![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
John Rentoul
John Rentoul is chief political commentator for The Independent on Sunday, and visiting fellow at Queen Mary, University of London, where he teaches contemporary history. Previously he was chief leader writer for The Independent. He has written a biography of Tony Blair, whom he admired more at the end of his time in office than he did at the beginning.
You can contact John in the comments area or email him at j.rentoul@independent.co.uk
You can contact John in the comments area or email him at j.rentoul@independent.co.uk
Just finished reading The Ghost by Robert Harris. A more spiteful way of using Tony Blair as a proxy for self-loathing is hard to imagine, and the plot is so bad that to call it babyish is generous. At least Harris can write. So what do Blair-haters who cannot write do?
They attend Blair lectures - the free ones, obviously - and submit fake questions for screening and, if selected, they then ask a "real" question that has the former prime minister reeling, his guilt exposed for all the world to see.
As Nick Kabat, a politics major, did at the University of Buffalo last week.
The gap between the Blair-haters' valuation of themselves and the reality is as wide as America. The "unapproved question" asked by Kabat turns out to be a long anti-Israeli statement about the invasion of Gaza last year. A student newspaper reported that Kabat
Like as if.
The question was so long Blair had time to get Alastair Campbell to email a draft answer to his BlackBerry, but as Quartet envoy to the Middle East he knows what he thinks about Israel and Palestine and has in fact been asked variants of that question several hundred times before.
Anyone from what Clarice Bean calls the planet of Earth would think that Blair's response was considered and insightful.
Jim Holstun, "an English professor at the University of Buffalo" (I don't know if he is English or a professor of English; either way his status is alarming),* summarises the answer thus: "Tony Blair, of course, refuses to affirm international law."
Watch the YouTube above and you will hear Blair say, twice: "I believe international law should be applied in these situations, of course I do."
As Holstun begins his report by saying, "Blair looks even more like a liar than usual here," he thinks Blair is lying and therefore believes international law should not be applied. As Holstun observes, "it takes a deft questioner to make him debase himself so openly".
And he concludes, praising Kabat: "Blessed is the university with students who have such moxy and smarts!"
Moxy and smarts? There are other words for it.
Update: It turns out that "Jim Holstun teaches world literature and Marxism at SUNY [State University of New York] Buffalo".
They attend Blair lectures - the free ones, obviously - and submit fake questions for screening and, if selected, they then ask a "real" question that has the former prime minister reeling, his guilt exposed for all the world to see.
As Nick Kabat, a politics major, did at the University of Buffalo last week.
The gap between the Blair-haters' valuation of themselves and the reality is as wide as America. The "unapproved question" asked by Kabat turns out to be a long anti-Israeli statement about the invasion of Gaza last year. A student newspaper reported that Kabat
said that he could tell that Blair was not expecting the question and thinks the former prime minister was thrown off by it.
Like as if.
The question was so long Blair had time to get Alastair Campbell to email a draft answer to his BlackBerry, but as Quartet envoy to the Middle East he knows what he thinks about Israel and Palestine and has in fact been asked variants of that question several hundred times before.
Anyone from what Clarice Bean calls the planet of Earth would think that Blair's response was considered and insightful.
Jim Holstun, "an English professor at the University of Buffalo" (I don't know if he is English or a professor of English; either way his status is alarming),* summarises the answer thus: "Tony Blair, of course, refuses to affirm international law."
Watch the YouTube above and you will hear Blair say, twice: "I believe international law should be applied in these situations, of course I do."
As Holstun begins his report by saying, "Blair looks even more like a liar than usual here," he thinks Blair is lying and therefore believes international law should not be applied. As Holstun observes, "it takes a deft questioner to make him debase himself so openly".
And he concludes, praising Kabat: "Blessed is the university with students who have such moxy and smarts!"
Moxy and smarts? There are other words for it.
Update: It turns out that "Jim Holstun teaches world literature and Marxism at SUNY [State University of New York] Buffalo".
Comments
Has John Rentoul ever found himself able to knock his idol, Tony Blair, for anything he's done?!
Blair is a liar, war-monger and god-botherer. Who on earth could find it right and proper to support him?
This uncritical attitude is really quite worrying, especially for an academic!
This critical attitude is really quite typical for the worried unwell.
http://keeptonyblairforpm.wordpress.c
"Why are you here?"
John Rentoul, like me, is one of those I have dubbed "we few, we happy few, we band of brothers."
You all KNOW what you'll find at his site and at mine:
http://keeptonyblairforpm.wordpress.c
If you don't like it ...
Were the Daily Mail, Guardian etc too busy with other 'happy haters' for the above three to get on there and shake it all about with like minds?
As for the video. Not for one moment was Tony Blair in any difficulties with that question. As Mr R. says, Blair's critics over-estimate their powers.
Nor did his audience conclude that he was thrown by this "question". At around 1:50 he mentions the Israeli soldier still held captive in Gaza and gets resounding applause for saying that he should be released. Only bettered by the applause he got at the end.