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

Sunday, June 24, 2007

Legacy of a monster and the Churchill hoax

It's perturbing to see this '24 hour global media' that Blair always justified his murderous personal spin machine with, now seek to construct a deliberate concoction of putrid lies to pour highly inappropriate reverence on perhaps the world's most putrid liar.

You don't really know where to start it's all so ridiculous, but let's just look at the BBC, who are today speculating about what Blair is going to do next. In the article, and consistent with our ongoing thesis here, former Tory cabinet minister Ken Clarke is reported as saying, "I think [Blair's next job] will be trying to govern the world and advise all the other political leaders how to run things"

And then there is:

"According to one of Blair's closest advisers: "Tony is obsessed with the idea of becoming a roving envoy who would seek to reconcile the Abrahamic religions of Christianity, Judaism and Islam"

More and more Blair's next job is becoming a terrifying check list of the New World Order; with Blair the head of the world government and trying to institute a one world religion.

Let's hope and pray that the world can put a stop to Mr. Blair once and for all.

Additionally, in this piece by Michael Cockerell, the BBC is trying to surreptitiously imply this new notion that well yes, we had this kind of a spat between this 'media' chattering class at the BBC over Iraq, but that isn't representative and Mr. Blair's place in history is somehow different to all that. And in doing so, they have dug up, incredibly, the Churchill hoax again, as if re-projecting this hopeless old piece of war-spin one more time, which didn't work when it was tried previously, will suddenly, magically rehabilitate all of Blair's atrocities, and the UK's insane support of this mess.

Now this page even has a link to a slightly older article where they somehow, out of millions of people in this country, managed to find three essentially pro-Blair perspectives to summarize for the plebling minds how they need to be thinking about their outgoing prime minister.

While ignoring virtually all of Blair's horrendous crimes against his own country, these 'experts' as the BBC describe them then proceed to cherry-pick their favorite worthless policies like the minimum wage and feebly criticize others to give a veneer of some kind of meaningful commentary and evaluation.

But it couldn't be more meaningless, and the article is replete with ridiculous passages like "Under the sincere impression that Saddam Hussein of Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction (WMD) - a view shared by the intelligence services of every major country in the world, (as well as by the United Nations' own weapons inspectors - he appreciated the importance of overthrowing the Baathist regime as soon as the Taleban regime was deposed in Afghanistan"

It makes you wonder, as back in the real world, outside of the fluffy unbiased Beeb; stuck in its awe of government, the state, 'multiculturalism' and its own Vicar of Dibley, there is now a red line of rational debate on this for everyone else as the evidence has amassed so fully to the contrary as to render this kind of hopeless bullshit not even worth the briefest of reflection anymore.

Look, on Afghanistan: I'm no fan of the Taliban, but the world's most advanced and powerful nation under the grip of murderous re-branded Trotskyites, with Mr. Blair desperately trying to attach himself to them, dropping bombs on one of the worlds poorest and most backward nations, then rewarding yourself with 'War on Terror' medals can hardly be re-spun as some kind of heroic accomplishment for mankind.

The funny thing is the Churchill Hoax (or rather the Churchill Deliberate Stumbling Block) in particular, that appeared immediately after Blair's speech on 9/11, was not coming from the shocked public who this latest digest of slops from the BBC is now aimed at as a final outrageous attempt to sell this sicko.

As I recall it was firmly coming from pundits at places like the BBC and Neoconservative opinionists in the global media, hungry to sell this war to the UK and cheered on by various well meaning, but gullible conservative elements who hadn't understood then what Neoconservatism was on either side of the Atlantic.

And that reminds us about Ian Duncan Smith, who was basically a good decent man, but naive and who took the bait about Bin Laden, the cave and the laptop like a fish on a hook and started croaking out terrible speeches about "terrorists skulking in caves" and so on.

Politically, it would have been difficult for him to do much else to be fair, but that shouldn't have been an excuse, especially in the light of the terrible public report (which a lot of people forgot about when it was later upstaged by the utterly breathtaking collection of hoaxes about Iraq) cooked up by Blair regarding Afghanistan (when the US couldn't do it themselves) but which had no intelligence in it at all, and was highly criticized by those with a clue and some courage at the time who spotted something awry.

But I think it's very telling about the unhealthy, cloistered detachment of the BBC from those forced to pay for its sickly propaganda, when they are trying so hard to resurrect the wrong and monstrous notion of Blair as some kind of wartime hero and make an analogy so ridiculous, so hopelessly wrong and upside down that it beggars belief that one would even try. And because of the timing and intensity of this crap in the article, it is not Afghanistan they are really trying to associate it with now, in presenting this nonsense today as he is about to go, it is as if it is trying to convert all of Blair's terrible crimes in retrospect into 'tough choices' in a righteous war.

Now Blair and the BBC are not the only ones to do this, inspired by Blair and presumably by the Bush criminals and Neoconservative Fifth Columnists in America, many others in the New Labour nightmare are guilty of this too: Gordon Brown with his 'Bletchely Park' garbage and John Reid in various speeches.

And when the entire rational world knows this man Blair is a war criminal and murderer as well as a traitor and monster, it speaks to a failure of the BBC to be able to deal with this topic at all.

And if we are talking about Blair's record on foreign policy, none of the three 'experts' (which include 1) a crackpot war fanatic, 2) Blair's own biographer and 3) a well known war historian who although does criticise Iraq, is only there to add weight to this misleading Churchill analogy) mention Blair's endorsement of the appalling attack on Lebanon endorsed by Blair which sickened the world last year, while ongoing Israel/Palestine catastrophe, supposedly once 'important to Blair' is condensed into a mention about the 'Arab-Israeli' conflict.

Nor do one of these 'experts' mention the crushing domestic police state created under Blair, and a brutal attempt to rewrite society at all, presumably they believe it won't affect them.

Now, I'm no expert on Churchill himself, but that isn't really so important in this context, as it's really all about trying to periodically and deliberately pour new life, legitimacy and gravitas into Britain's soiled role in this disaster, by falsely claiming that there is some sort of analogy between World War II and the 'War on Terror', and this constitutes a staggering failure by the BBC to regurgitate this rubbish.



Post a Comment

<< Home