Former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair Blames Obama Administration for ISIS


Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

President George W. Bush & Prime Minister Tony Blair
President George W. Bush & Prime Minister Tony Blair

Hat/Tip to WeaselZippers.

You have to love the British habit of telling it like it is. US politics often times gets so PC that it’s nauseating. In this breath of fresh air, former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair answers charges that had he and George W. Bush not led Britain and America (respectively) into war in Iraq, ISIS would not exist.

But as WeaselZippers points out, he’s essentially correct.

He’s basically on target.

Via Daily Mail:

Tony Blair last night attacked ‘bizarre’ claims that his decision to go to war with Iraq in 2003 caused the current wave of violence in the country – and blamed everyone but himself for the crisis.

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

The former Prime Minister insisted he was right to topple Saddam Hussein with the US and said things would have been worse if the dictator had not been ousted from power a decade ago.

Mr Blair ended a week-long silence after mounting claims by diplomats and Labour MPs that his and Mr Bush’s handling of the Iraq War sowed the seeds of the attempt by the Al Qaeda-backed ISIS terror group to conquer Iraq.

In a 2,800-word ‘essay’ on the new Middle East conflagration, Mr Blair refused to apologise and argued:
Barack Obama ordered US troops to leave Iraq too soon.

Britain and America must launch renewed military attacks in Iraq and Syria.

Al Qaeda was ‘beaten’ in Iraq thanks to the Blair-Bush war, but the bungling Iraqi government let them back in.

Keep reading…


British Raise Top Tax Rates, Two Thirds of Millionaires Left


Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Evidence shows again and again that if you want there to be less of something. , you tax it.  Well, either there is less of it, or it goes underground, which means you don’t get to tax it at all.  The British are learning this lesson now, as after passing a unsubstantial increase in their highest tax rate, they suddenly found that they had far fewer millionaires to tax.  The Telegraph has more…

In the 2009-10 tax year, more than 16,000 people declared an annual income of more than £1 million to HM Revenue and Customs.

This number fell to just 6,000 after Gordon Brown introduced the new 50p top rate of income tax shortly before the last general election.

Last night, Harriet Baldwin, the Conservative MP who uncovered the latest figures, said: “Labour’s ideological tax hike led to a tax cull of millionaires.

Far from raising funds, it actually cost the UK £7 billion in lost tax revenue.

“Labour now needs to admit that their policies resulted in millionaires paying less tax and come clean about whether they would reintroduce this failed policy if they were in power.”

No, Labour will not admit that their policies caused the exact opposite of their stated intent.  Like all leftistis, it will likely be someone else’s fault.


“Hope and Change”- Not Exactly What Most People Had In Mind


When candidate Obama created the meme “Hope and Change”, he never told us, except for his dream that Americans should pay super high prices for energy,  what he was hoping for or what changes he envisioned for America. In the last two and a half years, Obama’s vision is becoming painfully clear to all who are willing to see. He hopes to convert the United States of America into the United Socialist States of America and he wants to change our nation into just another nation in the world community of nations. He wants to change our traditional friends and allies for a whole new set of friends.

Conservative Americans are keenly aware of our President’s far left ideology as it applies to policies here at home. But, only a relative few talk or write much about Obama’s foreign relations vision.

For example, it seems that Obama believes that the US no longer needs a Department of State nor a Department of Defense. Apparently he feels that he is better served by international organizations like the United Nations (UN) and the Organization of American States (OAS).

He obviously agrees with the UN position on Agenda 21 and AGW and the need for the wealthy nations of the world to redistribute their wealth to the poorer nations of the world. Another example is that Obama demonstrated absolutely no interest in intervening in Libya until the UN suggested that we should.

While this regime has made nice with the nations of Islam and with Cuba, Russia, China and, remained silent about the atrocities of Chavez in Venezuela, Morales in Bolivia, Ortega in Nicaragua and supported the criminal Selaya in Honduras, how has he treated our best allies in the world; Great Britain and Israel?

Obama’s betrayal of Israel has been well publicized; but, his betrayal of Great Britain, not so much. From the day he took office, he has snubbed, insulted and betrayed Great Britton. As the newly elected President of the United States, he rejected a gift  of a bust of Winston Churchill .  Obama, against the direct wishes of Great Britain, gave away the secret details of Great Britain,’s missal defense system to Russia. A couple of weeks ago Obama made a State visit to Great visit. Apart from making a fool of himself with gaffs in protocol, he did seem to try to make amends when he talked about the “special relationship” between our two countries. However, within days of his return home, he found a way to stab Britain, in the back again.

Obama decided last week to side with the UN and the OAS and President Kirchner of Argentina against Great Britain, by signing on to the OAS demand that the UK sit down with Argentina and negotiate the issue of sovereignty of the Falkland Islands.  Let me give a brief history of Britain,’s claim to the Falklands that I gleaned from Wikipedia. The British first colonized the Falklands in 1766. They were expelled by Spain in 1770 but regained control almost immediately. From 1774 to 1841, control of the Falklands changed hands several times when Britton established a permanent colony. You may recall that in 1982 Argentina invaded the Falklands, which resulted in a war with Britton, which was won by the British.

So, you can see why Great Britain does not agree that there exist any issue over the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands. As Rick Moran points out, via Fox News, in his recent article posted aAmerican Thinker (H/T to Cheryl at my Tea Party Chronicle for the heads up) :

“British sovereignty over the islands is not an issue for negotiation. … This is a slap in the face for America’s closest friend and ally,”…

So why is Obama following the lead of Hugo Chavez and Chavez’s socialist friends in the OAS. Obama is literally giving the finger to Great Britain, which he only a week ago refered to as our “special friend”? Is this an example of Obama’s vision of ”hope and change” that the American voters supported? I would like to prevail upon you, dear readers, to ask your friends and family members who voted for Obama, is this the hope and change they were expecting?

Anyway, that’s what I’m thinking. What do you think?

Original Post: Conservatives on Fire


Global Warming Causes More Record Cold


It seems that this winter is setting up to be even more severely cold than the last.  Of course, when record cold and snow came last winter, the alarmists said it was caused by global warning.  Or, they are saying that the cold is a temporary exception to they over all warming pattern.   They are sticking with this, for now...

“Even though this is quite a cold winter by recent standards it is still perfectly consistent with predictions for global warming,” said Dr Myles Allen, head of the Climate Dynamics group at Department of Physics, University of Oxford.

“If it wasn’t for global warming this cold snap would happen much more regularly. What is interesting is that we are now surprised by this kind of weather. I doubt we would have been in the 1950s because it was much more common.

However, weren’t the climate geniuses out there telling us that cold and snow would soon be a thing of the past?

Will they think us gullible enough to believe them if they have to switch to cooling yet again?

In March 2000, Dr David Viner, then a member of the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit, the body now being investigated over the notorious ‘Warmergate’ leaked emails, said that within a few years snowfall would become ‘a very rare and exciting event’ in Britain, and that ‘children just aren’t going to know what snow is’.

Except the children, all over the northern hemisphere, that are literally buried in snow!  Am I right?

Now the head of a British Council programme with an annual £10 million budget that raises awareness of global warming among young people abroad, Dr Viner last week said he still stood by that prediction: ‘We’ve had three weeks of relatively cold weather, and that doesn’t change anything.

‘This winter is just a little cooler than average, and I still think that snow will become an increasingly rare event.’

The last quote was from last January, and they were basically calling last winter’s cold snap an aberration.  Now, however, not only is it happening again, it’s worse.  Can we expect excuses to be forthcoming?

The Other McCain has his take on the crumbling AGW juggernaut.

Y’know, when liberals decided to politicize the weather, we should have seen this coming. Jammie Wearing Fool catches liberals arguing that the snowstorm is somehow the result of man-made environmental damage:

The gulf stream is blocked with the oil spill that BP created. This has been confirmed by several scientist here in the US. It will have a devastating effect on the US east coast and parts of Europe, including the UK for years to come.

Now, I’m by no means a meteorologist, but we in the East are prepping for snow, and in some areas, a blizzard.  If the warmth and moisture were being blocked by a oil spill (An oil spill, mind you, that man stopped and nature cleaned up months ago).  What is going to feed the blizzard that’s about to hit the East Coast?  Here’s a map to show what I’m talking about.

As you can see, there’s the gulf stream, coming up from the Carribean, up the East Coast of the US, and the off to the North Atlantic.

Here’s where the Oil Spill theory goes off the rails:  We’re prepping for a nor’easter.  Here are some details…

A nor’easter (also northeaster; see below) is a type of macro-scale storm along the East Coast of the United States and Atlantic Canada, so named because the storm travels to the northeast from the south and the winds come from the northeast, especially in the coastal areas of the Northeastern United StatesAtlantic Canada. More specifically, it describes a low pressure area whose center of rotation is just off the East Coast and whose leading winds in the left forward quadrant rotate onto land from the northeast. The precipitation pattern is similar to other extratropical storms. Nor’easters also can cause coastal flooding, coastal erosion, hurricane force winds, and heavy snow. Nor’easters can occur at any time of the year but are mostly known for their presence in the winter season.[1] Nor’easters can be devastating and damaging, especially in the winter months, when most damage and deaths are cold related, as nor’easters are known for bringing extremely cold air down from the Arctic air mass. Nor’easters thrive on the converging air masses; that is, the polar cold air mass and the warmer ocean water of the Gulf Stream.[1]

Pay close attention to that last sentence.  If the Gulf Stream was blocked by the Gulf Oil Spill, there would be no warmer water from which the storm can “blow up” into a Nor’ Easter.

In other words, the oil spill theory is another lame excuse in the long line of lame excuses.

As for the latest from Britain..

Britons awoke yesterday to the coldest Christmas Day on record.

In parts of the country, the mercury touched minus 18C and few places saw temperatures rise above freezing.

At 8am in Shawbury, Shropshire, it was minus 15.9C and in Altnaharra, in the Highlands of Scotland, minus 18.2C.

Forecasters predict this December is likely to be the coldest on record. The previous coldest was in 1890, when the average temperature for the whole month for England was minus 0.8C.

The alarmists are in quite a hole.  However, they have invested so much capitol into the whole, “We’re making the Earth warmer and we’re all going to dieeeeee!” thing, that they can’t simply stop shoveling.  They are going to try to change the language a bit, as well as the overall narrative.  It’s as if they’re going to keep shoveling, but they’re going to use the shovel with the blue handle, rather than the red.  In the end, they’re going to fail.  There are far too many of us out there that will remind everyone of their inconsistencies and flat out lies.

Then again, it ought to be fun to watch them twist and spin in order to keep shoveling.