Jultra Truth. Freedom. Oh and the end of New Labour and Tony Blair, Ian Blair, ID cards, terror laws and the NWO and their lies

Wednesday, September 27, 2006

9/11 and the American Empire: Intellectuals speak out

9/11 and the American Empire: Intellectuals Speak OutDavid Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott have edited a new book '9/11 and the American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out' , which presents contributions from different academics (and from across the political spectrum). The title of the book was designed to illustrate the intensely serious nature of this issue.

Along with Ray McGovern and others they have just had a conference at Berkeley, California, I believe organized by KPFK radio.

Download an mp3 of it here (courtesy of 9/11 Blogger)

This is very much worth a listen, and I encourage all to do so.

Monday, September 25, 2006

Gordon Brown: the horror that should not be allowed to become Prime Minister

So Cherie Blair stormed out of Gordon Brown's arrogant, tedious waffling speech at the Labour party conference as Bloomberg reports:

"Brown praised Blair and said it was a ``privilege for me to work with and for'' him. Blair's wife Cherie, a human rights lawyer, walked out of the conference hall during that portion of the speech, saying ``well that's a lie''"

Of course, this twitched pathetic witch only had her own petty reasons for doing so, and if the Labour party had even a grain of honour the entire conference would have walked out in disgust or not bothered attending at all.

"Today's speech gave Brown's most detailed agenda yet for what his premiership would look like, reaffirming Blair's alliance with U.S. President George W. Bush and the government's efforts to combat terrorism. He also embraced unpopular parts of Blair's agenda including changes to the National Health Service and identity cards for all U.K. residents.

``The world changed after Sept. 11,'' Brown said. ``No one can be neutral in the fight against terrorism.''

Good lord, how many times have we heard this crap ? It should be a glaring clue that such a pre-soiled gargoyle seeks to print his ticket to power on the back of 9/11 and paint this hideous deranged picture of himself as some sort of winged saviour to the plebs, showering them in ID cards, laws, and other drivel. It makes you wonder what constituency Brown is trying to appeal to with this incessant stream of garbage, which proves already beyond a shadow of a doubt that Brown is not a fit candidate.

Of course, just in case you didn't know, the world did not change after 9/11, this is the most noxious lie of all, written down in fact by 9/11 Commission director Philip Zelikow three years before 9/11, and should be a warning sign not only to the British, but to some Americans who think that the bloody nose gleaned on Bush's wars (and domestic police state in the making) from Blair's departure, will somehow be eased if Gordon Brown is coronated to power in the UK.

To tell you the truth, I'm sick of writing about Gordon Brown, because in reality Brown is a meaningless, dreary, boring little turd, but I make no apology for doing so because he is also a poisonous and very dangerous one, already stained in the blood and hell of Blair's years, and contrary to all reasoned reality, believes he has a divine right to install himself one notch up and make things even worse.

So it needs to be constantly loudly rebroadcast to the world that the last decade of unbearable misery has not been due to Tony Blair alone. Gordon Brown has been very much the other half of that partnership; helping to deliver perpetual war, a sickening police state in the UK, and a host of other repulsive crap. Indeed as Ewen MacAskill recently reminded us in the Guardian,

"After that meeting, Mr Brown briefed a group of his supporters, one of whom recalled him producing a memo he had written at the restaurant listing 12 points, including promises of posts in the shadow cabinet for allies, a promise to stand aside for Mr Brown in the second term and control not only of the Treasury but of other domestic departments related to the economy.

The promise about domestic control meant that when Labour won the general election in 1997, Mr Blair was deliberately left in the dark by Mr Brown about much of domestic policy and the prime minister began to focus more and more on foreign policy, with disastrous results in the case of Iraq"

To let Gordon Brown in, is not to renew or reinvigorate a soiled, damaged and worthless political party or to lift the burden of disgrace from the UK. On the contrary, it is to moronically applaud the horrors inflicted on Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and our own troops, as well as to celebrate the relentless, crushing, humiliating police-state in the UK which Brown himself has been eagerly inflicting for the last decade.

And on the latter, I find it quite extraordinary that Brown's star policy would be a written constitution which far from empowering anyone, will mercilessly and permanently lock-in Brown's extended-ID slave grid, databases, CCTV, DNA stockpiling, terror laws and so on.

Aside from the grotesqueness of pretending to give back democratic rights, processes and essential liberties stolen by Brown when he was 'only' half-leader, Gordon Brown will exalt and make lasting and constitutional these attrocious wounds on the population. Do not be fooled for a second, you are being led into a trap, now is not the time for a constitution and Labour parties should not be touching constitutions in any event.

"An opinion poll by YouGov Plc showed 27 percent of voters said Brown will make a good prime minister, down from down from 36 percent in March. Labour trails the Conservatives by 31 percent to 38 percent in today's YouGov Plc. The survey of 1,734 adults was conducted between Sept. 19 and Sept. 22"

And it should be no surprise, Gordon Brown deserves not to be prime minister as he has essentially been 50% prime minister for the last decade, but to be flushed down the toilet of history along with all the other different shapes of shit within New Labour and not talked about again.

If Gordon Brown becomes leader and then holds a snap-election as is sometimes speculated, Labour could well loose, but I wouldn't rely on either. So in terms of practical steps against this hideous problem, I would urge a grass-roots campaign of people of all political leanings against Gordon Brown. Write to the press (Murdoch in particular who Brown has long been trying to impress), the TV, call in to talk radio, write to your MP, Labour MPs, lobby your local Labour party office and so on and tell them that Brown is not a suitable candidate for prime minister.

Do yourselves a favour and work towards restoring the dignity that Brown has been fanatically stripping away from you for the last decade, because if you don't and ignore this problem you will be rubber-stamping the last 10 years of misery while endorsing another 15 years of it under Brown and things will continue to get worse.

Capitol Hill Blue: The terrorist who lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

Doug Thompson (CHB):

"In George W. Bush's perverted, pathetic, partisan view of the world, anyone who disagrees with his lunacies is not only wrong but unpatriotic - a traitor who cannot be trusted and a voice of dissent that must be silenced.

In recent weeks, a growing number of Republicans have joined the loyal opposition, telling the President, mostly in private, he is dead wrong to wage his illegal invasion of Iraq while refusing to appear with him in public because they are scared shitless that his escalating unpopularity will rub off and end their miserable careers in elected office.

Now Bush has a new set of "enemies," ones that are neither partisan nor political in their assessment of his failures but provide a sobering look at just what a miserable failure his Presidency has become and verifies what many have known for months - that the actions of this madman has placed this country in harm's way more than any acts of terrorism that have been waged on our shores or elsewhere in the world..."

Read on..

Friday, September 22, 2006

'US: deploys major strike group of ships, may be preparing for war with Iran'

The Nation: "As reports circulate of a sharp debate within the White House over possible US military action against Iran and its nuclear enrichment facilities, The Nation has learned that the Bush Administration and the Pentagon have issued orders for a major "strike group" of ships, including the nuclear aircraft carrier Eisenhower as well as a cruiser, destroyer, frigate, submarine escort and supply ship, to head for the Persian Gulf, just off Iran's western coast. This information follows a report in the current issue of Time magazine, both online and in print, that a group of ships capable of mining harbors has received orders to be ready to sail for the Persian Gulf by October 1.

As Time writes in its cover story, "What Would War Look Like?," evidence of the forward deployment of minesweepers and word that the chief of naval operations had asked for a reworking of old plans for mining Iranian harbors "suggest that a much discussed--but until now largely theoretical--prospect has become real: that the U.S. may be preparing for war with Iran..."

Tuesday, September 19, 2006

Swiss Experts: 'WTC 7 most likely explosives'

Via 9/11 Blogger:

"Nach meiner Meinung ist das Gebäude WTC 7 mit grosser Wahrscheinlichkeit fachgerecht gesprengt worden», sagt Hugo Bachmann, emeritierter ETH-Professor für Baustatik und Konstruktion. Und auch Jörg Schneider, ebenfalls emeritierter ETH-Professor für Baustatik und Konstruktion, deutet die wenigen vorhandenen Videoaufnahmen als Hinweise, dass «das Gebäude WTC 7 mit grosser Wahrscheinlichkeit gesprengt wurde"

"In my opinion WTC7 was with the utmost probability brought down by controlled demolition done by experts" says Hugo Bachmann, Professor emeritus for structural analysis (design ?) and construction at ETH*. And also Jörg Schneider, another Professor emeritus for structural analysis and construction at ETH, interprets the small number of existing videos as indices that "WTC7 was with the utmost probability brought down by explosives"


Sunday, September 17, 2006

Police still looking for Blair/Levy smoking gun

Lord Levy

The Observer reports that thus far, the police inquiry into the cash-for-peerages scandal has not found "any compelling evidence of serious wrongdoing". Of course it depends what you mean by 'serious wrongdoing', as subsidizing a hideous ongoing attack on the country (and others), would in normal times, be considered quite serious.

As far as the police inquiry goes, perhaps they should read the Daily Mail, where it was reported that Levy's friends said he would "take others down rather than take the blame", which, when you take everything else into account, tends to strongly suggest everybody concerned is up to their eyeballs in this.

Getting some prosecutions under the 1925 Honours (Prevention of Abuses Act) is just a desirable cherry on the cake.

Blair, amongst his many horrific crimes, has been running a virtual factory of peerages to flood the Lords with corrupt cronies who will rubberstamp his and Brown's police state, while early on, Levy nominated himself as Blair's financier of misery and horror.

Gordon Brown

Tony Blair stands for...

Thursday, September 14, 2006

Festering New Labour regime continues to devour UK and attack population

Charles Falconer
Yesterday, the Daily Mail reported that:

"A vast database containing a file on every man, woman and child is being planned by the Government in a 'sinister' expansion of the 'Big Brother' state.

Personal information containing details of every aspect of an individual's life will be available to 400,000 Whitehall civil servants and council workers.

Lord Falconer has ordered privacy laws to be watered down to allow the plans to be forced through.

The plans would allow anyone working for a public body to monitor everything from an individual's driving licence record to whether they had paid their council tax on time. "

Who is this installed noxious toad Falconer to be 'ordering privacy laws to be watered down ?' You would tend to think, as useless as they have proved themselves in other ways, what feeble laws are there, are there for good reason.

"Critics warned that allowing sensitive financial information to be viewed by all public bodies would leave it wide open to identity fraud. And pensioners who take stands against soaring council tax bills by refusing to pay could have their rights to pension credit withdrawn"

One reason the UK is so vulnerable to this sort of crap, is that opponents of tyranny are not capable of arguing against it thanks to the crippling poisonous socialism that New Labour and its instruments of torture like the BBC have so corrupted political thought with.

People have been so bludgeoned into being terrified plebs by the regime, they can no longer argue in a principled way as human beings, but feebly; only against the trivial practicalities of tyranny as stupified slaves which is of course worse than pathetic and useless.

It seems perfectly obvious that people's lives should not be under this intolerable burden. Scrutiny in this joined-up way can only be described for what it is: dehumanizing, degrading and grotesque. It is also monstrously dangerous to be transforming people's existence from appropriate and distinct compartments under their control into a big stew for a unified state to dip into and feast on that is seizing/claiming control. It is devaluing people's lives into a sludge and is representative of the genuinely alarming contempt from this government towards people themselves. It is insulting, debased, abnormal and it shouldn't be happening.

It also means the radical politicization and debasement of the civil services under the regime, mutating goverment and council workers into a sinister and unwanted monstronisty.

The seperation of information has naturally stood people in extremely good stead, and provided something of a desirable and healthy check and balance on the state. That Falconer implies that something is broken here when it isn't, should, for the umpteenth time, be a cause for genuine concern about the judgement and goals of this government.

There probably are some real, although highly subordinate to the principle, practical arguments as well. It would seem likely to me, such databases will dramatically increase the risks of suicides, as vulnerable people realise they are being continually assessed (the quality and 'contribution' of their life rated) across the range of government services for merely living their lives. It also will increase the rate of people just leaving the country in horror, as a BBC poll showed many are doing or strongly thinking of because 'they don't like what the country had become'.

Additionally, it will contribute to a breakdown in the already-strained legitimacy of the state itself as people rightly reject this nightmare scenario being wrongly inflicted upon them, and correctly become ever more contemptuous, mistrustful and intolerant of government (run amok).

Furthermore, if you think about it from the government's point of view, hell bent on crushing and humiliating the population, there is simply no case for not including tax and medical records either, (the Daily Mail says those won't be included). Of course that will happen anyway too if this government is allowed to practice its vile sorcery for much longer, and the ID slave grid will form the platform by stealth for linking tax and medical records into this database and any other, so all encompassing files will exist on everyone.

The principal trend in the Blair/Brown regime is to reclaim people as cattle, as pets or as fish in a bowl and hope that will be tolerated, if not quite dotingly accepted, under dollops of worthless dangerous bullshit, despite the fact that this directive is incorrect, abnormal and needs to end.

You can also bank on the fact that all of these disgusting projects will just breed more of these digusting projects in an attempt to justify their existence. So you will have exploitative humiliating project heaped upon exploitative humiliating project, all struggling to bolster and explain each other in Labour's 'The Modern World".

Naturally, this particular crackpot scheme will forever and strongly contribute to the boundless and unlimited mutilation of the delicate relationship between individual and state in the UK, already in dire trouble, of which Blair, Brown and Falconer are permanently obsessed with making worse.

"Data-sharing powers would also allow the electoral roll to be used to police the ID card database - allowing residents to be fined up to £2,500 for not registering their name or address"

Well I won't be registering anything. Sorry,

What's more, appalled citizens who the state serve, have a responsibility to put their foot down when the state becomes this malignant.

The question civil servants, various council workers, the police, security services and military have to ask themselves is should we really be listening to a faction that Clare Short recently described as a coup ? That former Foreign Office officials are openly saying is putting the country in danger, and that the Telegraph describe as 'Nazis' ? (although it's a tough one to choose, I think the better analogy is communists).

Are these people going to take orders like pitiful shamed automatons to hurt the population on behest of a truly wretched criminal government that instead of confronting it's own abnormalities becomes sicker and more perverted by the day, and is permitted to do so by a largely worthless collection of coward backbenchers who are more concerned with masturbating over a pre-soiled gargoyle like Gordon Brown than doing their job ?

New Labour has proved itself to be a vicious and deep coup. Headed by a genocidal lunatic in the form of Blair, administered by a range of disgusting installed cronies like Falconer, and paid for by the corporate purse of Levy, it has made its entire purpose in government an attack on the country itself. It represents, by all authoritative accounts, a significant and ongoing hazard to everybody and its only accomplishment in office is the deployment of unprecedented misery.

It is government that represents torture, house arrest, state executions and actively seeks to propagate utterly baseless, illegal wars of aggression, while seeking not to ensure the freedom of the people who mistakenly elected it, but to attack them, to hurt them and enslave them with a maniacal radical fervor at every possible opportunity in a perpetual top-down revolution against the country itself.

The general public, would be well advised to strongly adopt a broad campaign of disassociation from this disgusting database. Let it fester as a waste of time and public money pissed down the toilet. When the government try to act on it, disown it and refuse to acknowledge it's legitimacy as your previously private information (remember there must have been some very good reasons for it being so) is being used and shared in a way you find fundementally vile. Furthermore it is being used by a murderous, torturing, enslaving government that keeps proving time and time and time again that it is so detatched from all reality that to agree to its demands and emboldening it more is now puting the country you live in, in danger, as well as sactioning its attrocities across the world.

Short: 'New Labour is a coup, stop voting for it'

Clare Short MPGuardian: "Clare Short, the former cabinet minister, could lose the party whip or face expulsion from the Labour party, after calling for a hung parliament at the next election as part of the announcement of her retirement.

Ms Short, 60, revealed today she would be standing down from her Birmingham seat as she was so "ashamed" of the Blair government.

But she also expressed hope that a hung parliament would help the case for proportional representation. Labour would have to lose its current working majority of 69 for there to be a hung parliament.

This afternoon, Labour's chief whip, Jacqui Smith, called her comments "completely unacceptable" and confirmed that her behaviour would now be referred to the general secretary of the Labour party

[...] One of Mr Galloway's offences was to call on voters to vote for another party, in that case Respect, a call Ms Short appeared to have implicitly echoed in her hopes for a hung parliament.

[...] In announcing her retirement in an article in the Independent, Ms Short wrote that the future of British politics was a hung parliament which would encourage electoral reform.

She said that Labour should hold a third of the seats, the Tories a third and the rest should be made up of Greens and other parties.

Ms Short said that Ms Smith had previously warned her that she could not recommend a hung parliament because that would mean the loss of Labour seats.

"I am standing down so that I can speak the truth and support the changes that are needed," she wrote.

"Sad to say, it is now almost impossible to do this as a Labour MP."

[...] The former international development secretary, who quit her post after the Iraq war, said that she was "profoundly ashamed" of the government, and described New Labour as arrogant, lacking in principles and incompetent.

Ms Short also levelled a personal attack at the prime minister, claiming that his "craven" support for US policies had made the world a more dangerous place.

And she said she had little hope that Gordon Brown becoming prime minister would change the situation.

[...]In the vitriolic Independent article, she wrote: "There are many good things that New Labour has done since 1997, mostly things Labour committed itself to before the New Labour coup, but I have reached a stage where I am profoundly ashamed of the government."

Lambasting Mr Blair's support for "US neoconservative foreign policy", she said: "He has dishonoured the UK, undermined the UN and international law and helped to make the world a more dangerous place."

She went on: "In addition to the arrogance and lack of principle of New Labour, there is an incredible incompetence. Policy is announced from No 10 to grab media attention and nothing is properly thought through."

[...] Little would change if Gordon Brown became prime minister, she said. "Whoever they talk about for the leadership there is no policy, there is no correction of error, it's just: 'Let's have another personality who can play around with this state of ours.'"

Tuesday, September 12, 2006

Chavez: "U.S. may have orchestrated 9/11"

MSNBC (AP): "Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said Tuesday that it’s plausible that the U.S. government was involved in the Sept. 11 attacks.

Chavez did not specifically accuse the U.S. government of having a hand in the Sept. 11 attacks, but rather suggested that theories of U.S. involvement bear examination.

The Venezuelan leader, an outspoken critic of U.S. President George W. Bush, was reacting to a television report investigating a theory the Twin Towers were brought down with explosives after hijacked airplanes crashed into them in 2001.

“The hypothesis is not absurd ... that those towers could have been dynamited,” Chavez said in a speech to supporters. “A building never collapses like that, unless it’s with an implosion.”

“The hypothesis that is gaining strength ... is that it was the same U.S. imperial power that planned and carried out this terrible terrorist attack or act against its own people and against citizens of all over the world,” Chavez said. “Why? To justify the aggressions that immediately were unleashed on Afghanistan, on Iraq.”

Chavez has said the U.S. launched those wars to ensure its political and economic power.

The U.S. government says al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden masterminded the attacks"

Professors organization Defend BYU's Jones

Via 911blogger:

KUTV: "PROVO A national organization is coming out in support of a BYU professor placed on paid leave for his controversial theories about the September 11th attacks. The American Association of University Professors says the school should not have placed the physics professor on leave for statements made outside of the classroom.

Steven Jones has published a paper suggesting the World Trade Center towers fell because of pre-set demolition charges -- not just because they were struck by planes. General secretary for the AAUP Roger Bowen says academic freedom also protects statements professors make outside the classroom.

Jones says he only discussed his theory in class after students asked him questions about it.

A spokeswoman for Brigham Young University says what Jones said in the classroom and how careful he was about disclaimers are subjects of the university review"

Monday, September 11, 2006

9/11: Paul Craig Roberts

Is American Democracy Too Feeble To Deal With 9/11?
Paul Craig Roberts:

"I would be more confident of the survival of democracy and civil liberty in the United States if, on this fifth anniversary of the September 11 attacks, a majority of Americans were reading David Ray Griffin’s challenging new book, Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11 [...]

Griffin expects no further investigation from Congress, official commissions, and government agencies, such as the National Institute for Standards and Technology. Although Griffin calls on the New York Times to take up the investigation, he does not expect any investigative interest on the part of the media, which has served as a propagandist for the government’s story.

Instead, Griffin places his hope in Christian churches. He calls upon the churches to confront the evil that has America in its grip.

Is the hope that Griffin places on Christian churches realistic? Many of the right-wing evangelical churches are fanatical supporters of the Bush Administration and Republican Party. The Rapture churches actually look forward to the Armageddon that they believe Bush is brewing in the Middle East as they think it will bring about their ascent into Heaven..."

Read on...

9/11: David Ray Griffin BBC interview

Sunday, September 10, 2006

9/11: David Ray Griffin & David Shayler

David Ray Griffin lecture London

Yesterday I had the privilege to attend the London event with David Ray Griffin and David Shayler: Was 9/11 an inside job ? The event got an excellent plug in yesterday's Guardian.

A Christian theologian, David Ray Griffin is one of the most fluent, eloquent, impressive and persuasive people to write and talk on 9/11, and who's contributions to 9/11 study, critique and discourse have simply been enormous, so I was very much looking forward to this lecture.

After the introductions by a leading UK 9/11 Truth activist; a fellow called Andy, Shayler gave an excellent and very down to Earth and very decent speech which covered himself, his background in MI5 and 9/11 which progressed into a particularly outstanding section about liberty and democracy in the UK which got a large round of applause.

Griffin gave an excellent and detailed speech which covered a great deal of ground from the alleged hijackers, NORAD's response, the destruction of the WTC, the Pentagon and the political backdrop to 9/11.

It was very impressive in it's detail although I personally felt it was not quite as strong as his famous Madison speech which was aired on C-SPAN, or quite as fluid and as simple to follow as some of his many radio appearences.

Unless one is familiar with it, it was easy to get lost on the significances of the problems in the NORAD story, which revolve around several different and contradictory accounts given by the US military. To be fair Griffin seemed quite tired as I believe he recently gave a speech in Amsterdam and was interviewing much of yesterday with the BBC. I believe he and possibly Shayler will appear on the 'Heaven and Earth' show tommorow morning.

Several times though Griffin did get into his most powerful flow, particularly on Blair and on the quite serious issue of 9/11 Commission executive director Philip Zelikow, and overall his presentation brought him a long and well deserved standing ovation.

One very serious recent issue which was raised in a question & answer sesssion is that fellow 9/11 scholar Professor Steven E. Jones has apparently been suspended from BYU. Griffin advised UK 9/11 activists to write to BYU to express their concern which I thoroughly agree with. Jones is a long standing professor at BYU of outstanding credentials.

All in all, it was a very interesting positive experience, and UK 9/11 activists should be extremely proud at an excellent and successful event that packed the hall. As well as an extremely brief conversation with an exhausted DRG, I got the chance to chat with David Shayler afterwards, who was drawing quite a crowd around him. I was a little surprised to hear him talk about holograms, and it seems Shayler may be a 'no-planer'.

I personally agree with those like Paul Watson who recently warned that this theory is sending people down the wrong path.

I should stress though Shayler seems as genuinely concerned as everyone is about the state of the world, and his speech on civil liberties was superb, hard hitting and down to Earth, so I honestly don't know why he was discussing this theory.

Also the people I met at the event were all very friendly, decent and well-informed people, and all genuinely concerned about what the hell is happening in this world. Naturally, you can't blame them.

Whatever you feel about 9/11, you come away from the event with no doubt that the world is in real crisis and the direction of the US and UK government is now so monstrously deformed and detatched from all reality, that it is simply putting everything in peril. The strong feeling among attendees was that 9/11 is not going to be swept off the table.

Some brief video clips I took:

Griffin urges new 9/11 Truth action:

Griffin talks about Blair's dossier on Afghanistan:

David Shayler:

Some photos below:

Friday, September 08, 2006

Labour collapsing into Brown/anti Brown war

I had a real chuckle last night reading and watching some of the coverage of the Blair/Brown spat. Truly I laughed out loud to hear the BBC's Nick Robinson tell of a phone call he had with one Labour minister (I think) who said something along the lines of 'If Brown ever gets into fucking power then we're all fucked".

Labour is in open warfare with itself as different grotesque factions fight for power. What's interesting is there is a vocal anti-Brown faction forming, presumbably with the equally vile porcine lie-machine Charles Clarke out in front attacking Brown for 'grinning in his car', and it's clear already that Brown is consistently damaging himself everytime he opens his mouth, as a recent article in The Sun, which is some of the most appalling and toe-curling crap I have ever read, attests to. So bad, one columnist on the Guardian even speculated it wasn't written by Brown at all.

Ultimately of course, it doesn't really matter which paritcular grotesque from the New Labour waxworks comes out on top because they all represent the same pointless misery for everyone else, but the fact that Brown, with a long standing arrangment, and a powerful contributor to the last decade of misery is being forced into the limelight as a problem (even if for inadequate reasons by people just as bad) can only be a good thing for everyone else, and what's more a poll today in the Telegraph makes for welcome reading:

"Only one voter in five thinks Gordon Brown will make a better prime minister than Tony Blair, while a similar proportion believes he will make a worse one, according to a YouGov poll conducted for The Daily Telegraph. Asked if the Chancellor would prove a more successful occupant of No 10 than Mr Blair, only 20 per cent of those questioned said he would.

Twenty-two per cent said he would make a worse prime minister and just under half thought there would be no discernable improvement.

The figures were not much better when Labour voters were questioned, with only 23 per cent definitely favouring a Brown premiership over a Blair one. The poll suggests that dropping Mr Blair is unlikely to provide the panacea desired by his Labour Party opponents and trade unions"

Wednesday, September 06, 2006

Blair's leaving date. Who cares ?

It wouldn't really matter if Blair continued for another 100 years as a talking reanimated head in a jar with Gordon Brown's head in a jar next to him still waiting to seize power.

In the current political climate, with Brown and an indistinguishable gaggle of similar perverts who's goals are all the same; a Bolshevik-inspired enslavement of humanity, it hardly matters.

I was just watching Newsnight for the first time in ages and, the irony of some of these people (now 8 eight how have resigned) and others pushing for Blair to go who have supported him over every vile and ridiculous policy that he has handed them is truly quite amazing. If Blair is so wonderful to these characters why push him out at all ?

If you supported Blair, his wars, his police state, his Orwellian doublespeak, if you have contributed to the destruction of society by voting for every single one of his disgusting laws as one character proclaimed, then why aren't you pushing for your own leaving dates ?

Anyway a lot of speculation on Newsnight about how much Gordon Brown is pulling the strings; the consensus being he is, just how much, and meanwhile of course Blair has given a date to buddy Murdoch while tommorow he will make some announcement following talks he has had today with Brown.

But quite frankly, so what ? Sure Blair's departure is a desperately needed bloody nose for Anglo-American Neocon perpetual war, but for Blair to be nudged out of office for all the wrong reasons and unscathed for his appalling crimes is such a terrible indictment of the Labour party and more importantly the UK itself that we may as well just hang ourselves now and be done with it.

But then as the UK these days is often perceived as a wretched cowardly stain on the world map and social-fascist state, where a good chunk of the population are capable only of keeping their head down and agreeing to be molded into whatever sick distorted shape Blair, Brown, Clarke, Reid, Miliband etc. choose maybe it doesn't really matter.

Tuesday, September 05, 2006

Blair departure blueprint

Against a backdrop of another letter by MPs (I would guess organised again by a desperate Gordon Brown) calling for Blair to go, this new leaked 'Blair departure blueprint memo' in today's Daily Mirror makes for predictable reading.

Indeed it just confirms the hopeless and enormous chasm between Blair, his advisors, New Labour itself, and the rest of the world. It explains one reason a rotting Blair is still hanging on; there is simply no way to allow him go out on a high note, there will never be a 'good moment', a 'high moment' and trying to pass off something with as much appeal as a box of decaying offal as a golden prize is, unsurprisingly quite a challenge.

"The retirement blueprint aims to promote the "triumph of Blairism" and allow the PM to quit on a wave of euphoria after 10 years in office"

If the 'triumph of Blairism' means the triumph of unlimited depravity and diseased thinking over right and reason, convincing the most stupid in society that up is down and black is white, then I guess you could call it a 'triumph'. But to everyone else, trying to repaint a repugnant, soiled, fanatical dictator with poll ratings worse than Nixon during Watergate, up to his eyeballs in a half-baked international coup against the world in some warm and friendly light where the public will be left 'hungry for more' is simply a lost cause.

And what is Blairism as history shows ? A means to give a veneer of deceptive 'free-market' legitimacy to a hodge-podge of dangerously deranged social fanatics to play God ?

Blair's legacy across the board is nothing to celebrate, instead it is a deep shame on Britain itself. Perhaps worse than Western-installed despots who Blair seeks to otherthrow with manufactured dossiers and old student essays plucked off the internet and then sexed-up some more by his advisors, as he was actually voted in and repeatedly, so all the more disgrace must be accepted by a vacant chunk of the British people for nominating everyone into a humiliating, crushing 'social democratic' nightmare. Of course, Blair's 'social democracy', is more akin to an extreme form of Lenin's 'democratic centralism', without the 'democratic' bit, i.e, Blair decides and a gaggle of useful (or rather useless) idiots under the spell of his personality cult in the vestigal cabinet dotingly agree to press on with wars, ID slave grids and debased police state fanaticism however ridiculous they look.

As such, it's no surprise that the Mirror, a once fairly decent anti-war paper misses the point that getting rid of Blair only opens the door to a set of even worse problems as new would-be despots jostle for power:

"Gordon Brown and the possible reactions of the Chancellor, who fears the longer Mr Blair stays the stronger the Tories will become, are prepared for under a section labelled "threats and opportunities"

Which is somewhat ironic as Brown is even more devoted to the horrific policies that appeared under Blair than Blair himself. Brown's fight with Blair is a fight not over policy, but over power and Brown's hunger for the Granita conspiracy to be fulfilled. Gordon Brown is not trying to do the UK a favour by getting rid of Blair because Blair is bad, but because he wants to install himself in Blair's position and do even worse.

The other failure of the Mirror is to look at Iraq as somehow distinct from all the rest of Blair's policies, and the Mirror being the Mirror, wrongly try to sort the good from the bad, not wanting to accept that Iraq is part of the identical mindset which is turning the clock back on liberty and humanity, with the radical human ID slave grid, bugs in your wheelie bins, CCTV everywhere, and 3000+ new crimes (much of it hideous political police state nonsense) designed to impose this 'triumph of Blairism' onto it's victims.

"The document, headed "Reconnecting with the public - a new relationship with the media", was prepared earlier this year"

Oh yes, let's reconnect with perpetual war, a politicised Stasi police force, and an endless fountain of crackpot nonsense laws, as the UK under the Blair regime is little more than a doll's house for Blair and Brown to play social tyranny and arrange how they want.

"Sketching out his exit it says: "One where we make it clear that the PM will be spending his final period in office preparing Britain for its future challenges, setting out what they are and connecting with the public who gave him the chance to serve"

Which they must surely regret, electing as they did in effect, a coup against themselves.

And who is Blair, who's judgment is monstrously perverted and therefore irrelevant, to be proclaiming what the 'future challenges' are? For Blair and Brown, the future challenges are already well documented; the challenge being to convince a population that it needs to be ever more crushed by their fanatical political choices that are firmly detached from reality, the challenge to convince the public that up is down and black and is white, and the challenge to promote war, torture and a domestic police state while trying to sell Gordon Brown as some sort of 'alternative' to Blair, when these are all things he has enthusiastically helped bring about.

Maybe I have misread this, but the Mirror's article seems to end curiously in mid sentence:

"There are specific issues which can provide opportunities and threats. They are: GB's reaction - the more successful we are the more it will agitate and possibly destabilise him, we need to consider how to deal" (?)

I guess it is refering to Gordon Brown, but some might feel it might as well mean George Bush, but in any event it doesn't matter as there is nothing even remotely endurable to replace Blair with within New Labour, it's not just Blair's departure we need to be planning for, but the swift removal of this entire menagerie of disgusting grotesques; Brown, Miliband, Reid, Clarke who's only goal is the permanent liquidation of society and will use any opportunity to do so.

Afghanistan 'falling into Taliban hands'

Scotsman: "AFGHANISTAN is "falling back into the hands of the Taliban" and British troops are fighting in a lawless land, a new report said today.

The report, Afghanistan Five Years Later: The Return of the Taliban, said the British and United States-led international coalition in Afghanistan has "failed to achieve stability and security".

The Taliban is becoming increasing popular due to the West's failure to tackle Afghans' "extreme poverty", according to the study for the Senlis Council think-tank.

All of southern Afghanistan, where British troops are concentrated in the lawless Helmand province, is now under "limited or no central government control", the report claims. The Senlis Council blames military priorities and "flawed" poppy eradication policies for Afghanistan's plight.

The report states: "The Taliban is back and has strong psychological and de facto military control over half of Afghanistan. The international community has failed to achieve stability and security in Afghanistan"

Was that the idea though ? Of course, another thing you have to consider, the FBI recently restated there is no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11, so what evidence did Tony Blair have in his Afghanistan dossier that he decided to concoct on behalf of the US neocon regime ? On reflection very little.

Saturday, September 02, 2006

A few goodies

Ok well I've been a little busy and then got quite run down, then to top it off had some connectivity issues.

Here's just a few things from the last few days that have caught my attention:

Lecture covered by C-SPAN on the Israel Lobby and US Foreign policy with Mearsheimer and Walt. (Also some very good interviews on this subject from last month and month before here: INN World Report)


Article in the Christian Science Monitor about how the Bush doctrine (dusted off Wolfowitz doctrine and polite code for arbitrary, agressive perpetual war) is thankfully in trouble.


And via 9/11 blogger, a new interview with David Ray Griffin on the NORAD tapes (KPFK radio)