Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

Well well... Someone's afraid of going to Hell!

Blair donates proceedings from his book to British Legion

Nice try Tony. You're still a cunt with the blood of tens of thousands of people in your hand. I think it's going to take a bit more than this to gain forgiveness from anyone, deity or otherwise...
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
«1

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Erm ok, let him keep the money then.

    Trying to gain redemption or not, I think people should be happy he is doing this for the RBL.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    fair enough, he's give a shit tonne to charity now and rightfully so but i can't help but feel it is all guilt money, i have no problem with it but i don't feel that he should be able to appease his guilt by throwing money at it, i think he should appoligize publicly as well...possibly even give more money because he's destroyed so many lives through the war
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Is Blair getting bothered by the fact he's currently rated the second biggest cunt of the 21st century, with Dubya the only person above him?

    As for G, I see no reason why he shouldn't keep the money. It's what he's been doing for years. The fact that this nation's foreign policy was set simply in order to give this man his millions to retire on is an absolute scandal. He hasn't shown any remorse for the illegal war he took us into, he's never expressed any doubts, he's never apologised. Indeed, the man is under the belief that he has a direct line with God and that he's only accountable to him. Never mind people wondering whether Gordon Brown was mentally ill - it's Blair that's clearly a few olives short of a pizza.

    You want to do something that'll see you possibly redeem yourself, Tony? Then go and crawl into a hole and die, you insufferable cunt. Alternatively, if you don't like that idea, here's something. Retire from public life immediately and spend the rest of your days working for the charities that are out in Iraq and Afghanistan dealing with the shit-storms you unleashed. Spend the rest of your life doing that, and not making any money out of it or giving a single interview to the press, and I just might have something positive to say when the day of your death comes.

    Because as it is currently, I'd dearly love to piss on your grave.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Giving the money to charity is not going to atone for what he's done and, as G has said, he's perfectly entitled to keep the money.

    Still, I'd rather he give the money to charity than not. At least the charity is going to use it helping people.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    G wrote: »
    Erm ok, let him keep the money then.

    Trying to gain redemption or not, I think people should be happy he is doing this for the RBL.

    This.

    The man can do no right can he? FFS. Would it be better if he kept the money for himself, certainly people have criticised him for making a huge pile since leaving office. When he gives it to a [very worthy] charity, people criticise him for that.

    Seriously, get over yourselves.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    As for G, I see no reason why he shouldn't keep the money.

    I don't either. Which is why giving several million pounds away is something we should be praising him for, not damning him.
    The fact that this nation's foreign policy was set simply in order to give this man his millions to retire on is an absolute scandal.

    Oh purlease. Grow up.
    He hasn't shown any remorse for the illegal war he took us into, he's never expressed any doubts, he's never apologised.

    There's that "illegal" word again *yawns*
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    MoK wrote: »
    I don't either. Which is why giving several million pounds away is something we should be praising him for, not damning him.
    Since leaving office, Blair has made at least £20million, to public knowledge. Not to mention any money that may or may not be hidden away under various arrangements. Why hasn't he given any of that money to charity? Why has he only learnt the meaning of the word charity now?

    Or has he suddenly realised he needs to make a good will gesture to keep the public off his back? Not to mention certain war crimes tribunals...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    Why hasn't he given any of that money to charity? Why has he only learnt the meaning of the word charity now?

    Who says he hasn't?
    Or has he suddenly realised he needs to make a good will gesture to keep the public off his back? Not to mention certain war crimes tribunals...

    This would be the public that voted him back in, after it had become clear that there weren't any WMD and the tribunals that aren't happening?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Blair donates proceedings from his book to British Legion

    Nice try Tony. You're still a cunt with the blood of tens of thousands of people in your hand. I think it's going to take a bit more than this to gain forgiveness from anyone, deity or otherwise...


    Poor bastard cant win lol
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whowhere wrote: »
    Poor bastard cant win lol

    Why should he get to?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whowhere wrote: »
    Poor bastard cant win lol
    Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying what he's done is bad. But I have little doubt he's doing it with ulterior motives rather than just altruism. He's too much of a cunt not to.

    And as far as I'm concerned, unless he admits in public he was wrong and he lied to us, the UN and the world in an attempt to gain approval for his stupid war, and refers himself to an international court for various breaches of international law, he will continue to be a despicable, blood stained war criminal even if he donated every last penny he owned.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying what he's done is bad. But I have little doubt he's doing it with ulterior motives rather than just altruism. He's too much of a cunt not to.

    Does it matter? If someone does the right thing for the wrong reasons, they still did the right thing, no?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    jamelia wrote: »
    Does it matter? If someone does the right thing for the wrong reasons, they still did the right thing, no?
    They did- but should get no praise for it.

    Certainly not when the person in question caused all the deaths, injuries and misery faced by the charity in the first place (not to mention hundreds of thousands of others who won't see a penny of it), and did so under false pretenses and after lying to the entire world about it.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    . Retire from public life immediately and spend the rest of your days working for the charities that are out in Iraq and Afghanistan dealing with the shit-storms you unleashed.

    If he did that, he'd be giving a lot less go than he is now - I'll wager these charities need money more than volunteers. I don't think a soldier in rehab with his leg blown off is going to complain that the money funding his rehabilitation may have come from TB with ulterior motives.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    MoK wrote: »
    This would be the public that voted him back in, after it had become clear that there weren't any WMD and the tribunals that aren't happening?
    In 2005, we had to choose between a pathological liar and then the rather creepy Michael "something of the night" Howard. The same Michael Howard who Labour attacked using anti-Semitic posters, and who weren't really taken to task for it. Has Call Me Dave forgotten Alan Milburn - whom he appointed to a government job a few days ago, he must have got bored of spending more time with his family - was one of the defenders of that? Then again in David Cameron, we're seeing a man just as fake as Tony Blair, a man just as selective in his memory as his hero.

    The public had a crap choice to make, and they made a crap choice, because they were only offered crap.
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying what he's done is bad. But I have little doubt he's doing it with ulterior motives rather than just altruism. He's too much of a cunt not to.
    Indeed. EVERYTHING that Tony Blair did came with ulterior motives. He has got to rate as one of the most dishonest politicans ever to run this country, and there's certainly no shortage of competition. Poor Gordon couldn't even beat Tony in the lying stakes, despite him constantly trying.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Would you do a better job?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    G wrote: »
    Would you do a better job?
    How could anyone possibly do worse? Even if a politician is utterly incompetent, I'd be prepared to at least acknowledge it if they were being honest about the situation or issue they were talking about, or trying to deal with. It's the lies and obfusication that's half the problem. If your policy is based on nonsense or false information, it isn't going to work. You can't polish a turd.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I asked if you thought you could do a better job, and you answered like a true politician and didnt actually answer the question posed.

    Im entirely confused that one day there will be (and likely allready is) a quite truthful politician, and simply because of the job he does he is hounded by people like SG.

    SG maybe the politicians behave, as thats all we ever expect of them.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If you disagree with his decision for war so much then stop using plastic and stop using any form of transport that uses oil ok, if not, then he did it in your name too.

    Our entire way of life is dependant upon cheap oil. As your leader, it was his job to defend and preserve our way of life.

    As the reserves around the world are depleted, only those who fight hardest can have cheap oil; that means war, and only war.

    Every time you use some plastic, every time you drive a car or switch on your television, you are a part of the demand for cheap oil; you are part of the demand for war. Every cheap-oil product you buy, from a CD to a banana, is a demand for war.

    By using plastic, you are actively condoning his choice to go to war.

    If you really want ‘no blood for oil’, you have to also demand no oil for yourself and your compatriots. If you really want the fighting to be ‘not in your name’, you must show that the oil is not for your use.

    Send your car keys to the Department of the Environment tomorrow morning. Once the government has figured out a way of effectively recycling your vehicles, we will come and collect them.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    G wrote: »
    I'm entirely confused that one day there will be (and likely already is) a quite truthful politician, and simply because of the job he does he is hounded by people like SG.
    Truthful politicians? They're a bloody rare breed, but they do exist. Iain Duncan Smith is a politician whom I regard very highly, as would be Frank Field and Daniel Hannan. Sadly, the good ones are more than outnumbered by the bad ones.

    Oh, and since you somehow failed to deduce an answer to the question in my previous response, I'll make it clearer. Yes, I honestly believe I would be able to do a better job.

    Or are you just using your usual strategy of waiting for me to answer one question you claim is very important before asking me another twenty?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I didnt want to put words in your mouth, as you affectionately touched that you didnt like me doing.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blair is the devil himself, and for attacking Iraq alone is the worst PM in UK history.

    At least all other UK wars for as long as the PM position existed had some imperial bent, to ward off an invader/nearby threat, or were due to complex European scenarios, but his war was based on a lie.

    And he calls himself a Christian lol. That really tops it off.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    kira wrote: »
    Blair is the devil himself, and for attacking Iraq alone is the worst PM in UK history. At least all other UK wars for as long as the PM position existed had some imperial bent, to ward off an invader/nearby threat, or were due to complex European scenarios, but his war was based on a lie.

    And he calls himself a Christian lol. That really tops it off.
    As to do all the worst hypocrites. No wonder Christianity has a bad name.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    In 2005, we had to choose between a pathological liar and then the rather creepy Michael "something of the night" Howard. The same Michael Howard who Labour attacked using anti-Semitic posters, and who weren't really taken to task for it. Has Call Me Dave forgotten Alan Milburn - whom he appointed to a government job a few days ago, he must have got bored of spending more time with his family - was one of the defenders of that? Then again in David Cameron, we're seeing a man just as fake as Tony Blair, a man just as selective in his memory as his hero.

    The public had a crap choice to make, and they made a crap choice, because they were only offered crap. Indeed. EVERYTHING that Tony Blair did came with ulterior motives. He has got to rate as one of the most dishonest politicans ever to run this country, and there's certainly no shortage of competition. Poor Gordon couldn't even beat Tony in the lying stakes, despite him constantly trying.

    That's all very nice SG, and I'm sure you enjoyed an opportunity to abuse several politicians there. However you missed the point.

    You questioned whether Blair donated the money because "he suddenly realised he needs to make a good will gesture to keep the public off his back? Not to mention certain war crimes tribunals..."

    The public aren't actually on his back and there are no tribunals.

    So, what other motive do you think he had? I'm sure you'll come up with one.

    I have an idea. Maybe he actually knows that his decisions in power have consequences - in the instance of sending people out to fight in a war people get hurt. RBL exists to support them He is wealthy. So he has donated money.

    You talk about him never giving money to charity before (without evidence of course), but make no mention of the fact that both of his predecessors sent people into war and yet there is no disclosure of if they have given a single penny to the RBL.

    To me this is like the outcry over Brown's letter to the parent of the dead serviceman. People don't like his politics so bitch about a truly good act. Can't see the wood for the trees, some people.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    MoK wrote: »
    You questioned whether Blair donated the money because "he suddenly realised he needs to make a good will gesture to keep the public off his back? Not to mention certain war crimes tribunals..."

    The public aren't actually on his back and there are no tribunals.
    The public are asking more and more questions about the conflict, which ultimately lead to more questions about how we got into it. Hence the point about Tony Blair. There are indeed no tribunals as of yet, but if people keep asking questions, it could well lead to one. This is Blair's way of knocking everyone off the scent, of trying to persuade us that he's a "pretty straight kind of guy", as he told us in 1997.

    He also knows people are very selective in what they remember, so most of them will still be unaware of just how duplicitous he really was during his time in office.
    To me this is like the outcry over Brown's letter to the parent of the dead serviceman. People don't like his politics so bitch about a truly good act. Can't see the wood for the trees, some people.
    You neglect to point out that I actually heavily critcised The Sun when that came out. Even I thought it was an attack too far, and I'm pretty relaxed when it comes to seeing Gordon Brown being shot at from all sides.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think Brown tried to do the right thing, something nice in that case. The sun does go a bit far thinking it is the lord high protector newspaper of the forces. Thing is thats good when its a positive story, still shitty when its a negative story.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    The public are asking more and more questions about the conflict, which ultimately lead to more questions about how we got into it. Hence the point about Tony Blair. There are indeed no tribunals as of yet, but if people keep asking questions, it could well lead to one. This is Blair's way of knocking everyone off the scent, of trying to persuade us that he's a "pretty straight kind of guy", as he told us in 1997.

    There a certain sector of the population asking questions, adding 2+2 just to see if they come up with something other than 4. Just as there is a sector who ask questions about moon landings, Kennedy assassinations, WTC attacks, London bombings, the real causes behind WW2 and whether the holocaust actually happened.

    People ask questions. Doesn't mean that they are correct, or that anything will come of it.

    In fact, if it's as much of a conspiracy as those people think then you can be damned certain that no trial or tribunal would ever take place. Even if it did, they would only accept a guilty verdict and would question validity if it found anything else.

    The court of public whispering isn't going to get him to donate millions any more than a protest march would get him to avoid any type of conflict in the first place.
    You neglect to point out that I actually heavily critcised The Sun when that came out. Even I thought it was an attack too far, and I'm pretty relaxed when it comes to seeing Gordon Brown being shot at from all sides.

    I didn't neglect to mention anything because I didn't say that you were part of that outcry because I know that you wasn't.

    My point was that the outcry about this remind me of that one. It's not about the man's actions, it's about something completely different.

    Anyone that says Blair shouldn't have donated this money should hang their head in shame. Say that he should never have gone to war, fine. But don't suggest that injured service personnel shouldn't benefit from this money because the donor didn't suit your political beliefs is offensive. IMHO.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    G wrote: »
    Would you do a better job?

    yes. I wouldn't have invaded in the first place.
    If you disagree with his decision for war so much then stop using plastic and stop using any form of transport that uses oil ok, if not, then he did it in your name too.

    Our entire way of life is dependant upon cheap oil. As your leader, it was his job to defend and preserve our way of life.

    As the reserves around the world are depleted, only those who fight hardest can have cheap oil; that means war, and only war.

    I disagree. It is the oil companies keeping back alternative forms of energy. Besides, nuclear power, wind power and wave power could sustain the UK alone. In the long run, the solution to the world's energy problems is to litter the Sahara desert with solar panels. With the heat/sun present there, it would provide enough energy for the world to run on.

    Another alternative is to litter Antartica with solar panels. it may be cold there, but there is six months of unbroken sunshine.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    kira wrote: »
    It is the oil companies keeping back alternative forms of energy. Besides, nuclear power, wind power and wave power could sustain the UK alone. In the long run, the solution to the world's energy problems is to litter the Sahara desert with solar panels. With the heat/sun present there, it would provide enough energy for the world to run on.

    Another alternative is to litter Antartica with solar panels. it may be cold there, but there is six months of unbroken sunshine.

    Cars tend not to run on solar power, no do they have nuclear reactors and waves tend to damage the upholstery.

    Ah, I hear you say, they could run on the electricity which these generate.

    Indeed you would be right. Not sure how you'd address each of these products though - some of which actually go towards making the cars... - but each has an element of crude oil in them.

    Plastics (inc. Ethylene and propylene)
    Lubricating oils, waxes, polishes
    Bitumen
    Clothing Ink
    Heart Valves
    Crayons
    Parachutes
    Telephones
    Enamel
    Transparent tape
    Antiseptics
    Vacuum bottles
    Deodorant
    Pantyhose
    Rubbing Alcohol
    Carpets
    Epoxy paint
    Oil filters
    Upholstery
    Hearing Aids
    Car sound insulation
    Cassettes
    Motorcycle helmets
    Pillows
    Shower doors
    Shoes
    Refrigerator linings
    Electrical tape
    Safety glass
    Awnings
    Salad bowl
    Rubber cement
    Nylon rope
    Ice buckets
    Fertilizers
    Hair coloring
    Toilet seats
    Denture adhesive
    Loudspeakers
    Movie film
    Fishing boots
    Candles
    Water pipes
    Car enamel
    Shower curtains
    Credit cards
    Aspirin
    Golf balls
    Detergents
    Sunglasses
    Glue
    Fishing rods
    Linoleum
    Plastic wood
    Soft contact lenses
    Trash bags
    Hand lotion
    Shampoo
    Shaving cream
    Footballs
    Paint brushes
    Balloons
    Fan belts
    Umbrellas
    Paint Rollers
    Luggage
    Antifreeze
    Model cars
    Floor wax
    Sports car bodies
    Tires
    Dishwashing liquids
    Unbreakable dishes
    Toothbrushes
    Toothpaste
    Combs
    Tents
    Hair curlers
    Lipstick
    Ice cube trays
    Electric blankets
    Tennis rackets
    Drinking cups
    House paint
    Rollerskate wheels
    Guitar strings
    Ammonia
    Eyeglasses
    Ice chests
    Life jackets
    TV cabinets
    Car battery cases
    Insect repellent
    Refrigerants
    Typewriter ribbons
    Cold cream
    Glycerin
    Plywood adhesive
    Cameras
    Anesthetics
    Artificial turf
    Artificial Limbs
    Bandages
    Dentures
    Mops
    Beach Umbrellas
    Ballpoint pens
    Boats
    Nail polish
    Golf bags
    Caulking
    Tape recorders
    Curtains
    Vitamin capsules
    Dashboards
    Putty
    Percolators
    Skis
    Insecticides
    Fishing lures
    Perfumes
    Shoe polish
    Petroleum jelly
    Faucet washers
    Food preservatives
    Antihistamines
    Cortisone
    Dyes
    LP records
    Solvents
    Roofing
Sign In or Register to comment.