Should Children Under 16 Be Barred From...
News2 mins ago
Tony Blair's Knighthood.
Do you agree with these mothers?
https:/
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by dannyk13. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
You're wrong again, TORATORATORA.
"There is no limit to the number of royal members, however. Initially, the order's members were limited to the aristocracy but they are now men and women chosen from a variety of backgrounds, in recognition for their public service, their contribution to national life, or their personal service to the sovereign.
The honour is personally bestowed by the monarch, with no interference from the Government."
https:/
"There is no limit to the number of royal members, however. Initially, the order's members were limited to the aristocracy but they are now men and women chosen from a variety of backgrounds, in recognition for their public service, their contribution to national life, or their personal service to the sovereign.
The honour is personally bestowed by the monarch, with no interference from the Government."
https:/
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
davebro - // I know Bliar has an ego the size of a planet but if 1/2 million of my countrymen and women thought I was a war criminal I would find it somewhat disconcerting. //
Given Blair's undimmed liking for the spotlight - witness his love of playing the grey-haired grandee statesman lecturing people about the evils of Brexit - it's clear that he is completely beyond any notion of humility or humanity.
He will ignore the hostility, keep raking in the money, and generally remain as repugnantly sanctimonious as he has always been.
I'm tipping the order for the new headed notepaper has already gone in.
Given Blair's undimmed liking for the spotlight - witness his love of playing the grey-haired grandee statesman lecturing people about the evils of Brexit - it's clear that he is completely beyond any notion of humility or humanity.
He will ignore the hostility, keep raking in the money, and generally remain as repugnantly sanctimonious as he has always been.
I'm tipping the order for the new headed notepaper has already gone in.
mothers who don't want their sons to die should dissuade them from joining the military: it's the job of soldiers to kill and be killed on instructions from their government, and that's what happened. I'd have had more sympathy over wasted lives in WW2, when conscription was in force, but not so much for a volunteer army.
that's about it, Ken. We still "read" soldiering as if it was WW2 and a national fight for survival, but what we've got today is people signing up when they don't have to, and knowing if they're wounded their government should look after them but quite possibly won't. I can sympathise with them, but I don't think I owe them any gratitude as I certainly would have 70 years ago.
Hopkirk, yes, I wonder if Brown will accept. Unlike the rest he was never elected. May only ruled at the head of a hung Parliament. But anything Blair can do, Dave will do.
Hopkirk, yes, I wonder if Brown will accept. Unlike the rest he was never elected. May only ruled at the head of a hung Parliament. But anything Blair can do, Dave will do.
'Sometimes the Right, when outraged, can be as ridiculously narrow-minded as the Left. Indeed, on the subject of Tony Blair’s knighthood, they seem to be united. Of course Mr Blair should be made a Knight of the Garter. Unlike most honours, the Garter is the personal gift of the Sovereign, not part of the patronage-controlled Honours “system”. Each prime minister is so called because he or she is the Sovereign’s first minister. If the Queen decides Mr Blair deserves it, that should be good enough for the rest of us.
Besides, he does deserve it. This is not because he was necessarily right: I personally have written tens of thousands of words about the numerous times he was wrong. It is because he was successful. He was one of only three of his party’s leaders ever to win overall Labour majorities in Parliament, and the only one to win enormous majorities all three times he fought. He brought Labour out of an 18-year wilderness. He fulfilled a key condition for our democracy’s functioning, which is that more than one political party should be capable of government.'
Charles Moore
Besides, he does deserve it. This is not because he was necessarily right: I personally have written tens of thousands of words about the numerous times he was wrong. It is because he was successful. He was one of only three of his party’s leaders ever to win overall Labour majorities in Parliament, and the only one to win enormous majorities all three times he fought. He brought Labour out of an 18-year wilderness. He fulfilled a key condition for our democracy’s functioning, which is that more than one political party should be capable of government.'
Charles Moore
Khandro - Once again you seem bereft of original thought and comment, and let another speak for you.
It seems you are determined to fly in the face of the majority opinion on here - which if course is entirely your right.
I do wonder, however, when you are busy mocking me with comparisons to Saint Andrew, you should be adopting your own patron saint - Saint Jude.
It seems you are determined to fly in the face of the majority opinion on here - which if course is entirely your right.
I do wonder, however, when you are busy mocking me with comparisons to Saint Andrew, you should be adopting your own patron saint - Saint Jude.
naomi - // But Khandro's case isn't a lost cause. As I said earlier, regardless of petitions and all the enraged jumping up and down, Blair will receive his knighthood. //
It's not Kandro's case that is the lost cause - in terms of The Prince Andrew debacle, and Tony Blair's honour, the first is ongoing, the second, as you correctly point out, is a done deal.
His lost cause is repeatedly and robustly defending them against all normal logical and moral reasoning.
It's not Kandro's case that is the lost cause - in terms of The Prince Andrew debacle, and Tony Blair's honour, the first is ongoing, the second, as you correctly point out, is a done deal.
His lost cause is repeatedly and robustly defending them against all normal logical and moral reasoning.
