LYCOS RETRIEVER 
Tony Blair: United States
built 198 days ago
In mid-May, just days after reading a draft of the DTI report into the energy review, Tony Blair spoke to the CBI. His speech "ignited a political storm" by endorsing a new generation of nuclear power stations, before the energy review was even finished. His remarks completely pre-empted the review, leading to his political opponents saying it had been a smokescreen all along.[16]
Source:
Britain's former Prime Minister Tony Blair arrives at Darlington railway station in Darlington, northern England, June 27, 2007. Arabs said on Thursday they doubted former Blair could succeed as Middle East peace envoy because of his unpopularity and because he is too close to Israel and the United States.
Source:
Blair is frustrated to tears by what he sees as fossilized trade unions which chain workers to dead industries, rather than building new ones. Britain's Prime Minister dreams of birthing the Entrepreneurial State. Instead, he finds himself caretaker of a museum of nineteenth-century glories made somnolent by easy welfare and low ambitions.
Source:
From early on, Tony Blair operated with an implied hierarchy of options over Iraq. The worst, in his view, was that Saddam should be permitted to continue in his defiance. The best was that the international community, acting through the UN, should threaten action sufficiently convincingly to get Saddam to back down completely. Then, as happened with Milosevic, Saddam might well be forced from power. In between these poles were other possibilities, ranging from an internationally agreed plan to force Saddam to comply, to the much less welcome possibility of unilateral military action undertaken by an isolated United States.
Source:
The Economist, Britain's venerable weekly news magazine, has called on Prime Minister Tony Blair to resign. The magazine's political leaning in the United Kingdom is to the right of the newsweeklies in the United States. In fact, the Economist's political position is right of center, though it is very fastidious about the positions it takes. Reading it is somewhat like reading the official voice of the Vatican, though with none of the puckish humor of L'Osservatore Romano. At any rate, I read the Economist regularly and enjoy it, but calling on Blair to resign strikes me as a publicity stunt, except that the editors of the Economist see themselves as above such opportunism, much as the Pope sees himself as above such opportunism.
Source:
On 5 September 2006 a letter signed by 17 Labour MPs called for Tony Blair to resign. On the same day 49 other Labour MPs signed a statement supporting Blair's departure timetable. The next day The Sun reported that Blair would step down as Labour leader on May 31, 2007, and as Prime Minister when a new leader is elected. That same day, seven of the MPs who signed the letter resigned as Parliamentary Private Secretaries (unpaid and unofficial posts assisting Government ministers).
Source:
MORE ABOUT
United States