It seems that every time the Labour Party hits the headlines, the bad smell of hypocrisy and double standards rears its ugly head. In case you don't know it, 'bad smell of hypocrisy and double standards' is my nickname for Tony Blair. Yes, the silver-haired war-monger is back, and he is just as obstinate and narcissistic as ever.
Speaking on Radio 4 recently, Mr Blair couldn't resist the temptation to take yet another swipe at the Labour leadership's stance on possible military action against the Syrian regime. Of course, we shouldn't really be surprised, as this is a man who declares war on sovereign nations because the President of the United States asks him to.
Mr Blair - realising the public distaste for his authoritarian brand of politics - was quick to point out that the Iraq debacle is to blame for parliament's reluctance to get involved. He expects us to acquiesce when he points out that the two situations are different. He told BBC Radio 4 "the fact that the Syrian government have, and have used, chemical weapons is beyond doubt." Wait a minute... does this ring a bell with anyone?
I must take this opportunity to admit that I used to be a fan of Tony and his 'New Labour' vision. My politics lies somewhere in the centre, and when the jug-eared saviour of the centre-left swept to power in 1997, I remember thinking that Britain had turned a corner. Despite the moronic invasion of Iraq, his refusal to apologise and his complete lack of contrition in the face of overwhelming evidence, I still gave Blair the benefit of the doubt.
I am all for strong leaders who are able to direct parliament in a decisive and forthright manner, so I put Blair's arrogance down to the fact that he was trying to remain in a position of strength. So, when he finally stepped down in 2007, I thought we would see a new side to the man. I hoped that we would finally see an apology, an admittance of guilt and a large slice of humble pie.
Unfortunately, what we now have is a man who earns a fortune in appearance and consultancy fees. This is a man who couldn't leave public service quickly enough after stepping down as PM, as the lucrative offers from the private sector he was receiving whilst still in office were obviously giving him sleepless nights. I'm no huge fan of Gordon Brown, but at least the hapless baboon is still serving the public - regardless of the shambolic way he conducts his political life.
It seems to me that Blair wants to have a toe in the British political waters to maintain a public profile. Let's face it, being in the public eye improves your earning potential, so sticking his considerable beak into the affairs of the parliament he cast aside for personal gain is obviously his way of doing that.
Do I believe that military action against the Assad regime is warranted? The simple answer is yes, but only when incontrovertible proof has been provided by UN inspectors. So, I actually agree with Blair's foreign policy in many ways. And if I'm completely honest, I always have. What I find utterly contemptible is that Blair's pearls of wisdom always seem to come from a place of selfishness. I want to like Blair, I really do. However, the mere sight of him - and his smug refusal to accept that his invasion of Iraq was monumentally misguided - make my blood curdle.
And doesn't it seem preposterous that the man jointly responsible for invading a Middle Eastern country on the basis of false information is then made a special envoy? If I didn't know any better, Blair saw this as an opportunity to keep himself in the public eye - always good for business.
Photo: Some rights reserved by Chatham House, LondonSuggest a correction