Are Bloggers4Labour blogging the bottom of the barrel? *UPDATED* Yes they are.
Whilst most of the outside world is more than a little perturbed that Tony believes he got the green light from God for what he did in Iraq, Bloggers4Labour are dismissive of the concerns of the rest of us.
Here's their analysis of the issue:
(all links are mine)
I'm amused by those who get themselves worked-up by things like this:
Blair 'prayed to God' over Iraq, the BBC's answer to slow blog day. I first encountered the story last night, and thought "let a thousand blog posts bloom!"...
- Tony Blair feels personal, not just professional, responsibility over the sending of British troops to fight in Iraq.
- Tony Blair wanted to make the right and moral decision, and felt that religious assurance (not being religious I can't say I know how this is granted) would be the clincher.
- Bloggers inhabiting this comfortable BBC/Guardian world of ours have no comprehension of the motivation, or the modus operandi, of the millions of practising Christians who, today and throughout history, have invoked their God's judgement on all matters major and trivial. It might be irrational (which does not, in itself, mean less rational than the alternative), but perhaps an inkling of understanding might give us a better idea of what makes the vast majority of the world's population tick...
Fair enough, a thousand blog posts did bloom. B4L hold the point of view that Blair's faith is not relevant. I dissagree, in fact I think it's a pretty self serving point of view, but that's IMHO.
Indeed, milions of peope pray before making hard decisions, nobody is saying there is anything wrong with this.
But do believers usually go through a whole series of seriously un-Godly hoops before asking Him to vindicate the decision to wage war and create terror?
Given the absence of evidence, and the paucity of the case for war, last night's Parkinson interview implied that Blair made up for that with his personal faith.
Does the Blair's disclosure of last night suggest that had the evidence been sound, but his religious conviction had told him 'no', we wouldn't have gone to war?
But what really got my goat about the B4L post was their referring to Reg Keys and Rose Gentle as "righteously indignant" for not being happy with their sons dying on the basis of lies, dodgy dossiers, manipulation of intelligence, and blatant scaremongering, and this being signed off on by a conversation Blair had with an invisble man who gave him the green light to send our troops off to war.
[follow the link for what Bloggers4Labour consider self righteous indignation]
That's low, real low.
Indignant the bereved families may be, but think for a minute what they have lost and why; military families anger and grief is genuine and not self rightous.
Call me self righteous or indignant, that's fair enough. But don't go dismissing the concerns of those who have lost loved ones in Iraq. That's cheap, petty and vindictive.
But I guess that's the only place left to operate if you are blogging in support of the Labour Party in 2006.
UPDATE:
It looks like Bloggers4Labour are blogging from the bottom of the barrel, judging from their description of Keys and Gentle in the comments as:
and their dismissal of objections to what has been done in our name in Iraq as:
Labour through and through.
I read their stuff and i
I read their stuff and i noticed none of them hav even noticed, let alone adressed the points I made here.
I've said it before and it bears repeating, many Labour supporters remind me of battered wives, continually making excuses for their partners behaviour, harking back to past times and hoping they can change them. In psychological terms, they're called enablers.
Thank you for that post. I
Thank you for that post. I would not normally visit a site like that. but your post inspired me to leave a comment on that Bloggers4Labour article. It remains to be seen if they will show it(so far there were no other comments)but I encourage everyone who feels as angry as I do over their shameful disrespect for the victims of this war to do the same.
Why did Tony have to pray at
Why did Tony have to pray at all? The case for war was very strong, there was no doubt, so the decision was easy. In that case, why pray? Was he uncertain on whether to go to war? Did he think that God would supernaturally modify the course of the war if he prayed? Did Tony think that praying would guide the cluster bombs away from family houses and children? Perhaps praying would get him a special place in heaven with his friends George, Dick and Donald. It could be that God would ensure Tony's corporate donors got contracts in the post war Iraq. Or was Tony saying to God, 'Look at me, see my power! I have the power of life and death. These men will die for me. I am the commander. I have made my mark.'
It looks like
It looks like Bloggers4Labour are blogging from the bottom of the barrel, judging from their description of Keys and Gentle in the comments as:
and their dismissal of objections to what has been done in our name in Iraq as:
Labour through and through.
Well now I'm in the
Well now I'm in the interesting situation where New Labour lecture me on
my limited definition of morality... fascinating.
My god, how vile. I've just
My god, how vile. I've just had a look at that bloggers4labour link. When people make distorted pronouncements like that, do they really believe it or are they practising their rhetoric? It reminds me of a comment about Guantanamo by the US Vice President, "They're living in the tropics...They're well fed. They've got everything they could possibly want. There isn't any other nation in the world that would treat people who were determined to kill Americans the way we're treating these people." To twist the reality in such a way, you either have to be demented or damn evil.
> and their dismissal of
> and their dismissal of objections to what has been done in our name in Iraq as: "tried and tested Iraq War Discussion pleasantries"
No, but I'll rephrase: DS's preliminary was a standard, textbook anti-Iraq war/Blair argument, complete with one, obvious, moral hole. I used another tried and tested response that exposed that particular hole. Perhaps when the pawns have been cleared, brains can be engaged, combatants can be civil, and we might get somewhere. On the other hand, let's face it, the odds are against it. 2-3 years of furious blog activity and both sides are still in their trenches. Which, if any of us, are looking at the stars?
BTW, you really ought not to single B4L out just on the basis that I'm likely to follow the trackback.
You got singled out because
You got singled out because it's on your site. tou talk about exposing moral holes, but all I can see is a squirming apologist. Let's face it the B4L line is clear and simple"
Bush claims he's doing God's will = Bad
Tony claims he's doing God's will = Good
Seriously, your descriptions of the families was distasteful, to say the least.
Apparently The Sun has
Apparently The Sun has obtained a leaked copy of God's Judgement :
God's Judgement Link
Personally there's something
Personally there's something that I found much more disturbing about the whole "Blair on Parky" episode than the actual "God comment". The latter has been seriously overblown, IMHO.
What I found really galling was that this PM could walk onto a studio stage without a single boo, heckle or placard from the public. Were all these sheople carefully vetted? Or was everything meticulously edited afterwards? Or is ITV1 really the Idiot TV1 I always thought it was?