Sunday, November 20, 2005
Meyer row in context
I've just unearthed a profile of Meyer from earlier in the month which provides interesting and explanatory background to the current spat between him and the Blair government.
1. Meyer had a heart condition in 2002 but, on grounds of cost, the Foreign Office refused to fund a second opinion. He then had open heart surgery in London which had to be supplemented by another operation when he developed a blood clot. Reason enough to feel a bit cheesed off with the government.
2. When he left Washington Bush threw a dinner party for him; Blair did not even say thank you. Reason enough to feel aggrieved and, for a vain man I daresay, vengeful.
3. Meyer has been married before-he has two sons from his marriage to Francoise Winskill- and his divorce cost an arm and a leg. This helps to explain why he needs the money from the book and his job at the PCC.
Anyone who has been divorced cn feel some sypathy with this situation. So the full picture is not as black and white as my previous posts have suggested and maybe Sir Christopher comes over more sympathetically in the light of the above. He has certainly written an insightful and rivetting account of events which arguably, we have a right to know about now rather than the usual 30 years hence.
1. Meyer had a heart condition in 2002 but, on grounds of cost, the Foreign Office refused to fund a second opinion. He then had open heart surgery in London which had to be supplemented by another operation when he developed a blood clot. Reason enough to feel a bit cheesed off with the government.
2. When he left Washington Bush threw a dinner party for him; Blair did not even say thank you. Reason enough to feel aggrieved and, for a vain man I daresay, vengeful.
3. Meyer has been married before-he has two sons from his marriage to Francoise Winskill- and his divorce cost an arm and a leg. This helps to explain why he needs the money from the book and his job at the PCC.
Anyone who has been divorced cn feel some sypathy with this situation. So the full picture is not as black and white as my previous posts have suggested and maybe Sir Christopher comes over more sympathetically in the light of the above. He has certainly written an insightful and rivetting account of events which arguably, we have a right to know about now rather than the usual 30 years hence.
