I dont pretend to understand the intricacies of the situation in Iraq. Neither do I understand why 9/11 happened; what is it that the extremists want and why are they so passionate and committed to acheiving it? And please, 'they want to destroy our way of life' is headline grabbing but not illuminating.

As much as I wish war to be a thing of the past, I do not feel that 'doing nothing' could seriously be considered an option.

John, Hertfordshire,

Only the most naive and bitterly ignorant would consider the politicing around Iraq and Afghanistan as genuine efforts at democracy. And even worse is to assume that there aren't any material colonial links between the worlds consumed resources and the nations which possess those resources.

Tony Blair is one in a long line of British leaders who having had the opportunity of sharing economic growth and political freedom with the world has instead plunged us deeper into world of more polarities and peddled that on old colonial sentiment. And the partnering in the war on Iraq, will be his ugly smudge on the new century (while his own troops are dressed as Arabs planting roadside bombs or training militia)

Goolam Dawood, Johannesburg, South Africa

Blair should hurry up and go.I personally think he has over road public opinion and common sense to long and in so doing has made the world a far more dangerous and unstable place

duncan, st.albans, uk

To John Doe from Dublin

The idea of the UK becoming a police state is utterly ridiculous. It's obvious some people have little or no real understanding of the seriousness of the dangers we face.

As you appear fond of quotes, here's another for you from the philosopher John Stuart Mill

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling that thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

Viv, London, England

Tony,

No-one is listening any more. Please shut up and go away. You've done enought damage as it is. Just GO

Jeremy Poynton, Fromeville, 51st State

Blair has got that right: "This terrorism has been a generation growing; it will take a generation to knock it out."

He recognizes the time required to battle the imperialistic vision of Islamic global domination will take much time.

On the Iraq war....No one doubted that Saddam was aggressively seeking to acquire WoMD. No one doubted that he would have posed a tremendous threat if had them.

Saddam's support for terrorism in Palestine--paying $20k-$30k per family of each suicide attacker--made certain that he had no reservations on exporting terrorism abroad. By definition, that support made Saddam Hussein's regime a terrorist state.

Ryan, Irvine, CA, USA

Pls read a history book! When, during its Empire, United Kingdom was tolerant, just, civil, democratic,...and so on. Whenever any other empire was a so romantic subject.
Pls read any english history book! Dominate if you don't want to be dominated! This is the only logic when interest (any type of) is the motor of our actions.
Islamics? They have their religion; blind but stronger than any occidental economic value! We MUST reason about this...............

giorgio caimmi, Milano, Italy

Blairs in his latest sound bite is saying we are not being fair to the British yet it is the very rules he has introduced which has caused this serious problem. Are the public so stupid that they are to be taken in yet again??

P.Michael Whitaker, Ilkley, England

Three words to haunt you forever;

COVENANT OF SECURITY

How dare you use the bombings of July 7th 2005 as an excuse to introduce even more police state measures when you refuse to hold a fully independent public inquiry into those bombings.

Or are you afraid of what such an inquiry will find that will expose what a bunch of murdering manipulators you lot in Whitehall and Vauxhall really are?

Christopher McCabe, Manchester,

For once I agree with Blair. We have the same problem in the American empire. A citizen of another state doesn't have a 'right' to come here and work to overthrow our govt.

Barry Bright, Lebanon, CSA, Kentucky

Every age has its demons (remember the anarchists?) and Blair has done this one no service by his strangely selective messianic approach to world order. He chose to take on Saddam, ignoring Mugabe and other tinpot dictators, and doing exactly what Osama bin Laden wanted: creating the right conditions for war between Islamic zealots and the "infidels." Blair has compounded his error by hacking away at Britain"s traditional freedoms and behaving generally like the zealots he denounces never conceding for an instant that might be mistaken.

It will take a very long time to undo the harm this obstinate, obdurate man has done.

David Nortjh, Nagykovacsi, Hungary

"Tolerance, fair play, justice & civility, (often misunderstood by the perpetually angry brigade's useful idiots of Oswald Moseley-like modern avatars as "P.C. gone mad!") - These are seen as weak by totalitarian fascists, in fact these values gave us the moral courage & strength to defeat any threat to our nation over the centuries.

SC, London, United Kingdom"

Yes, those qualities have stood us in good stead over the centuries but these are the qualities which have been non-existent in all the socialist regimes (totalitarian or otherwise) there have ever been. They always preach them and always ditch them.You may not have noticed, SC, but this is a LABOUR government which is trying to introduce this evil legislation. Tolerance, fair play, justice & civility have always hung more comfortably to the right than the left.

Steve, Sutton Coldfield,

There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpation.

James Madison, Orange County, Virginia

For all those defending absolute civil liberty: it is a wonderful thing. However, do not complain or be surprised if once in a while a bomb kills a couple of dozen British citizens.

Adam Prentis, Kladno, Czech Republic

Once again... "Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." ~Benjamin Franklin
Mr bliar, following is neocons footsteps, is slowly but surely creating a police state (he is maybe even more advanced)...
When all will be in place, it will be too late to revolt.
Because, very soon, peace and liberty activists will be labeled terrorists (as they tried to do in some US state) and will fall under these new laws.
Welcome to your very soon to be facist country!

John Doe, Dublin,

Mr. Blair is absolutely right, notwithstanding the much more vocal opposition represented by the leftist media, courts, NGOs and bleeding hearts of all persuasions.

Prominent among these NGOs is Amnesty International (AI), whose recent report blames terror on the so-called "politics of fear" practiced by the West. I have no doubt that Irene Khan, the head of AI, would be squarely trounced in any debate with Tony Blair.

Salomon Benzimra, Toronto, Canada / Ontario

Mr Blair seems to be missing the point. These people have done nothing wrong, those under Control Orders and those at risk of summary deportation. Where did the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" disappear to? It still lives on in my heart, but apparently few others.

By all means lock people in jail for terrorist offences. If they have actually killed someone then lock them up forever. If they're plotting to do so then give them a suitable punishment. But you have to prove it first, to me as a British Citizen, or to my representative the Judge and Jury. By definition these individuals are innocent.

This seems self-evident to me, but there are good reasons too. History has shown us time and again that the greatest threat to freedom and democracy comes not from external oppressive regimes, but from the hijacking of those very principles by unscrupulous rulers, and almost always in the name of protecting them.

Jack Target, London, UK

“Extremism can be defeated only by recognizing that we have not created it;” author Tony Blair. I have tremendous respect for this man, but how he can make such an obviously false statement with a straight face ?

We talk of democracy and then we have the Security Council which negates the basis of democracy. We accept the principal of national interest over right and wrong. We accept might over right in cases such as the right of return etc. No, I do not support terrorism. However, I do not see how the weak and poor can have their voice heard in the current system. Does it justify terrorism? When a state terrorizes a community it is rarely identified with terrorism, but when the weak do the same thing it is called terrorism.

A clever man once said that the only views we can change are our own. Well, it will take a "Bigger" man to change his views and hopefully create a better tomorrow for us all.

Ravi Abay, Colombo, Sri Lanka

"This extremism can be defeated. But it will be defeated only by recognising that we have not created it." -- Mr Blair

Dear Mr Blair,

1)Are you saying that 650,000 Iraqis are just playing dead ?
2)Are U.S military bases in the Middle East just a mirage?
3)Are one million dead Iraqis who had died from U.N Sanctions just our imagination?

source : www.csmonitor.com/2002/0319/csmimg/0319p10b.jpg

source : www.counterpunch.org/ferner05112007.html

Mohammed, London, UK

The phoney war. Remenber 1940.

Ben, York,

The mistake I believe many make with regards to the present threat of Islamic extremism is that it is all because of Iraq/Afganistan. That the dangers we face now were born directly from the West's recent intervention in these nations internal affairs. This is not the case, the real issues being wider and far older than this. Centuries of conflict exists between Christian and Islamic societies, fueled by many things from the greed of religious institutions (all of them evil in my opinion) to oppressive foreign policy and imperial expansionism. Nothing is simple as many on this forum would believe. You condemn this nations past (and present) explotation of other nations, yet revel in the economic stability and privilige this affords you. You cry 'No war for Oil' and then jump in your 4X4, pop down the shops to buy cheap clothes made by children in sweatshops, all the time moaning about the price of petrol.
You blaim TB? Take a look at your own lives - you think you're not part of it?

Simon, Edinburgh,

History moves slowly. Just because Iraq has not achieved a healthy, happy democracy a few months after the toppling of its murderous tyrant, does not mean it will not eventually do so. It is a task made more difficult for Iraq's democratic new leaders, and it's people, by foreign insurgents pouring into the country each day, intent on causing mayhem and exploiting a war-weakened country for political and ideological purposes. But when it eventually overcomes such threats, Iraq can join the democratic nations around the world that exist without invading neighbouring countries or killing thousands of their own citizens with chemical weapons. War is always ugly, but it is to be hoped that the Iraqis will eventually overcome those within their borders who kill in the name of a peaceful God and make the most of their chance of a future free from torture and repression on a scale that we in the west can only imagine.

Martin, Bordeaux, France

Unfortunately, it appears liberalism is a disease that is spreading faster than extemist Islam. This liberal disease will only serve to strengthen an ideology that will not cease until it reaches its' ultimate goal.

Joseph Teneriello, Stoneham, USA/MA

Boy, reading the lunatic comments above makes clear why Britain as a nation is so useless in the battle against extremeism. Trembling weakness, guilt, and self-loathing drip from the bizarre ramblings of those who are angry with the prime minister for trying to defend Western Civilization.

It is indeed good that Mr. Blair is leaving office, for he is far too good for the people he has wasted his services on.

Veatch, Denver, USA/Colorado

The resources of the world are limited and we in the first world have had a good run of it for a long time. Now that the rest of the world wants to catch up with our extravagant lifestyle and have a fair piece of the pie it's going to get difficult.

China is going to want plenty of resources to give it's peope to lifestyle that they are coming to expect. The people of the Middle East are unfortunate casualties in the race for resources, The people of Africa are going to have to wait a while, whilst the people of South America are enjoying their successful experiment of socialist revoloution.

When this all kicks off and we are fighting with the chinese for oil and other resources in the middle east and Africa things are indeed going to get ugly.

Sure, we can go back to the days of diplomacy, and try to build up the reputaion of the UN which is in tatters. but it seems to be much more process efficient to stick with soldiers and bombs.

David Koskuba, York, UK

why do we have to have 4 weeks more of this short sighted man? Especially when it is so obvious that he so out of touch with reality.

akram, London,

Debate? There's no debating with Blair. He decides, and if we are lucky - and I never, as a pre-Iraq lifelong Labour voter (now 55), believed I would say this - the Lords will throw it out enough times to dilute at least some of the most excessive (further) infringements of our basic freedoms as subjects of Her Majesty.

Sooner or later we are going to have to engage in real dialogue with the ideologues of Islam. I give you South Africa; I give you Northern Ireland. Further measures will serve to further alienate the Muslim community, and the many many of us who are already horrified at the curtailment of civil liberties by this government.

Do they serve us, or we them?

Does Bliar serve us, or we him?

What do you think? At what point with this government will we see riots? What will be Brown's Poll Tax? Or even Bliar's?

Jeremy Poynton, Fromeville, 51st State

Tony Blair is a giant amongst pygmies, as evidenced by his detractors here.

WHY is he saying this now with 4 weeks to go before he leaves? Why not leave it for his successor to tackle? Why so urgent?

1. Threats have been made recently before Blair leaves office.
2. Brown on succession will be busy launching new domestic policies, and trying to ignore terrorism / Iraq.
3. Blair knows he has failed to convince many just how dangerous the fundamentalist Islamist threat is.

When the population of the UK gets to 50% muslim such Islamo-fascists are instructed to impose sharia law & take over this country. So in 15 - 20 years we might see beheadings of our politicians.

WAKE up, people.

Mr Blair is telling you this because he BELIEVES it is a danger as do our security services. The courts are confused by conflicting laws. We are in a QUIET war, so quiet the liberal press haven't actually noticed yet!

Iraq is NOT the cause but the excuse. People who kill their own are NOT dissidents.

E Warlow, London, UK

"Liberty is precious. So precious it has to be rationed."
"Liberty has to be limited in order to be maintained"

Ben, York,

i suppose the war on terror is a good way to get round the principles of decomacracy and the rules of law

thank god ths man is going. He is more of a threat to our feedom than hitler

Dave, Merseyside, UK

Jakob Stenfalk says "Terrorists have murdered and injured less than five hundred European residents in the years since Sep. 2001. "
Has it occurred to him that the toll has been kept so low ONLY because of the unrelenting efforts of the security services in most European countries? Has he a clue about the number of plots to carry out mass bombings or poisonings that were disrupted before the plotters had a chance to carry them out? Germany, France, Spain, Italy and Great Britain have all managed to avert serious attacks. The intent to carry out such attacks remains. Terrorist wannabes have attempted poison and "dirty bomb" production, and planned multiple aircraft bombings (over the Pacific and Atlantic), and assassinations.
It is sad to observe a Europe in lala land, sticking its collective fingers in its ears and with its hat pulled down over its eyes, saying, terrorists? what terrorists?
The terrorists have to be lucky only once... And he would make it a whole lot easier.

Erwin, Sydney, Australia

It is not that we are trying to protect the terrorists,both here in America and in the U.K. but rather that we are trying to protect our citizens from the abuse of the Government in using these laws against us. Especially here in the United States where the bush Administration and the Attorney General have constantly violated our Civil Rights in the name of 'Fighting Terrorism'. It is turning out that we have more to fear from our own Governments than the 'Terrorists' they are supposed to be protecting us from.

Bob Garcia, San Antonio, Texas, USA

Amazing this fixation that TB has on moslim extremism. He actually has done them a great favour as they have grown in strength and notoriety during his reign as PM.
To put things in perspective , the 2006 report from EUROPOL (the European Interpol) has numbered 498 instances of terrorist acts in Europe in 2006. Of this the great majority was the work od independentists, activists, political extremists (left and right). Only ONE instance is attributed to islamists, which makes them " the greatest threat" surely!!!!
However the same report points out that out of 700 people arrested or suspected, more than half were muslims. Now how does that tally with the FACTS, Mr TB?
The real target of all this orwelian drive is not the threat by muslim extremism, but the liberties of the British public, and in particular the muslim minority.

Bob Andrews , London,

Tony, you have no idea of the contempt the majority of
the UK population has for you.

John, LONDON,

You loathsome little man. You want to remove our freedoms. Begone.

whitey, Sydney,

One gentlemen posted the following:
"There is no world threat from 'terrorists', just a greedy grab for Earth's resources."

Tell that to the nearly 3000 who died on September 11th, (before the invasion of Iraq if you recall). Also tell it to the 57 Britons who died on July 7th. Their families would be interested to hear that there is no threat from "terrorists."

It worries me how incredibily naive many of you are and how much you hate your own country.

Travis Richie, Pensacola, U.S. / Florida

What we are witnessing today in Iraq is primarily the internecine strife within Islam. Saddam had been able to keep ‘peace’ in Iraq by violently suppressing the majority Shias. His overthrow by allied forces unwittingly occasioned the blowing away the lid of the boiling sectarian cauldron also, which would have blown away anyway sometime later. Should not the Muslims who accuse the allied powers not entirely wrongly for causing turmoil in Iraq also exercise introspection and protest as vociferously against the killing of Muslims by fellow Muslims?

Moti Lakhi, Schoten, Belgium

Governments to do not repress their own population in order to protect that population. Governments repress their their population in order to protect the government. Blair's raft of fascist "anti-terror" legislation is designed to protect his own backside, and the the backsides of his colleagues, from the inevitable blowback from his misguided adventure in Iraq. The govt is stealing our freedoms to protect themselves from the payback for their illegal invasion.

Blair, if you make these decisions you should live with the risks they entail, and you should not turn the UK into a prison-state for us law-abiding peaceable types who would still like to remain civilised members of a free and democratic country. What next? A bogus "state of emergency" and the suspension of elections?

David Rochester, Liverpool, UK

Blair happens to be right.

In the United States the same sort of legalistic lawsuits are often used to protect the rights of terror suspects and criminals over the victims and citizens.

A famous Supreme Court justice once ruled that our Constitution "was not a suicide pact". In other words people were using our own laws to tie our own hands and allow the criminals to take advantage of them to our own disadvantage.

Blair's right. If you think he's wrong, you'll be the one wishing something more had been done when the evil doers of this world come for YOU.

Phil, Mine Hill, US/NJ

"tell me exactly what they feel angry about." ... perhaps the killing of 655,000 Iraqi civilians in the pursuit of regime change explicitly forbidden by UN Resolution 1441?

iman, watford,

One of the cornerstones of British society is fairness and tolerance. Innocent till proven guilty. Mr Blair seems to have forgotten this and jumped on the Bush terrorism-wagon. These actions will only aid the further alienation of a strata of society. I am one Labour voter who will be glad to see the back of Mr Blair..

Hamad lone, Thornton Heath, England

Mandatory fingerprinting of all eleven year old children, 4m+ CCTV cameras, that have the ability to yell and listen to the public, police with the power to deputize anyone as an officer of any branch of government, DNA extraction and permanent recording for people who litter or speed, the ability to hold suspects(not foreign nationals) for a month without charge. This country does not even do the magna carta justice anymore. Maybe after the next massive corporate attack when they actually set up camps for us, people will wake up.

Mike, Stratford,

Many did not not notice it when India has been going through it for a long time! Now enjoy a bit of it right in your backyard!

Tony was one of the guilty, who blindly sided with Pakistan. Please remember: you have not yet seen much the barbarism of the terrorists and their sympathizers!
Regards,

Krishna R. Kumar, Udupi, India

Your adoring fans in the U.S.A .await you Tony.
I too will shed a tear at your departure, then crack open a bottle of champagne.
(Good job Americans do not understand irony, or for that matter anything about British Politics).

Don, leeds, u.k.

You don't seem to understand the values on which your country was built Mr. Blair.

You don't seem to understand the values that the British people hold most dear Mr. Blair: honesty, freedom, taking responsibility for one's actions.

Your vision of Britain is a country that would need liberating.

I would be so glad if I never had to hear your name or see your face again.

Reginald, London, UK

Sir,
Guilty until proven innocent.

So tell me Mr Blair, exactly what values are we fighting for, & who appears to be winning?

The classic struggle of the Western pysche, betwixt the Athenian democrats & the totalitarian militarist Spartans.

Surely we cannot let pragmatic Britain fall to the Hollywood hysterics of the paranoid armed ghetto state?

All this talk about existential threats to human civilisation, appeasement & calling every tinpot dictator the new Hitler is frankly quite embarrassing, not at all worthy of a country with our long history.

Tolerance, fair play, justice & civility, (often misunderstood by the perpetually angry brigade's useful idiots of Oswald Moseley-like modern avatars as "P.C. gone mad!") - These are seen as weak by totalitarian fascists, in fact these values gave us the moral courage & strength to defeat any threat to our nation over the centuries.

SC, London, United Kingdom

It's always someone else's fault isn't it Tony? I'm glad my girlfriend and I left when we did.

Lucy, Florida, USA

We used to have more bombings by the IRA in main land Britain that we have terrorist acts by Islamic extremests yet we did not need to loose our civil liberties then, so why do we need to loose them now?

I will not object if the police come up and talk to me, I will be polite to them because that is how I was brought up, but I will maintain my right to refuse to talk to them if I don't want to and not tell them anything I don't want to tell them.

We as a country have a right to choose who we allow to come here just as I as an individual have a right to choose who I let in to my house and how long they can stay. The human rights act needs to be amended to allow the police and imigration service to excercise this right. Then we can get rid of the foreigners who want to bring down our system and use existing laws for people who are UK citizens.

Oh, and the government can stop trying to impose its will on other countries, we don't have the right any more than they do.

Mark Gordon, Slough, Berkshire

There is a tradeoff between freedom and security, sometimes. Its regrettable, but true. Tony Blair may be correct in wanting to detain foreign nationals (who were in case free to leave), when there was not evidence in a court of law to convict them.
In my country (the US), I see that there is little or no security in the malls, no security in the bridges and tunnels, and none in the electric power system and water system and trains and so forth. If terrorists start doing to the US what they do to Iraq and Israel, we will become a much more policed society. That may be the way it has to be.

Gideon Isaac, Irvington, NY

ToFelix Dynin.

' He whom the Gods want to punish is punished by insanity'

There are some who thinks that this now applies to Tony Blair himself. He seems to be getting more and more desperate to prove he is right as we count down to his departure from office.

nick dekker, cumbernauld, Scotland

This article makes me very angry. Too angry, in fact, for words.

Helen, Dublin, Ireland

It will much, much easier to manage this problem as soon as you start being honest. This scourge will just continue growing until you stop differentiating between "good terrorists" and "bad terrorists". People will probably have more faith in your intentions if stop trying to profit from the outcome.

GregD, Boston, USA

1) Blair is a democratically elected leader.
2) WMD were found by Polish troops after the invasion. Of course that is rarely reported by an anti-war press.
3) WMD were used on the Kurds. We had to assume they were still there.
4) "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing", Edmund Burke.
5) This is not a police state, banana republic, dictartorship etc. This very forum proves it.
6) We have lost around 150 troops. Put this in context with WWII, WWI, indeed any other war and this is nothing. Same with civilians - 20 million killed in the USSR in WWII etc.

Ben, York,

Sir,
Guilty until proven innocent?
Our dear PM Tony Blair has stated that this war is about winning the war of values.
So who is winning?

SC, London, United Kingdom

I wonder if Blair is as tired of his own spin as we are. Forget the protestations we hear time and again about his government being frustrated by his own laws or human rights legislation as this is just another smokescreen to excuse themselves from responsibility. Blair has had a very nice majority in the house for 10 years so any real anti-terror laws could easily have been passed. If they were frustrated as he claims, it was his own party that felt the laws were too draconian and akin to Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany. Human rights laws that Britain signed up to does not seem to affect other EU countries or give anywhere like the same problems it apparently gives our home office. There are many reasons for the current mess but all of them attributed to his government and no one else. Its time he and his government stood up and took charge and responsibility instead of blaming everyone else but themselves.

Mike, Alicante, Spain

I am an American. I am sixty years old. I always vote in every election.
I consider myself a responcible person. I have good judgement and common sense. I have taken the time to keep myself informed so that I can make good sound judgements concerning current issues. Does that mean I know all that can be known? No! What do you expect from your leaders? Do you live up to the standard you have expressed here for Mr. Blair or for that matter Mr. Bush. I seriously doubt it. Just remember that what ever happens in your country will be on your heads more than on the leaders. Carp all you want, spill your guts and cleanse your soul in the rags of media. What does that do for you. Nothing! Have you voted, or do you only claim to vote. Do you know the truth about what happens? Are you privy to sensitive information about what goes on in the bigger world. Why don't you harpers get together and hold a world summit. Invite the terrorists leaders and solve it all over tea and crumpets.

David Doyt Miller, St. Marys, Ohio USA

This article – presumably from the heart and unspun – only confirms what many people have suspected for a long time: that our soon-to-be-ex Prime Minister really is just not very bright by the general standard of British public life. Perhaps that is why he has always seemed happier and more confident when standing next to George Bush rather than Gordon Brown.

The idea that the threat we face is unlike anything we have faced before is a measure of his lack of historical perspective. Worse, he holds those who do have it – whether in the judiciary, the civil service, the monarchy, the professions or any other branch of public service – in contempt .

In his retirement, might he not usefully read the Hansard debates of 1940-41 and reflect that Britain's "traditional civil liberties" , hard-won and hard-fought-for, are no mean inheritance. His "legacy" has been a wasting of that and the "hand of history" he feels is not on his shoulder now but in the small of back, ushering him out.

Margaret, London, UK

I will not read any article by Blair. My life savings of 20 years, over £100,000 , has been seized by his vicious Government. Railtrack was renationalised and Bliar's Government bragged about not compensating the shareholders.

Winston smith, Barcelona, Spain

Blair goes into political obscurity without a note of grace.

The war on terror is a slogan. Not that lots of people aren't being killed, but thery're being killed for no purpose.

A regime such as Hussein's is the last to have anything to do with terror. There were no terrorists in in the Soviet Union, and just so in Hussein's Iraq.

How can you have a war on a method or belief?

And what is that method? It is the method of the hopeless and desperate, people whose interests receive no fair hearing and whose oppressors are immensely well-armed.

And let's keep a sense of proportion. Americans murdering other Americans kill every two months the number who died in 9/11. They kill that many on the highways almost every month. There are over a half million cases of serious child abuse every year in America.

So why two wars, hundreds of billions spent, laws violating everyone's rights, secret prisons and torture, new police-state rules?

I can't say. Neither can Blair.

John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada

Mister Blair

Please permit me to share with you some simple arithmetic: Terrorists have murdered and injured less than five hundred European residents in the years since Sep. 2001. It has now been six and a half years. Europe has a population of about four hundred million (give or take maybe twenty or thirty mil).

Even if we assume (extremely generously) that terrorist laws similar to those you propose and those passed since Sep. '01 would save 80 % of all future terrorist victims, even then - by the most generous possible estimation - they would reduce the risk of being murdered in Europe by less than one in a million p.a.

To get a sense of scale, please consider the fact that this risk is comparable to the risk of being killed or injured by police in the course of their duty. Or, put another way, the risk of being murdered by terrorists is more than two orders of magnitude smaller than the risk of being murdered by non-terrorists.

How, again, do you justify these teror laws?

Jakob Stenfalk, Copenhagen, Denmark

Tony Blair is one of the highest developed politicians ever. This must be said... and said it will be in future times to come.. and ridiculed will be those narrow minded ignorant extreme liberals!

Jack Lubo, London,

What about the danger of a totalitarian regime emerging in this country? If the government continues to remove the democratic and legal safe-guards which protect us from state oppression then this country will become more and more vulnerable. Wake up and smell the coffee.

Richard Lafferty, F'Borough,

Oh well.. The times have just lost them selves another reader. I thought Blair was New Labour,,, it seems not hey;)

Tony Blair needs to face the reality of what he has done. He has authorised the brutal murder of 1000's of innocent civilians unter the pretnece of "freedom fighting" dosnt sound much different to what every other "terrorist" does.

We are a democracy, democracy has worked for many 100's of years untill he came along. Go and work on the streets tony blair on the minimal wage. Leave your safety net, then tell the people what you did was right.

Anthony, Cheshire,

The very freedoms that so many civil libitarians cherish are under threat, not from Mr Blair, but from extremists who bomb and maim. The removal of extreme and brutal regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq occurred after (a long time after) Al Qaida began attacking western civilisation.

Sometimes it is necessary to limit freedom to preserve the safety of the majority. We accept these limitations because we want safety. Traffic lights, seat-belts and smoking bans are all examples. No-one has the right to abuse our hospitality and those who do should be deported to their own countries no matter how unsafe they would be there. British nationals who plot sedition can hardly complain if they are found out.

A dangerous and alien culture has captured the minds of some of our endogenous youth. As the letter from Faisal Haque demonstrates we are losing the propaganda war. Unfortunately, the doctrine of taqiyya makes it acceptable for Muslims to lie to unbelievers. Too may are being deceived.

Terry Hamblin, Bournemouth,

If Americans think Tony Blair is a great leader - then please
take him. It's style over substance. Everything Tony Blair ever does has been about
Tony Blair - not about the people of Britain and what they actually
desire. He has been described as a sanctimonious
control freak with a God complex, and that is just about right, it
thus he will suit America well. The Constitution, he will ride rough-shod over; the Congress, he will ignore; the Supreme Court, he will try to by pass. When you do finally rumble him he will say: "I hope you are not questioning my integrity, because I really did believe I was doing the right thing". Mr. Blair is sadly deluded and has damaged Britain and its interests in a way which would have been thought unimaginable ten yearsago. In the name of a fight against terrorism, he is rapidly turning
our wonderful tolerant country into a fascist state, where Blair is
an elected dictator. Thanks, but no thanks. America you would rue the day you said come over

Michael Bilton, Southsea, England

What a facist.

There has been plenty of anti terrorist legilslation on the books since the 70's, In conjunction with this and an aggressive security force the IRA were defeated, more than once.

New laws are NOT required, proper policing and competent intelligence servies are.

Why has Blair's Gvnt never understood or seen the evidence of their own eyes that sitting in Parliament passing a plethora of new laws DOES NOT WORK without the apparatus to enforce them, all you do is bring the law into contempt, something Labour are passed masters at.

The Gvnt seems to be at war with it's own people turning them into mere serfs before the power of the state.

Great legacy Tone and a fine example of the inherent facism of the left's 'We know what's best for you'.

Clark, Genf, Schweiz

I once asked my MP why if you can stop certain football followers from travelling abroad for fear of trouble, why is it not possible to stop fellow British citizens from travelling abroad when their objective is murder? I was told it was a very complex issue!

John, Nottingham,

the big picture oil

chris, derby,

It has long been the practice of the US to interfere in the destinies of other cuntries, usually for strategic reasons to America' benefit.. The reasons fed to the public have usually followed the line of the generosity of the US in spreading democracy like blessings bestowed on those who crave it and the US once again came to the rescue. I thought TB was more more aware of 20th C. history to fall for that line. I can think of nowhere that America has fiddled with that is better for it. National cultural comfort is various and both British and the American politicians don't seem to grasp this. The citizens of other nations do not have the same concept of priorities, church vs. state or whether democracy or some other organisation of society feels right. Western leaders have forgotten the importance of religion in daily life...Muslims haven't. We should not be so arrogant as to think we know what other cultures want or need.
Bush and Blair have made this world far more dangerous.

Susan Whiteman, Heather, Leicestershire, England

I completely agree with Mark of Sheffield,

Mr Blair's government boxed itself into the corner, by the introduction of the Human Rights act, which most of the British public for the past several years do not want. Furthermore, the Judiciary at the time expressed concerns, as it create conflicts where they courts would be asked to rule on political decisions, and as such felt in the long term would eventually lead to the government trying to remove their inpartiality.

Finally, increased immigration control, amending or repealing the Human rights act, you crytisised and welcomed the rubbishing of such proposals by liberty while at the same time indicating such proposal as being racist without actually stating it. Mr Balir this so hypocrytical no wonder the British people do not believe you even in this case where I feel your intentions are justified. You know sometimes the skills of spin and good campaigner come back to haunt you.

Andrew Tagg, Halifax, UK

John, this is not an oppressive nation. This very forum, and freedom your freedom to say that without being
'disappeared', prove it. To those who question the wars, "the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" (Edmund Burke). Saddam and the Taliban were evil and could only be expelled by an invasion, even if the war is not yet won.

Ben, York,

If anybody actually read this article they would see two well made points.
1) That the foreign terror suspects could have left the country at any time. If no other country was stupid enough to take them, why should we let them roam free?
2) The killing of cvilians in Iraq is by Muslim militants who cannot accept a free country. British and American troops are PROTECTING civilains.
Tony, take some consolation from history - the louder the loony left scream at you, the more likely it is you are doing the right thing.

Charlie Downshire, London, UK

Tony Blair asks: "Why should anyone feel angry about us?" Perhaps because we, Britain, sided with the US, but against most other governments and the UN, and mounted an illegal (according to overwhelming international legal opinion) attack of aggression against a sovereign state purely for reasons of shock and awe in order to restore America's pride after the devastating and shocking attack on September 11, 2001. It was a "war" designed to avenge someone, anyone, and it did not matter if the facts did not stack up. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, yet years of Blair/Bush propaganda has made it seem so in the minds of many. Many Iraqis are now saying that the situation was *better* under Saddam, because at least the killing wasn't completely random and most people, including Westerners, could go about their business undeterred and certainly not under threat of bombs on a daily, hourly basis as now.

But all Blair can ask is: "Why should anyone feel angry about us?"

Mike Mitchell, Spalding, England

Mr Blair is right. When are our courts and others going to wake up and make sensible decisions to protect us from fanatics? This is not a game of technicalities.
And when are our politicians going to amend the stupidly idealistic Human Rights Act? How many atrocities does it take?

CP, London, UK

It was Blair who introduced the Human Rights Act, turned a blind eye to extremists, was soft on immigration, tried appeasing Muslim minority groups. Blair it was who chose to interpret 9/11 as an attack on UK. The same Blair went into an illegal war against a country which had done nothing to hurt us.
Terror is his legacy.

To Blair - Just go. Leave us alone. Make loadsamoney somewhere else. We've really had enough of you and your delusions.

To British Press - stop reporting the self-justifying ramblings of a past-sell-by-date clapped out politician.

Tricia Williams, E. Sussex, UK

JUST TO OPEN YOUR AMERICAN EYES.
in the UK we see every day the effects of the war in Iraq ,
woman and children still die every day and it is not getting
better ,the war is now civil and costs the American and
British taxpayer thousands of pounds and dollars everyday
THE NEW BRITISH GOVERNMENT needs to put the problem right how we don't know but we do know LOTS MORE US SOLDIERS AND UK TROOPS WILL GIVE
THEIR LIVES before we solve the problem.

george william taylor, hull, uk

How Al-Qaeda must have laughed once they’d provoked the “Great Satan” and his poodle into obligingly sending 150,000 of their troops to Iraq. Saddam Hussein was too intent on maintaining his own evil regime to want anything to do with Al-Qaeda, and as we now know was suppressing the intentions of countries such as Iran. Mr Blair suffers badly from self-delusion and constantly quotes Iraq has democracy when he knows full well that he or any foreign national cannot walk outside of the Green Zone in Baghdad without risking death; some democracy. Meanwhile the killing of Iraqis by Sunnis and Shias continues unabated and own home grown security threats increase whilst Blair offers up the facile excuse: “It’s not me guv.” The salient point is that yes, we know that Blair wants peace in Iraq, but was warned that his ham-fisted attempts would make matters worse, but with his simple Manichaean philosophy of permanent conflict he lacks the intellectual nous to work this out for himself.

Stan, Stanmore, England

It is not for one government to go into another country and remove its government. The people can be helped to dispose of their dictator and to elect a new leader, but they would be doing it directly, not outsiders. Such a supportive approach would have been far more successful than this interfering one. It is arrogance to deny respect to a country and relieve it of its leader to impose our values etc, an arrogance which has exacted a terrible price in the lives of the Iraqis and our soldiers. Worse still, to do it against strong opposition then demand respect for what we cherish and believe in. Respect has to be both ways if we believe in having it for ourselves too . Respect also carries sensitivity at its core, so we can only have the respect we deserve when we are sensitive to the needs of others.

Muslims are not being 'angry about people doing the killings' because they know the root cause lies in the invasion which stirred up a hornet's nest without a strategy to quell it.

Elaine Sihera, Maidenhead, United Kingdom

There is no justification for Islamo-fascist fundamnetalist terrorism. Equally, there is no excuse or justification for what Blair and his ilk have imposed on Britons in the name of their defence.

Terrorists aim to place British subjects in fear of their security and freedom to go about their business without threat or hindrance. Having starkly failed in his duty to plan for post-war peace in Iraq, Blair is now determined to use the imposition of draconian restrictions on individuals as a fig leaf for his own abysmal failures.

It is the oldest desport dictator's trick in the book - if your own policies are failing, find an enemy to blame.

Blair's multi-pronged attack on our liberties will be studied for many years to come, in the same vein as Stalin's oppression of his people has been and Hitler's rise to power through democratic means has been.

This is all going to end in blood and tears.

Edwin Thornber, Bucharest, Romania

Bush and Blair seriously damaged the credibility of the UN
by steamrollering an invasion of Iraq.No Bin Laden and no WMD.A repressive regime undoubtedly. But since when have western countries cared whether other countries have repressive regimes? How many have died in Sudan, Burma , Zimbabwe, Tibet , China under Mao, Russia under Stalin etc.? No western intervention there.
Provided the target country is small, has Oil and is of strategic importance then the likes of Bush and Blair will invade. Otherwise they will only tut tut at human rights violations .
Blair got it completely wrong. The target should have been Bin Laden . Blair and Bush embarked on their own distorted agenda and left a legacy of pain, suffering and religious / sectarian conflict.
In the name of Christ ?- surely they cannot be serious.

graham connor, christchurch, new zealand

Time for a bit of analysis: be honest about Britain's foreign policy. Always on your moral high horse about democracy when Britain is fully responsible for Israel/Palestine situation, Kashmir, Diego Garcia, Zimbabwe etc etc.
No it's not in the past. The US supplied chemical weapons to Sadaam Hussain, kick started the nuclear programme in Iran, established with the UK Israeli nuclear power.
You know people do know their history and have aren't suffering from political amnesia like you. We don't need a lesson in peace studies. You're not target specific. Instead of going after Al-qaeeda you helped them flourish in Iraq (non-existant before). In a region where we've never ever had suicide bombing not even in Kashmir, we now do as in Afghanistan.
Your political rhetoric supports islamaphobia with no distinction between extremism and ordinary Muslims. We already have one true Islam we don't need terrorist's world vision. And we're always monitored like hawks while terrorists run free...

myonlycrimeisimhuman, london, uk

As you've never really understood it. Leadership, in essence, involves developing a coherent framework for addressing major issues and generating confidence amongst, and support for, those involved, to aid them calmly and confidently handle the situation for themselves. The British people as a whole has shown much more maturity and confidence in assessing and handling this modern threat, without in the main any knowledge of statistical analysis or state-restricted information. Your shrillness we will well do without.

Colin Wells, Bath,

Shame on the Times for giving a platform to this extremist.

KJ Keir, Aberdeen, Scotland

I am amazed at the overwhelmingly left wing comments to Mr. Blair's article. God save the UK because the House of Lords and your judges won't. You value your civil liberties so much that you are willing to gladly follow the path of your own destruction as a nation because you value the rights of terrorists far more than you do the rights of all the other people.

Tony Blair will ultimately be remembered as a great statesman. Compare him with Mr. Browne.

Norman Stern, Naples, Florida

Mr Blair wou're wrong. We don't need laws to destroy our liberties, we need realistic leaders. Leaders who understand that invading a sovereign state automatically triggers resentments. Leaders who use the time-honoured systems in place to research their evidence. (Press secretarys, especially ones with less than glowing CVs, should not be the single source of information). Britain has been juggling with Iraq since it created it. The Thatcher regime was nearly brought down by its arms deals with Saddam. And Mr. Blair, , for a 'world statesman' to believe that if you invade a country, dismantle its governing infrastructure, achieve what you need to 'prevail', the natives will be grateful seems to me to be utter stupidity.
There is no world threat from 'terrorists', just a greedy grab for Earth's resources. Your shame Mr Blair and Mr Bush is that you insist on showing no humility in your relentless brutalities.

tim, brighton, UK

"...and the Muslims in both countries get the chance to vote"... if they live long enough ! thanks to the security and public services breakdown, brought about by your failure to follow through on your removal of " two utterly brutal and dictatorial regimes " by efficient, corruption free ones !. Thank you for the lives saved Mr Blair ! They are killing each other, all Bush and Blair has done is rid Iraq of a tyrant and made way for free elections.

Fred Steele, Hinckley, Leicestershire

He's been shaking that kalaedoscope again.

Edward Teague, Rochdale,

Blair's assault on democracy and the rule of law is being resisted by Parliament and the Courts. His ill-conceived dream of bringing democracy and the rule of law to Afghanistan and Iraq at the point of a gun has failed, and his attempts to dismantle democracy and the rule of law in the UK have at least in part failed too.

Yet here he is, still peddling the same old hackneyed lines, unable to accept that he was disastrously wrong and that his approach has been rejected. He has lost the war and lost the arguments. Goodbye.

Nick King, Datchworth, UK

The "war on terror" is not something that can be won by military force. Negotiation, reconciliation and discussion are vital.
Even if we eradicate terrorism, what does that achieve if the result is that we are no longer free? We are watched constantly. Civil liberties are being eroded in the name of democracy and freedom.

a, cambridge,

The key to Blair's personality is to realise that he is (1) essentially an adolescent and (2) a most fearful creature.

(1) means that he is forever recklessly grabbing at policies the implications of which he does not understand until too late or ever, while (2) his abnormal cowardice drives him to ever more extreme measures to make himself secure - right from the start of his Premiership he has surrounded himself with a level of security which would have embarrassed Stalin, whether it be his armour plated car to take him from Downing Street to Parliament or the 24 guard on his constituency home which at the last count required 18 full time personnel.

If this proposal goes through Blair wil have created all the apparatus needed for a police state bar identity cards and he hasn't done that only because of a lack of time.

Robert Henderson , London ,

What are they angry about? My guess, Prime Minister, would be that they're angry that compared to life under the unquestionably brutal and authoritarian Saddam regime, the average Iraqi citizen is now something like thirty times MORE likely to meet a violent and untimely death, and in addition also lacks the basic amenities like water, electricity, functioning hospitals, education and an effective domestic police force which all existed under Saddam.

This situation is almost certain to persist for many years to come, even assuming the country doesn't descend into total civil war, which it probably will as soon as the coalition troops leave. Having a vote is very nice, but it's somewhat pointless if the people you vote for can't stop you from being blown up when you pop out to the market to buy some carrots.

I've never been to Baghdad so I can't speak for the average Iraqi, but a foreign invasion of my country causing that situation would certainly make ME pretty angry.

Rev. S. Campbell, Bath, UK

I was really shocked to read of the Government's plans to propose measures to give the police increased powers to stop and question citizens. Mr Blair is consistent in his style and in his belief that Parliament and the courts have been wrong to criticise ant-terriorism laws. He says that the fault lies with the fact that we have chosen as a society to put civil liberities of the suspect, even if a foreign national, first. Surely, treating all suspects fairly is not our weakness, that is our great strength, won out of many conflicts in the past. If Mr Blair had been stopped in the street by the police and not by another person, as he relates in his article, and then asked about his beliefs, perhaps then he would have realised that the ideal of restricted liberty he persistently seeks is not the ideal that many of the rest of us share.

Paul Tomlinson, London,

What terrible ingratitude some of these comments display. Surely a further butchering of our civil liberties is not too much to tolerate if it enables our leader to add yet another " achievement " to his list before he goes.

J. Mackay, London,

So many faulty misconceptions. "We as a nation" has decided this or that, that we should make civil liberties formost. When did "we" make this decision? I don't remember anyone asking me? Does anyone give me the chance t change the law? We have a small democratic power over our government, but that;s it. We have no control over the law. And thus we had not choice in placing foreign nationals civil liberties above our own. Likewise, when Tony was having this little chat, and gave his 'eye opening' vision of the opposite side of the argument (which the man had never heard before because the reality of the actions of the war are veiled and hidden from our view - not because no one wants to hear it) he proved nothing, of course they have every right to be angry. They never asked for democracy. Maybe they don't want it. Tony is clearly blinded by this idealise vision of perfection in democracy. It's SUBJECTIVE Tony.

Sarah, London, UK

"Within the next few weeks we will publish new proposals on anti-terror laws. Our aim is to reach a consensus across the main political parties"..... Surely the aim of new anti-terror laws should not be to acheive cross party consensus, but rather to protect the British people from terrorist attack. The nation is not under threat from lack of consensus, The nation,.and indeed the peace of the whole world, is threatened by a dangerous, primitive, totalitarian ideology, which uses terror as but one of its means to acheive the goal that it clearly and regularly states (just read the words of Zawahiri, Qutb, Ahmadinejad, OBL. Hamza. Brooks, etc).It is essential that we clearly identify this ideology, "terror" does not adequately explain it. It is this fear naming the enemy that.is.the source of the divisions that are paralysing our effective response. Perhaps we shouldn't impose our own name but allow them to define themselves. So, in what name do they claim they murder, maim and die?

sean birnie, Madriz, Spain

I can fully understand why Tony Blair is trying to minimise the risk of a terrorist attack happening on his watch - after all, the only price is a few civil liberties that people don't even need when their government is obviously so perfect and trustworthy!

What amazes me is that he can't work out why so many people disagree with him on this. He seems to have completely forgotten that, for regular people like us, our civil liberties are our only defence against our rulers. Nothing could be more important.

As for Iraq - of course we have to stay there and do as much as we can to save lives. But that doesn't change the fact that going there in the first place stoked the flames of a fire we desperately needed to put out. I don't mind people defending the continued British presence in Iraq - but please not the man who took us there in the first place, on spurious promises of WMD.

Jonathan, Cambridge,

One hardly knows where to begin with this delusional piece of self justification by Mr. Blair. However, as Iraq is now seen by most as opening Pandora's Box, I'll take the quote about 'treating foreign nationals well.' In Liverpool a respected school governor and his family were deported to Pakistan in the dead of night. Since then they have been harrassed and beaten for their peaceful opposition to the 'regime' there, as Mr. Blair knows full well. As a life long Labour voter until the invasion of Iraq, I am telling you Mr. Blair that you have wasted your time in office and that this country is a more dangerous place because of your policies.

Brian , Liverpool, UK

I am happy to see I'm not the only one who thinks the route our government is taking is utter madness. Why are we still listening to Tony anyway? I don't remeber a single story about Muslim terrorists attacking the UK (let alone actual attacks) before he came along. Coincidence or not? I'll leave you to decide.

Steve, London, UK

Be honest. Tony Blair "gets it" when he talks about the threat from Islamists - though even now for him its the terrorism "that dare not speak its name" for fear of causing "offence".

Violent Islam has been around for 1300 years - just ask the remnants of the Zoroastrian faith or the displaced or forcibly converted Jewish/Christian/Hindu/Buddhist peoples.

Its methods of aggression, intimidation and subversion are centuries old and well known to anyone with the ability to read history books.

Our laws were sufficient for us until, with no democratic mandate, governments allowed mass immigration and the imposition of the now discredited "multiculti" society.

At the same time, through the adoption of the Human Rights Act, the rights of those here illegally or planning, inciting or conducting acts of terrorism and crime are placed ahead of the rights of the rest of us to live in safety.

At the grand old age of 50 I can remember a country that had no need of this!

Geoff Miller, Bromsgrove, England

There are, of course, many, many people like Michael Rigby who see the rise of Islamist terrorism as being a wholly predictable response the overthrow of Sadam.

They are incapable or unwilling to look even 10 or 20 years back in time to acknowledge this threat to Western democracy and the civil liberties we hold dear predates Blair's election, let alone Iraq.

The self-indulgence and decadence within our society, typified here by Mr Rigby, is a greater threat to our future freedoms than anything militant Islam can ever conjure.

Dom in Oxford, oxford, UK

Well said Mr. Blair!!!
Unfortunately the great British free press has the freedom to lie, distort , and mislead those of the public who are incapable of learning via experience the true nature of what faces western democracies.
Attention deficit disorder is the current description for the condition our media engender in the minds of the soap generation.
Neither you, or anyone attempting to enlighten or awaken
them is fighting a losing battle.

ron reece, blackmore, essex

Western Europe's (and the UK in particular) tolerance of intolerance will be it's undoing. 80 years from now your grandchildren will look back at this period of time and say "Look what you did to us!" I agree with the poster above, a Sharia state is coming because your overly PC society will let it come because you are too afraid to stand up to immigrants who will not tolerate your culture and bring their unpalatable culture intoy your country. Western Europe is what it is because of hundreds and hundreds of years of development and changing attitudes. They're still cutting peoples heads off in Iraq...they were doing that 4ooo years ago...there has been no moving on of attitudes. Sadly, it won't be long before the first beheading takes place on UK soil. The UK and its PEOPLE need to toughen their stance and drop their ridiculous PC attitude and take a look at how they as well as the extremists are destroying their country.

Garth, Cape Town, South AFrica

Mr Blair must recognise that we have made it really easy for anyone to become a British Citizen or resident, while deploring and actively attacking British values- quite different to those to immigrate to America- who invariably demonstrate a huge pride in their new country. Sadly, that is lacking in far too many of those who come to these shores and, and the anti-British mentality has been de facto encouraged by the grovelling of the Labour Party and its leaders towards potentially large voting blocks.

Doug, Glasgow,

I believe that Mr Anthony, after a decade in the Ivory Tower, is now disillusioned. He is a fine orator, maybe the best we have, but he has been so high for so long that he has lost touch with the ground. I wonder whether it was a three way conversation between him, Bush and God when they took on the mission to liberate the “oppressed”.
A criticism on the judiciary, what signals does that send about the separation of powers Mr Blair and most crucially about the ancient duty of the judiciary to keep checks on your power Anthony? Is that why you reformed the Lord Chancellors office, so the voice of the judiciary can be undermined?
Britain ought to be proud that it was the first country which recognised the rights of the individual after the “glorious revolution” a century before France and America, but a choice between safety and civil liberty is only an oratorical misleadment.
Democracy in the 17th and 18th century was about the right of individuals and keeping power under control. What is democracy in the 21st century? Tony says an agreement between the main parties, which parties, when new labour looks at itself in the mirror it merely sees the new conservative. How can it be democracy when the nation cannot choose its Prime Minister?
I should say well done though, you have achieved your purpose, you have once again confirmed that politicians are only liars, you and Cameron have shown to the nation that there is no party or choice to be made in elections, you and your cabinet is undermining the judicial independence and above all you have made the nation fed up with your rhetorics.

rebel, where illusion is above truth,

The key words in Blair's thesis are 'believed to be' and 'suspected'. A mature democracy cannot simply go by individual's beliefs and suspicions. We know of the beliefs of the Nazi's and the more recent beliefs of Blair in respect of weapons of mass destructions in Iraq, and we know of the many innocent lives lost as a result of these beliefs. In this instance, the proposed changes to our law based on belief rather than evidence will focus on the British Muslims and others of Asian or Middle East descent. It will divide our society.

J. Anwar, London, UK

I am sorry he feels frustrated, but that is why we have a Parliament and independent judiciary to stop fenatics passing unacceptable laws.

John Lewis, London, UK

Self-serving facist claptrap. Your government has made the most concerted attack on personal freedoms in living memory. Robert Mugabe's regime is only marginally more oppressive.

John Lockett, Burnley, Lancashire

Tony, you seem to dislike democracy yet you try to impose it on the Iraqis. Some democracies don't function well, for example, Italy.

When will you admit that the reason behind the Iraq war was the oil?

Michèle, London, UK

"...and the Muslims in both countries get the chance to vote"... if they live long enough ! thanks to the security and public services breakdown, brought about by your failure to follow through on your removal of " two utterly brutal and dictatorial regimes " by efficient, corruption free ones !. Thank you for the lives saved Mr Blair !

DKarara, Cairo, EGYPT

Tony, I backed your wars. Though now I am not so sure if I was correct to do so. You praise yourself for elimination of 2 brutal dictatorships, but what of the others. Is it really our mission to change the world by force? And is it not hypocrisy to leave the other to their brutalising and oppression? Surely if we lowered trade barriers and did more to correct the in-equality of markets this would create a better world. This would create the want in the people of the oppressed nations of the world which could not be resisted.

Simply, lead by example!

Justin Hesford, Leigh, Lancashire

Tony Blair Said:
'We have chosen as a society to put the civil liberties of the suspect, even if a foreign national, first.
'I happen to believe this is misguided and wrong.'

Try substituting 'suspect' with 'member of the public' , then 'foreign national' with 'British citizen'.

How does it read now?

Jim Mackay, Oban, Scotland

There is much one could say about Tony Blair but I think that it can all be summed up by the words "glib politician". I for one do not believe that glib politicians should be allowed to shape our lives in quest of some illusory search for historical validation. What we as a society should be doing is seeking ASBO orders against policiticans like Tony Blair.

susan clark, New York, USA

The nub of what Tony Blair is saying is that he does not like a democratic society with an independent judiciary. I would remind him that England has flourished as a relatively democratic society for a couple of hundred years. If agitating foreigners are a problem why admit them into the country in the first place. A far more acceptable solution to the problem instead of restricting liberties within the country would be to strengthen the immigration services and their intelligence gathering and refuse to admit potential terrorist/agitators. The precise problem is little to do with civil liberties but more to do with the open arms policies adopted for so many years by misguided politicians like Tony Blair who have unconsidered knee jerk reactions to whatever problem currently attracts their butterfly minds,

robert curtis, Geneva, Switzerland

Mr Blair
you are history- realize it NOW!
you seem to have a lot to say -now you are leaving..........
shooting from the hip as u walk out -backwards-through the bar room doors,,,,,,
statements that should have been made long ago -if u had the guts to do so.....
Join prescott on his tax paid junket
just go ...shut up and go...please..............
P.S.
If u want something to say ...
Justify Prescotts paid pleasures.....you are history to everthing else!!

mike, oxford, england

amazing. Tony Blair writes an article about the threat from Islamic Jihadism, without mentioning Islamic Jihadism.

if you are afraid to mention where the threat is coming from and who is the enemy, then there is no chance that we will win this war.

archduke, London, UK

"We remove two utterly brutal and dictatorial regimes;"


So why not make it three and invade Zimbabwe?

Ross McInnes, London,

There is no need to reach a concensus with the opposition parties in order to legislate to tackle your war on terror, Mr Blair. Your Labour party has an overall parliamentary majority of 60-plus, despite the support of just one in five of the electorate at the last General Election. You could force legislation through Parliament, if necessary invoking the Parliament Act, which you did in the instance of the Hunting with Dogs Act.

But you know this perfectly well, don't you? You are simply using the judiciary and Parliament as scapegoats for yours and your ministers' incompetence.

Ray Burke, Stockport, England

Bliar, only weeks from his abdication, still has the neck of a giraffe. Murderers, rapists and hi-jackers are still in this country because HE and Nu-Labor adopted the ECHR and now he behaves as though it had nothing to do with him and his traitorous ways.

Andy Brim, Great Malvern, England

We need to protect ourselves now and the only way to do so is to impose strict conditions on suspected terrorists. Any non uk national here should forgo their civil liberties if they are suspected of being involved in any form of terrorist related activity. Its too late to keep looking back and proportioning blame for the upsurge in extremism, we need to deal effectively with it now. Human Rights must come second when you are engaged in conflict and that is exactly what we are doing here in the UK. We are the most tolerant country in the world but now is the time to stop the liberal middle classes that unfortunately run this country allowing us to be put in further danger. Any suspect terrorists , and the suspicion can arise from quality intelligence that already exists within the intelligence services being placed before the ruling Judges, should and must be removed from this country forfeiting their civil liberties and perceived dangers they face at home.

Lee, Manchester, England

How typical it is of the Muslim respondent Faisal Haque to put all the problems down to the Iraq invasion. I suggest a history lesson for Mr Haque you dont have to go back too far 9/11 long before the Iraq invasion so what was the the excuse for Muslim terrorism then. Because that is all we get from Muslims excuses and cries of victimisation while all around the world militant Islam is on the march killing and bombing and maiming, Thailand,Indonesia,Phillippines,Spain,UK, France,Norway,Yemen,Lebanon,Afghanistan,Pakistan etc etc etc.

Peter Barry, Bangkok, Thailand

It has become very trendy to be against the iraq invasion, hate America, accuse Bush and Blair of being the real terrorists. Trends have a short shelf life and are of the minority. This minority does not want to hear an alternative argument, Mr Blair is correct.
The invasion was discussed for weeks involving all parties, there was no option. Hind sight is a great thing. The vast majority of this country didnt attend the anti war march, and do believe that civil liberties have become a joke. Britain is not a police state, but a country into which the world and his sister are desperate to gain entry. That is reality. Prime minister Blair Is one of the greatest we have ever had, like it, or lump it.

kenny, hove,

Tony, the main reason, as you well know, why we cannot deport foreign extremists is because of the Human Rights Act, an act which your Governement passed with great enthusiasm. Most of the British public want this act repealed but your Government has consistently refused.
Claiming that "society" is responsible for this is, at best, a poor excuse. The Government is being stopped by it's own legislation.

mark, sheffield, england

It is easy to see how simply a small number of people could control this country through the intelligence services unless they are strictly curbed. If you cannot supply information ‘for security reasons’, you have a licence to do anything you want - unless you are otherwise restricted. There is no way to distinguish between a false threat and a genuine threat except by experience. You thus have to accept the freedom to find out the hard way unless you want to be chained on false premises ad infinitum. There is no alternative. Furthermore, if there is an active terrorism, it will only be defeated by counter-action, not suppression. It will be defeated by the outrage and combination of the general population, not by the secret police. The Courts are right, and the government is wrong to try to impose these restrictions. If there is a terrorist war, then let us see it and have the ‘spine’ to win it on it’s own terms. Otherwise you will end up with a pale shade of what we have had in Northern Ireland, indefinitely.

Henry Percy, London, UK

For me now, I refuse to live in a country like the UK, I refuse to pay taxes there and I have removed all my assets from there. I can live anywhere and even i am currently in country that suffers heavily from corruption at least the politicians here are smart enough not to bring all the dangers here from abroad by pretending they are such smart stately world figures. No you are the buffoon and the public that voted for you will pay the price. i shall not be contributing one penny.

I can live in China, as i do and the peacefulness and beauty of the country and its people and the safety is unimaginable compared to the burden carried in the UK and the insolence of those who think they have the right to tell me and others what we should do.

You should look in yourself blair and see what you have done by your political posturing, The one million a year Brits who quit UK PLC can see the writing on the wall. we are leaving it to you now and I can assure you that things will get worse.

Dave Chambers, Gingoog City, Philippines

The observation of Faisal Hague justifying every Muslim action is wrong. I believe the mistake in Iraq is not a means for Muslims in Britain to justify the violence in Iraq or killings of innocent people on July 7. Moderate Muslims are indirectly supporting the extremism in Iraq to achieve victory over West. Iraq is difficult country to rule with so many self centered politicians. History only would tell whether Saddam’s way of ruling was what Iraqi people deserves. These self centered politicians in Iraq should be replaced by people who can unite Iraqis. The democracy is not immediate need in Iraq. Unity among Shiates ,Sunnies and kurds are needed. Britain’s campaigners of civil liberty are putting hardships to the majority of peace loving British. Britain does not need to protect suspected foreign nationals in British soil.

Viswanath, Watford, Herts

Enrique Hugo Bargioni and others like minded- assuming you're American, I can appreciate your like of TB, but I find it exceptionally frustrating that you are either disregarding, but most likely unappraised of the diabolical police state his government has crafted in the 10 years since his government have been in office. This is a discussion of life in the UK, not UK/US relations. FYI Britian is now a country where traitors are allowed to call for the murder of UK troops with almost no consequence, in fact, they are not even referred to as trators. Citizens cannot protect their own lives or property without punishment and now stop and search will be the rule for all to be quickly followed by ID cards. I have no doubt that what has happened in the UK would be intolerable to the point of violent resistance in the US,

Richard , Dallas, USA

Mr Blair, Faisal Haque says honest and robust debate in the UK is far from the government then blames it for the Islamic threat- at once how right, wrong and ironic. Right that there is no forthright debate; if there were you would have been made to focus security on the parts of the population from which the problem overwhelmingly emanates, not found the miserable UK police state we live in Wrong that the war in Iraq is threat's source; it is fundamental Islamic hatred of the west that spawns terror, period. But the great irony has to lie in the fact that were there even the slightest measure of the honest and robust debate he mentions the west could have swiftly convicted the conservative Muslim communities that threaten and then develop and execute the policies to remove them The emperor with no clothes, the unfathomably big elephant in the room, is that conservative Islam is not compatible w/the west and the tragedy is that the UK/EU no longer possesses the spine to deal with it.

Richard Molloy, Dallas, Texas, USA

poor brits. You've got a fine leader and you're sacrificing him. Certainly, you'll get what you are wishing for, i.e. the sharia as the ultimate civil rights accomplishment. He whom the gods want to punish is punished by insanity.

felix dynin, Mountain View, USA/CA

Dear Editor,

A recent letter to The Times authored by, Faisal Haque, London, UK, in response to Tony Blair injects this comment ". . . . . .A research paper for the MOD Defence Academy notes that "The war in Iraq...has acted as a recruiting sergeant for extremists across the Muslim world."

Sadly, Faisal Haque like a vast number of citizens in the Western World need to realize the foremost recruiting force for terrorists is all out hatred for every human being that refuses to bow to Islamic Law set forth in the Qur'an.

A military failure to defeat terrorists on their turf will only guarantee escalation of terror and the inevitable fall of Western Civilization.

When innocent people whose only crime is being non-Islamic have their heads chopped off on prime time television it gets my attention. This particular form of execution for Westerners was common long before Tony Blair was born. I'm sure Faisal Haque is not yet aware of that.

James Whitehead, Lawrenceburg, USA/Tennessee

Dear Mr. Blair:

Your clarity, courage and unwavering determination as Prime Minister will be sorely missed.

That said, I am absolutely certain that I am not the only one who hopes and, in fact, expects, you will continue to shape the debate on the war against terrorism as a private citizen.

In other words, your new job is just starting. Welcome back, Mr . Blair.

An American friend and fan.

Enrique Hugo Bargioni, Miami Beach , Florida, USA

You have made this bloody bed Mr Blair,now you will have to lie in it.I see no reason why the population of this country should lose their freedoms because of the so called 'war on terror' you and Bush started.
Iraq is the biggest foreign policy disaster of my lifetime;It is too late for draconian measures,the genie is out of the jar, and it's your fault.
Just resign. Go away.

Michael Rigby, Blackburn, England

Unfortunately, honest and robust debate seems to be far from the minds of the Government. While the entire world can see the disaster of the occupation of Iraq and the insecurity and violence it has spawned, the Government denies that its policies are to blame. Tony Blair was forced to admit in his resignation speech on 10th May 2007 that the "blowback" since Iraq had been "fierce, unrelenting and costly". The head of the British Army admitted that the presence of British troops in Iraq "exacerbates the security problems". A memo by senior Cabinet officials called for "a significant reduction in the number and intensity of regional conflicts that fuel terror activity". A research paper for the MOD Defence Academy notes that "The war in Iraq...has acted as a recruiting sergeant for extremists across the Muslim world…Iraq has served to radicalise an already disillusioned youth".

Faisal Haque, London, UK