Do you know how much money Tony Blair has been raking in? He's in the Clinton Class, in every grasping respect.

He disgusts, and his wife even more.

Posted by: Hugh at December 26, 2008 3:29 PM

Silly old me! Am I a nitwit to suggest that maybe Blair has been hypnotized (the effects of reading only the uh-normal parts of the Qur'an daily?) Also that every Muslim is aware of the necessity, indeed the power of deception? Every time he talks to the Muslim authorities, they are sweet-talking him with deceptions! It happened to Bush so why not Blair!~

Yes, I have read a few "nice" things in the Qur'an too, seemingly plagiarizing of the Bible.

Posted by: angryamerican at December 26, 2008 5:47 PM

Man, Hugh must really be pissed. His orthography is all disheveled.

Posted by: Jewel Atkins at December 26, 2008 6:38 PM

There is about as much chance of Bliar reading the koran as there is a member of the British Parliament reading the Lisbon Treaty before voting "yes" to ratify it.

In other words a pig has more chance of scratching its backside on the kaa'baa.

Posted by: Stephen Gash SIOE England at December 26, 2008 7:37 PM

Perhaps he understands it better than we do.
Posted by Blairsupporter

You might be right and if you are, that would make Mr. Blair guilty of high treason for selling out his country, his people, and his civilization to islam.

Maybe he's just playing dumb to cover his own ass. How could such an educated, intelligent man read the vile, virulent doctrine of the qur'an and conclude that a barbaric, medieval warlord was a "civilizing force"? Blair promised change and by God, he delivered it. Now the United States is about to suffer a similar fate at the hands of Obama and his democrat minions. God help us.

Posted by: Susanp at December 26, 2008 11:47 PM

Blair deliberately set about social engineering projects for change and multiculturalism. To achieve this he bought about changes to the way our culture and history was taught in schools. Not only was British history diminished in prominence it was something to be ashamed of and was replaced by the history of other countries. Blair also bought in political correctness by stealth to make it unacceptable for anyone to speak out about mass immigration and the detrimental effect it was having on the country. With regard to religion he said that one day Islam would probably replace Anglicanism as the chief religion in the UK. Not surprisingly these sentiments were echoed by the Archbishop of Canterbury. So the stage is set for a complete take over of the state by Islam aided and abetted by Blair. Incidentialy Blair rarely used parliament for debate on changes etc. Most decisions were made on the couch at No.10 with Cherie and that other master of the universe, Alastair Campbell.

Posted by: Tommo at December 27, 2008 5:18 AM

Not everyone in the UK is a traitor to western civilization. Read the comments, running about 99-1 in favor.

Indulgence of Islam is harming society

According to Murray, "what we are seeing is the state deferring to a seventh-century Arabian tradesman as a source for secular law". He was speaking on Christmas Eve. The next day, Ahmadinejad spoke to the nation. Yesterday it was reported that Baroness Butler-Sloss, one of Britain's most senior legal figures, wants Sharia divorces to be enshrined in law. For the first time in decades, religion is moulding public life in this country; but that religion is not Christianity.

Posted by: Beagle at December 27, 2008 12:13 PM

I'M FLUMMOXED, TO BE BLUNT
I really don't know where to start. There are so many people at this site with whom I agree on the problems of creeping sharia & islamicism in the west, and on slamming down heavily on jihadists. I'm not in favour of violence, but if you have to shoot anyone, as suggested by a commenter above, let it not be Blair, America's strongest ally against terror. (Don't please forget that little episode after 9/11.)

Concentrate on taking out those trying to take us out - jihadists.

I have watched Robert Spencer on video and I am very impressed by this learned man. I'm on YOUR side on these issues. ALL of them. Apart, that is, from this knee-jerk reaction to Blair on Mohammed. Though as you will know I am far from happy about it.

BLAIR READING THE KORAN
(Btw, to commenters here - please get out of the habit of stating as fact that which you do not know. You sound like the 'Bush is a war criminal' crowd of imbeciles). Blair has been reading the koran for years now. His colleagues used to joke that he was packing it for holidays (vacations) rather than books on British history. In his last few weeks in office a TV series showed him saying he was deeply concerned that we in the west were being taken in by the brainwashing from some in terrorism's thrall. He said Muslims who complained about their treatment in Britain were "loopy" (read as "looney"). Here they had freedom of worship and speech as well as all that the state provides to all of its citizens.

But the loopy ... loney press still blamed HIM for siding with Israel against the poor oppressed Palestinians and Muslims in general.

SCHOOLING HIMSELF FOR THE 'INEVITABLE'
Perhaps in the Koran readings he was schooling himself for the seemingly "inevitable" showdown. Perhaps he is now in a position to deal with that showdown from a position of authority which will be listened to in the Arab world due to his studies.

http://keeptonyblairforpm.wordpress.com/2008/12/10/islamists-or-islamicists-the-language-of-islam/

OR WOULD YOU RATHER HAVE WAR?
The alternative could be world war III. Would you rather no-one tried to avoid this by trying for understanding, reform and tolerance?

So, am I only defending Mr Blair because I am too embarrassed to say I got him all wrong? Is it that I was naive to believe his words when he was (often) the only member of his own government speaking out about the responsibilities of Muslim immigrants in Britain? (FYI - Muslim immigration did NOT start with Blair but decades ago throughout Conservative governments too, including Thatcher's, and she served for 18 years.)

No, until I am proved wrong, I defend him because he is one of the few western leaders to have got it right, and to have paid for getting it right with his job.

BLAIR - "THIS TERRORISM ISN'T OUR FAULT"
There is still in Britain and the rest of Europe an unwillingness to accept that WE didn't cause terrorism following 9/11. The papers have been largely responsible for this misinformation. Now they cry "havoc" and let slip the dogs of war - on western leaders.

BLAIR DID NOT SAY THAT ISLAM WOULD REPLACE ANGLICANISM
A commenter here states without any verifiable source that Blair said this prior to the Archbishop of Canterbury's statement. This is a lie. I would have recalled Mr Blair saying this. It is SO contrary to everything he worked for, and would have caused an uproar, even amongst the Left who might well have been happy with this but would have loved to see a battle royal - Blair versus the Queen. Off with his head!

Constitutionalists would have been in utter chaos, confusion and a state of revolution had a British Prime Minister uttered such words. The British state is linked to the Church of England and the Queen is monarchical head. Even if he had thought it - and his record is of working AGAINST this - he would never have said anything to cause embarrassment to the Queen. Blair is a loyal royalist.

MULTICULTURALISM TO BLAME?
We can happily blame Blair for carrying on a multiculturalist agenda if it makes us feel better. But isn't America multiculturalist? The land of the immigrant?

Every European government of left and right has pursued such an agenda for decades, in order to fill jobs (laughable now perhaps) and to try to absorb immigrants comfortably. In principle there should be nothing wrong with that. But the PC brigade pushed it all too far, and governments have had to comply in order to appeal to the vocal majorities, whether they were happy or not.

And here in Britain, although Blair may not have toed the line like many earlier PMs, we have cabinet decision-making and parliamentary accountability.

A BENIGN DICTATORSHIP?
I'd like him back, perhaps even as a benign dictator! I trust him THAT much. But, of course, if he lets me down ... well you know what happens to dictators in the end. (apart from Mugabe, of course).

A benign dictatorship may be what the west will need one of these days. If Tony Blair, first of all he'd need to dispose of the koran reading. As a secular Christian (I am not religious, but adhere to its social mores) I would hope that my PM would not become immersed in any religious book. Skewed judgment is NOT what we need right now.

Politics is the art of the possible. Blair knows this. Give him a chance, please. You can shoot him down if he ever really DOES sell us out to Islamicist terrorism. I might even pass you the bullets, tears in my eyes.

On second thoughts ... I couldn't ... I COULDN'T ... honestly, NO. I couldn't!

Posted by: BlairSupporter at December 27, 2008 3:47 PM

P.S. Meant to add this to the above:

http://hotair.com/archives/2006/09/27/video-this-terrorism-isnt-our-fault/

Video clip of Tony Blair in his last Speech as leader to his party conference -

“This is a struggle that I believe will last a generation and more. But I also believe this passionately. We will not win until we shake ourselves free of the wretched capitulation to the propaganda of the enemy that somehow we are the ones responsible. This terrorism isn’t our fault, we didn’t cause it, it’s not the consequence of foreign policy. It is an attack on our way of life. It is global. It has an ideology. It killed nearly 3000 people including 60 British on the streets of New York before the war in Iraq and Afghanistan were even thought of. It’s been decades growing ... And it preys on every conflict and it exploits every grievance and its victims are mainly Muslim. This is not our war against Islam. This is a war fought by extremists who pervert the true faith of Islam.”

"If we retreat now, hand over Iraq and Afghanistan (to terrorism) we won't be safer. We would be committing a craven act of surrender that will put our future security in the deepest peril."

Even if you reject and/or hate Islam per se, and I am still undecided on this, you have to admit THIS politician NEVER implied that we in the west are wrong. Or that the "true faith of Islam" was free of blame. True he did not shame or blame the WHOLE religion. But the fact that he and his audience knew he was leaving BECAUSE OF his stance on terrorism makes this particularly poignant, imho.

The commenters at Hot Air all seem to agree with this.

Do you really think a man who felt this so deeply - and he did - has now turned 180 degrees?

No. Nor me.

Political diplomacy. The art of the possible.

Posted by: BlairSupporter at December 27, 2008 4:12 PM

"I regularly read the Koran, practically every day," Blair told the interviewer. He said the Prophet Mohammed had been "an enormously civilizing force."

Well, I guess in a perverse way it is. It forced Spain to route them out of Alhambra. There was a driving force for European civilization back in the day, and it was the notion that islam is NOT acceptable. Unlike now. Maybe the lunatic Blair was being facetious??

Posted by: lorfalcon at December 29, 2008 12:56 AM

Esselamu aleykum we rahmetullah brothers and sisters. A new world will open for T.Blair when Allah (swt) guide's you to the straight path (insAllah). Greetings from Holland.

Posted by: ex-christian at December 31, 2008 8:22 PM