Tony Blair appeared on this morning's Today Programme on Radio 4 to speak about the violent reaction of many Muslims to the film 'Innocence of Muslims'. For once, he appeared to be genuinely discomfited: voice croaky and quavering and stumbling for words. He struggled to find a politically correct way of explaining the situation, yet reluctantly had to concede that the violence had something to do with Islam, although he termed it "a wrongheaded view of religion". However, on a more encouraging note, although rubbishing the film for its poor production values and content, he did not call for its censorship or wider restrictions on free speech, which is something that the OIC will surely press for afresh following this outbreak of violence amongst Muslims across the world.
Monday, 17 September 2012
Tony Blair on 'Innocence of Muslims'
Comments that call for or threaten violence will not be published. Anyone is entitled to criticise the arguments presented here, or to highlight what they believe to be factual error(s); ad hominem attacks do not constitute comment or debate. Although at times others' points of view may be exasperating, please attempt to be civil in your responses. If you wish to communicate with me confidentially, please preface your comment with "Not for publication". This is why all comments are moderated.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
I think we can safely say that in his role as 'Middle East Peace Ambassador' he has failed miserably. No doubt he's still getting paid for his advice in the region though. God, why do I hate him and his wife so much?! The money-grabbing, obnoxious, publicity seeking pair! Oh yes, I see why now...ReplyDelete
He has indeed failed terribly in his chosen role, and despite being a successful Prime Minister, he was undoubtedly a bad one. "Money-grabbing, obnoxious [and] publicity seeking"? Yes, that seems to be a fair summary of the Blairs! However, I am sure that Tony believes that God thinks otherwise.Delete
I agree with anonymous, but think you're right to pick out his reluctance to condemn the film, which would previously have been a knee-jerk reaction from him even before Harriet Harman had had a chance to tell him what to think.ReplyDelete
It does seem to be significant Joe, for as you note, his reaction did not consist of the usual instantaneous reflex that it had nothing to do with Islam.Delete