A blogger at the Economist hits the nail on the head with respect to the many people now sounding off about Tony Blair's donation being conscience money.
Mr Blair's detractors are entitled to wish that he felt differently, that he would succumb to their demands for an apology. But simply pretending that he privately agrees with them, because no other view of the Iraq war can be held with any logic or honour, is just a little arrogant.
Arrogant, yes, and more - deluded. It has been, in fact, the primary delusion amongst anti-war dogmatists: that there could be no other defensible view than theirs; which has led, with some of them, to the sad option (as practised by Mr Matthew Norman). This is the option of imagining for the former prime minister an inner life made up of the torments of hell, and so reassuring all Blair-haters that there is a secular version of divine justice to give them worldly comfort. (Via John Rentoul.)
There's more delusion over here from a group of folk that includes Iain Banks, A.L. Kennedy, Moazzem Begg, Lindsey German, John Pilger and Andrew Murray. What a line-up! They want Waterstone's not to host a book-signing by Blair. Amongst their delusions is that the event 'will be deeply offensive to most people in Britain'. They might like to take a look at this.