News that Blair is to become Middle East peace envoy for the Quartet is surely a sick joke.

His commitment to Israel (signed up 'Friend of') and pro-Zionist stance automatically disqualify him. He has never publiclty demonstrated his wish for a just solution to the Palestine-Israel conflict or even an understanding of its causes. He showed no respect the Palestinians' democratic rights, collectively punished them with an economic blockade and never criticised Israel's continued occupation and annexation of Palestinian lands or their slaughter of civilians. He 'buried' a report by our own diplomats criticising Israel's illegal settlement-building in and around East Jerusalem designed to prevent a Palestinian state having its headquarters there.

The job involves working with the Palestinians over security, the economy and governance. But his every action shouts US/Israeli stooge. Palestinians have no reason to trust him an inch.

Again I am in agreement with you here Yorkie; Tony Blair signed Britain up to the invasion of Iraq, was an achitect or was undoubtedly mixed up in the production of the dodgy dossier and hardly even bleated at the Israelis while they were destroying Lebanon in vain last year.

For these reasons amongst a myriad of others He is spoiled goods..

I will be exceedingly surprized if he can pull anything off.

Ah, but this is the Holy Land and the maniac is still on his messianic mission...

Hi all

Yorker your comment on the DC response thread:

David was taking the first steps, on 11/6/2007 the Tories called for an inquiry into the Iraq war, it was voted out - Quentin Davies spoke and voted against the bill.

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2007-06-11a.532.1&s=500

But he failed to support the 'Impeach Blair' movement a couple of years ago.
http://www.impeachblair.org/downloads/A_Case_To_Answer.pdf

P.S. The 'impeach Blair' move would have failed, of course, but it would have inflicted considerable damage. It was a matter of principle, but that counts for little at Westminster these days.

Quentin Davis now crosses the floor... I can't understand how anyone could join the party of Blair and Brown..???

Anyway he obviously was a closet traitor all along.

'Scuse me jonjii, does Q. Davies really belong on the Blair Peace Envoy thread?

He was mentioned above... as you may see I have posted plenty about him as well.

No prob Yorkie... I am still with you. Blair is a disgrace and should be charged for all the lying and misery he has caused, leading to deaths of countless thousands of Iraqi not to mention the 150 Brits... Their deaths are on your head Tony B.

Remember the Cash for Honours scandal isn't over yet. We can always hope.

Jonjii, the cash for honours will be another whitewash and we all know it.
Blair doesn't really give a to55 if his position as a peace envoy is untenable, distasteful etc etc. All he can see is his long love affair with President Bush, the international stage and brand Blair continuing. The man has no idea.

Yorkie I confess to finding this probably as hysterical as you do!

I ask you, how is it that a man such as Blair can be taken seriously for a position as mediator or envoy or whatever, in the mid-east after conning a whole nation into going to war in the mid-east? How can the term "honest broker" apply here? In considering his deals with the British public he has proved himself to be nothing less than a liar and manipulatory of the truth! Can anyone tell me why he's fit for this job? or maybe that's why he's fit for the job!!

If ever there was a "jobs for the boys" this must beat all - it demonstrates in an all to cynical fashion the cant and hypocracy of politicians today. Anyway I'm just jealous that he got his application in before me!

I wish Blair would just eat shit and die, I really do!

If they get hold of him out there, maybe they'll make him do just that.

Seriously, Vespa, I've heard him described as the most hated man in the Middle East. After 40 years of trials, tribulations and betrayal by British leaders, do the Palestinians really deserve Blair?

...a telling quote from an excellent article by Adrian Hamilton in The Independent.
http://comment.independent.co.uk/columnists_a_l/adrian_
hamilton/article2717248.ece

I'm of two minds on this one. Blair showed excellent negotiations in Ireland and that had a result I never thought I'd see happen. Mentioned on Newsnight yesterday by a Labour MP was his 'work in Kosovo'. But this is different. The Middle East aren't going to want Blair, basically interfering, with their issues. How can they learn to trust a man who sent his troops into Iraq?

I won't condemn the man, but I don't think this is going to have the results he wants to see. His critics will have a field day if it is unsuccessful (which is the only outcome I can truly see). The Middle East needs long term support. If Blair is willing to dedicate the time to it, and is successful, then I wish him all the best.

But the article on a 'quick fix' is entirely relevant. The West do not understand how the East functions and I feel he will be entirely out of his depth. Time will only tell.

Amberlina, while agreeing with you in forecasting doom for this enterprize I cannot agree with you about Northern Ireland.

The only thing that brought Sinn Fein to negotiations was that finally, after 9/11, their funding dried up. (The US, hypocrits that they are, stopped virtually all IRA funding as at last they were deemed to be terrorists).

What brought Dr No to power sharing was likewise money.. Hain was, at last, going to close Stormont and send them all home with no salary. (In addition he was going to mess up their education system)

So although a result has been achieved it is mostly through coersion.

If he thinks that will work where he is bound he is much in error.

For a start no threat of cutting funding to Israel will work.. The International Jewry are too powerful and own too much of the world's stocks and shares... a fact much bemoaned by Yorkie.

Next the Pallestinians are making do without funding so there is nothing Blair can threaten them with.. the point is that they are the poor relations of the countries surrounding Israel who would love nothing better than for the whole lot of them to go away but have NO common cause with Israel.

And this much vaunted charm is a cultural thing.. Clinton's smarmyness worked on the Americans but does little for me. Blair's charm work's on the Brits (Although I don't see it it must do...we elected him 3 times and gave him a standing ovation as he departed yesterday)

But I think it will signally fail to win over the people of the middle East who are culturally very different from us.

Negotiations and agreements do still have to be settled, and this is where I refer to Blair. However you are right; they wanted the result, and worked together - this is where it differs from the Middle East. They haven't shown any signs of wanting to dissolve the situation.

You can't help people if they don't want to be helped. I feel as if Blair is fighting a losing battle. A battle where his credibility (if he still has any) is at stake.

Heartily agree.

When Hamas unexpectedly won the election last year I looked up their government ministers' CVs. All well qualified individuals, many were born and brought up in refugee camps but nevertheless got themselves a university education under the most appalling circumstances (DC and his preoccupation with 'social mobility' might learn a thing or two from these chaps). They're no angels, being the product of disasterous shenanigans on the part of Britain and the US, but neither are they fools. From your reading of Brown, Amberlina, do you think he's got the bottle to sit down and talk to these democratically elected people (as opposed to the corrupt Fatah faction) and reach an independent understanding, like Norway? If he does he might also learn something to his advantage about the principles of social welfare - Hamas are rather good at that.

One thing that concerns me about Brown is a comment I heard on Newsnight yesterday, "he's clumsy". Brown, having waited to be in power for so long, has a clear set of ideas that he wants to follow. Will the question you posed be part of this? As a person slightly biased toward Labour I sure hope so.

I do believe Brown to be 'a man of conviction' (as much as I hate that term), a man of action, and somebody who will stand for what he believes in. Will he speak to these democratically elected people? I doubt it will be one of the first items on his agenda but I can only hope that he will consider it.

But here are some people that he has spoken to since becoming PM:


Source.

I heard an "white House" official on Radio 4 this morning discussing this.. their position is that it is perfectly acceptable not to talk to a terrorist organisation (Hamas is deemed to be such and was long before they set about getting themselves elected.)

I reckon they are awful hypocrits as they were giving tacit support to the IRA and allowing funds to flow to the IRA all through Bill Clinton's presidency.

Even now they won't sign the extradition bill to allow us to extradite some Irishmen with whom we have a few issues we would like to discuss.

In Northern Ireland however once Sinn Fein renounced violence and "put it's weapons beyond use" (whatever that means) it was finally granted legitimacy.

Would that work in Gaza.. Do you think we could get the Palestinians of any persuasion to finally renounce violence as a means to an end... I doubt it (said the Carpenter, and shed a bitter tear)

Off topic. I started this Lewis Carrol stuff I had no idea how appropriate it is... Have I missed it or have we stepped through the looking glass into a macabre wonderland?

Palestinians will only renounce violence when the occupation is ended. Why is that so hard for the West (and Isrealis) to comprehend?

And the Israeli's will never withdraw while they are being threatened.... why is that so hard for the Palestinians to understand... Reduce the viloence and then the 'justfication'sic for remaining in the occupied territories goes.

Admittedly it will take a lot to get all Israelis to agree anyway.. by all accounts they are the most argumentative and political peoples... witness the fuss at the dismantling of some of the settlements in the occupied lands recently.

Anyway we are in a no win no win situation and have been for a long time.... Thousands of years as a matter of fact.

The only reason they are threatened, jonjii, is because they are trespassing, thieving, oppressing and subjugating... with impunity and unchecked by the international authorities, which have ruled Israel's conduct illegal and in breach of UN resolutions and the Geneva Conventions, not to mention all acceptable standards of human decency.

Will Blair address these issues? Huh...

Yorkie I am not in dispute with you about the "nastiness" of the Israeli's.. I just haven't been exposed to much evidence that any Palestinian faction is particularly nice either.

But what about the Palestinian people... including the Christians? Are they nasty?

I'd say Hamas and Fatah are both entitled to be unfriendly towards anyone who has a jackboot on their throat.