The day after we won the Olympic bid came the terrorist attacks in London. These murders were carried out by British-born suicide bombers who had lived and been brought up in this country, who had received all its many advantages and yet who ultimately took their own lives and the lives of the wholly innocent, in the name of an ideology alien to everything this country stands for.

[...]

... it has thrown into sharp relief, the nature of what we have called, with approval, "multicultural Britain". We like our diversity. But how do we react when that "difference" leads to separation and alienation from the values that define what we hold in common? For the first time in a generation there is an unease, an anxiety, even at points a resentment that our very openness, our willingness to welcome difference, our pride in being home to many cultures, is being used against us; abused, indeed, in order to harm us.

[...]

Integration ... is not about culture or lifestyle. It is about values. It is about integrating at the point of shared, common unifying British values. It isn't about what defines us as people, but as citizens, the rights and duties that go with being a member of our society.

[...]

... our essential values - belief in democracy, the rule of law, tolerance, equal treatment for all, respect for this country and its shared heritage - then that is where we come together, it is what we hold in common; it is what gives us the right to call ourselves British. At that point no distinctive culture or religion supercedes our duty to be part of an integrated United Kingdom.

[...]

Yet, because this challenge has arisen in this way, it is necessary to go back to what a multi-cultural Britain is all about. The whole point is that multicultural Britain was never supposed to be a celebration of division; but of diversity. The purpose was to allow people to live harmoniously together, despite their difference; not to make their difference an encouragement to discord.

[...]

Obedience to the rule of law, to democratic decision-making about who governs us, to freedom from violence and discrimination are not optional for British citizens. They are what being British is about. Being British carries rights. It also carries duties. And those duties take clear precedence over any cultural or religious practice.

[...]

Our tolerance is part of what makes Britain, Britain. So conform to it; or don't come here. We don't want the hate-mongers, whatever their race, religion or creed.

Read the full speech at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...8/ublair208.xml

Tony Blair for president

yeah yeah i know he can't be...........

He's a nice public speaker, that's about all I'll say for him.

the issues AMerica has are not even close to UK.. USA doesn't have small radical groups with their own penal code, or beliefs that allow certain groups to commit crimes excusing themselves on some weird interpretation of religions..

we don't?

care to tell me something that happened lately that is like the things that happen in UK?

of course the paranoia that the US govt wants to make u have and think at any moment terrorists are gonna blow up ur local walmart doesnt count.. i mean real events.. not supposed 'terrorists' that 'live in irak'..

there are no rapists justifying themselves on some crazy interpretation of religions or people killing women 'cuz they are not covered'.. unless u count the crazy pseudo-christian groups that do the 'god hates fags' things and other crazy sh!t..

and what is your definition of lately?


they don't count, eh?

well those pseudo christian groups are formed by americans, not immigrants.. so, no, they don't count, because Blair talks about the immigrants coming to UK and adapting to their lifestyle and stuff..

and again, no, those invented terrorists that want to blow up ur walmart, are not even real, they are no even close to a real threat

Blair is a huge douchebag but he has a point.

It's sad that it takes speeches to remind immigrants what "immigrating" means. Seems that some folks are just in for the taking but none of the giving. Immigrating is, like most things in life, a give-and-take type deal. I applaud Blair for stating the obvious. Too many politicians ain't got the balls to do that anymore.

Britian is not isolated. The muslims here in Australia are whining also.

Will they ever stop complaining and actually take some responsibility?

Too bad Bliar doesn't have the courage of his convictions to back up what he says. That's actually a big part of why he has become so unpopular in Britain.

When Great Britain and other European Countries went around the World raping,killing, stealing and practicing the colonalisation of Nations I cannot recall them adapting conforming to the indigenous peoples culture in fact quite the contrary!

Another self loathing, self hating, guilt ridden Brit. You'll do get along quite well in America with your self hating American counterparts here.

Yes...we deserved 9/11 and the subway bombings. Our chickens came to roost. Feel better now?

Tony Blair for president

yeah yeah i know he can't be...........



Trust me Charles, you really would not want him, to say he is as much use as a chocolate fireguard is putting it mildly, he is useless. When you consider that it is his government that opened the floodgates and were insistant on "multiculturism" and it is only now, when the "proverbial" is starting to hit the fan.

He can "talk the talk" but that is about all

In reply to Spiritee, Great Britain only did what many nations before had done, i.e. the romans, the turks and the arabs, trouble is we were pretty good at it

I REALLY can stand the man...

Tony Blair will be judged in history as one of the great leaders Britain ever produced; he and Winston Churchill will share similar accolades.......

I don't think there's anything wrong with saying that immigrants to a country should integrate into that country's culture ... the problem is that "the country's culture" is always narrowly defined as liking what the people in power like.

For example, I'm sure that many people would say that immigrants to the US should be obligated to go to a church (or possibly a synagogue, but definitely not a masjid) and fly the American flag and never criticize the government. Despite the fact that we're taught as schoolchildren that a valuable part of the US history and culture is the pluralism of religious and political views and of cultures. And so I believe that people who don't agree with the ideals upon which this country was founded should go elsewhere ... whereas if you agree with the ideals and disagree with the implementation, you should work to change that.

And I picked the third option because I think a lot of the speeches on immigration reform have been pretty darn close and it's only a matter of time. (Although I must say, and I hate to admit it, I thought President Bush's immigration reform plan was excellent ... and I think that any plan that liberals think is too harsh and conservatives think is too lenient merits serious consideration.)

Immigration is a privilege and a country can (and should) make the entry requirements however they want.

Here is how Blair defines it (from the article posted on page 1):

Integration ... is not about culture or lifestyle. It is about values... our essential values - belief in democracy, the rule of law, tolerance, equal treatment for all, respect for this country and its shared heritage - then that is where we come together, it is what we hold in common; it is what gives us the right to call ourselves British.

Can't argue with that.

i also agree..it is rational and logical to have these expectations

Ha ha!

I don't argue with his rationale - just his willingness to actually back it up with supporting legislation.

Blair, like Bush spent his last piece of "political capital" some time ago.

Interesting, Kaydee, you should think that Tony Blair will go down in history as a great leader - you do realise that the Labour Party is traditionally left leaning?! Other than his support of Iraq (against the will of the country, if I may point out), I wouldn't think that there's anything "Our Tone" has done that you'd like.

Where is Labour now? Sort of Center right isn't it, at least Blair's version of it was. Once Gordon Brown takes over next year, I'm guessing it will realign to its traditional ideology.

Unfortunately the tories still haven't figured out firstly how to properly market themselves - looking at the various showers of $hit the party has elected to lead them. They start off with Hague, an ex-public school toff who failed miserably to show any charisma or anything meaningful that could identify him with the public.

He quits after losing the election and possibly realising how ridiculous a figure he is in public.

In comes Iain Duncan-Smith who fails miserably to put together any comprehensive policy package to give his party any a guiding strategy or sense of leadership. The party then stabs him in the back before bringing in yet another public school Toff - Michael Howard: a sort of jewish Adolf Hitler, who was actually fired from his own party some years before for abusing his authority.

Now they're stuck with David Cameron, who comes up with the genius idea to re-brand the conservatives as the "new green party". He even sets the example, by riding a bike to work every day - while his chauffeur driven limo follows behind carrying his briefcase.

UK politics couldn't get any more ridiculous, or any more depressing for that matter.

should, never will