Wednesday, June 27, 2007

the last post

So it is goodbye to Mr Blair, the prime minister, and goodbye to Blairy England the blog and the country as ruled by Blair.

I finally managed to publish some of my recorded poetry about this war criminal, cheat, lyer accomplice to mass murder, and master of manipulation.

If this country is a less safe secure honest predictable and honorable place ten years on it is due more than anything to what he has done to our political and social life.
If we are more prosperous, and we are, it is more due to Mr Brown, who took over as prime minister today.

There should be a war crimes trial for Blair. Maybe there will. He certainly has Iraq written in blood where his legacy should be.

For myself and my family.... we move on. We are in great shape, never better. Gill, I, the boys and the girls are all thriving. We have begun to do so in these last months as the reins of power have perhaps coincidentally been slipping from Blair's hands.

Gill is really well for the first time since we met. Joel can read and cope well at school. Holly has passed her Teaching Internship and is now qualified to start her new job in the top Catholic girls school in the country,
Rosie has grade 5 in music theatre and is looking confident and unaggressive for the first time.

I am winning contracts for work and selling my books and pictures.

Goodbye Mr Blair.

Farewell to Blairy England.

Monday, April 24, 2006

Easter in Iraq 2006

Easter in Iraq 2006
Originally uploaded by Why Not Studios.
Easter has gone, but images like this are still coming through.
I fear that very soon we will see another fake 911 in america followed by a fascist take over.
In Blairy England Brown is organising patriot youth groups in schools.

I fear for the future.

Wednesday, March 29, 2006

Blair the final denouement or the resurection of the darkness

I have copied this piece from an egroup since I am not keeping close enough to the news myself any more. This is important stuff. Are we coming to the final days of Blairy england as the police widen their investigation into his possible corruption.
If only it were possible to prosecute him for the death of 100,00 people in an unsanctioned unnecessary uninvited indefensible war of aggression.
Yet he is defending the indefensible and seemingly sanctioning further murderous invasions of peoples who are unlike him ( not us).

"Britain: Blair sets out ideological justification for new wars of
By Julie Hyland
24 March 2006

Use this version to print | Send this link by email | Email the

Prime Minister Tony Blair's March 21 speech in London marking the
third anniversary of the Iraq war coincided with President George W.
Bush's Washington press conference making clear that the occupation
of Iraq will continue for years and threatening military attacks
against any country deemed an obstacle to US interests.

As at the time of the invasion, Blair's task today is to contrive a
pseudo-moral justification for the illegal policy of preemptive war,
which the prime minister euphemistically termed "active

However, he does so under conditions in which the catastrophe
wrought by the invasion of Iraq has stripped both his government and
the White House of any political legitimacy in the eyes of tens of
millions of people across the world. Thus, despite appearing before
a friendly audience at the Foreign Policy Centre—a pro-New Labour
think tank—the prime minister appeared harried and edgy, and his
remarks bellicose and
defensive by turns.

Three years on, the "majority view of a large part of Western
opinion" was that the war should never have taken place, Blair said.
He went on to acknowledge that "the precarious nature of Iraq today
and . . . those who have died" had made the doctrine of "active
intervention" the object of "scorn."

Many had also concluded that "George Bush is as much if not more of
a threat to world peace than Osama bin Laden," Blair continued, "and
what is happening in Iraq, Afghanistan or anywhere else in the
Middle East is an entirely understandable consequence of US/UK
imperialism or worse, of just plain stupidity."

This admission is itself a damning self-indictment of his policy.
That so many hold these views is not difficult to explain. All of
Blair's justifications for the war have been exposed as lies. There
was no connection between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks on New
York, and Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction.

More than 100,000 Iraqis have been killed, and rather than being
greeted as "liberators," the US and Britain have been confronted
with a popular insurgency, which they are seeking to extinguish
through a combination of military action against entire towns and
cities, and the deliberate cultivation of sectarian and ethnic

Once again, Blair made clear his indifference to domestic and
international popular opinion and his determination to continue his
political and military alliance with Washington. Rather than make
any accounting for the disastrous results of his previous actions,
he sought to set out a new ideological pretext for further military
adventures aimed at "regime change," whilst denouncing his critics
as apologists for global terrorism.

Blair presaged this section of his speech by praising the Koran and
attributing to it a historically progressive character in an earlier
era. But he went on to claim that what was at stake was not a
clash "of civilisations" but rather a "clash about civilisation"—
i.e., that his opponents should be regarded as barbarians and
enemies of civilised values.

He complained that ministers had been warned against using the
term "Islamic extremist" because it might cause offence. Given that
the government has made repeated reference to Islamic extremism, and
has justified all its encroachments on civil liberties on the basis
of combating this threat, Blair's claim is nonsensical.

But the implied criticism of an overzealous "political correctness"
was of a piece with the prime minister's adoption of a slightly more
sophisticated version of the reactionary anti-Muslim campaign being
waged by the right wing across Europe This reached its high point
with the publication of cartoons denigrating the prophet Mohammed
that were
justified on the grounds of free speech.

Blair echoed those who profess that Islam has fallen behind the
advanced Western world due to the impact of the Renaissance, the
Reformation, and the Enlightenment. His invocations of an
ideological crusade were backed up by reference to his own Christian
faith and his desire to safeguard "our way of life."

It was not simply a question of defeating terrorism, Blair said, but
defeating the "global ideology" that lay behind it, which had
become "embedded now in the culture of many nations and capable of
eruption at any time."

This ideology had to be taken on by "telling them their attitude to
America is absurd; their concept of governance pre-feudal; their
positions on women and other faiths, reactionary and regressive."

The attempt to dress imperialist militarism in the mantle of
progress is Blair's particular ideological contribution to
Washington's war effort. The social base of the Blair government
constitutes a privileged section of the upper-middle class that
prides itself on combining a healthy respect for the benefits
of "free market" capitalism with progressive views, particularly on
questions relating to gender and sexual preference. Like the authors
of the cartoon provocation and their supposedly liberal apologists,
Blair seeks to exploit the position of Islam on women,
homosexuality, etc. in order to portray it as incompatible
with "Western" values.

What is the reality behind his claim to be waging an "ideological"
struggle in defence of civilisation? It is his lining up with the
world's strongest military power to inflict death and destruction on
defenceless peoples in order to seize control of their country and
its resources.

It is sanctioning the building of concentration camps such as at
Guantánamo Bay, where anyone deemed an opponent of the West can be
imprisoned without trial. It is an apologia for the sadistic
treatment of detainees, sanctioned by the highest echelons of
government and the state.

The tradition that Blair stands in is not that of the Enlightenment,
but the pious rhetoric of the "white man's burden" that was used to
justify the creation of the British Empire during the nineteenth

Blair's proclamation that Islamic extremism is "embedded now in the
culture of many nations" constitutes a license to terrorise,
intimidate and even wage war in many of the nations of the Middle
East and Africa.

Just as with Iraq, this will be justified as a great civilising
to safeguard world peace and liberate the native population through
regime change. Whatever forces offer their services as a proxy
government for the Western powers, regardless of their true
political character, will be proclaimed as representatives of
moderate Islam.

Worse crimes are to follow. Blair placed his speech in the context
of those on British foreign policy which he gave in Chicago in 1999
and Washington in 2003. It should be noted that both of these were
made with the immediate purpose of legitimising the wars against
Yugoslavia and Iraq.

Similarly, in his remarks this week Blair accused Tehran of
meddling "furiously in the stability of Iraq" and of supporting
terrorist attacks in the Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Libya and
Beslan. "True," he said, "the conventional view is that, for
example, Iran is hostile to Al Qaeda and therefore would never
support its activities." But, he alleged, such divisions between
Sunni and Shia Muslims count for nothing as "fundamentally, for this
ideology [i.e., extreme Islam], we are the enemy."

There is a remarkable similarity between such spurious arguments
linking Iran and Al Qaeda to the earlier claims that the secular
Ba'athist regime of Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11. The
similarities do not end there. At one point in his speech Blair
responded to those who have pointed out that Iraq was not a threat
to world peace by citing the "fourteen UN resolutions" repeatedly
invoked by Washington and London in the run-up to the invasion to
provide themselves with a fig leaf of legality.

A letter leaked to the Times this week reveals that the Blair
government is engaged in a surreptitious campaign to create a
similar paper trail to provide a pretext for war against Iran. The
Times reports that a March 16 confidential note by John Sawers, a
leading British diplomat, addressed to his counterparts in France,
Germany and the US urges a united offensive to secure "a United
Nations resolution that would open the way for punitive sanctions
and even the use of force if Iran were
to refuse to halt its controversial nuclear programme."

Sawers sets out British proposals for upgrading the case against
Iran so as "to bind Russia and China into agreeing to further
measures that will be taken by the Security Council should the
Iranians fail to engage positively... We would not, at this stage,
want to be explicit about what would be involved then."

Tuesday, March 21, 2006

The Richard Nixon of Downing Street | the Daily Mail

The Richard Nixon of Downing Street | the Daily Mail: "Caught red-handed, up to his neck in slush funds and sleaze, the Richard Nixon of Downing Street attempts to distance himself from the cash for honours scandal by presenting himself - risibly - as the champion of reform.

The gall of Tony Blair knows no bounds. Suddenly, the Prime Minister who so ruthlessly exploits loopholes in the rules to secure secret loans for the Labour party claims to have seen the light."

Jack Dromie has maybe started the assassination process with Blair.

The Daily Mail rejoices.

But with so many ministers in the same fog of war world where truth is an utter stranger, what does it matter.?

Suddenly, the man who moves heaven and earth to obtain peerages for wealthy cronies, despite the objections of the Lords Appointments Commission, wants to take politics out of the honours system."

(DV) Nichols: Radiation in Iraq Equals 250,000 Nagasaki Bombs

(DV) Nichols: Radiation in Iraq Equals 250,000 Nagasaki Bombs

I cannot confirm the content of this link. It beggars belief. Even the most severe commentators I have read to not come near this figure. From the research I have read even a tiny fraction of the DU mentioned here would be enough to render Iraq uninhabitable for the forseeable future after a few years of dust spread.

I do not know if we are in the last days of Blairy England. I want to finish with this blog. I can no longer stomach writing about this Government which has gone beyond all contempt.

On the Today Programme day after day the ministers who dare to speak tell stories that even young children could see are grotesque twistings of any kind of truth.

and the future........

Mr Brown plans to start army cadets in schools.

So from Blairy England we progress to Brownshirt England, run by Scots on behalf of Americans.

It is probably what the country deserves. Re-electing this Government was a criminal act in itself. It sanctioned this war of aggression.

Friday, February 24, 2006

Thursday, February 23, 2006

Werther: a Half-Dozen Questions About 9/11 They Don't Want You to Ask

Werther: a Half-Dozen Questions About 9/11 They Don't Want You to Ask: "4. Who wrote the script for the rhetorical response to 9/11?

The smoke was still rising from the rubble of the World Trade Center complex and the Pentagon when the unanimous and universal cry erupted in government circles, and was relentlessly amplified by the media, that this was 'war,' not a criminal act of terrorism. How very convenient that this war, declared against a diffuse and stateless entity, would trigger long-sought legal authorities and constitutional loopholes which would not apply in the case of a criminal act. [5] Torture, domestic spying, selective suspension of habeas corpus, all the unconstitutional monsters whose implications are only clear four years after the event, all slipped into immediate usage with the rhetorical invocation of war.

This was not merely war, it was unlimited war, both in the sense of total war meant by General Ludendorff (civilian rights being trivial), and in the sense of lacking a comprehensible time span. 'A war that will not end in our lifetimes,' said Vice President Cheney on Meet the Press on the very Sunday following the attacks. How could he be so sure during the fog of uncertainty following the strike?

If bin Laden and his followers were merely a limited number of fanatics living in Afghan caves, as we were assured at the time, why did the Bush administration relentlessly advance the meme that a decades-long war was inevitable? Could not a concerted intelligence, law-enforcement, and diplomatic campaign, embracing all sovereign countries, have effectively shut down 'al Qaeda' within a reasonable period of time--say, within the period it took to fight World War II between Pearl Harbor and the Japanese surrender?

Four years on, Vice President Cheney, doing a plausible imitation of the radio voice of The Shadow, continues to publicly mutter, in menacing tones of the lower octaves, that the war on terrorism [6] is a conflict that will last "

Friday, January 20, 2006

AlterNet: Blogs: PEEK: Why we can't capture Bin Laden

I don't care how crazy it appears. I think Bin Laden is working with Bushco. It seems that he pops up with a message just when America needs to be reminded that the bogeyman is still out there.

Catch him!? He is much too valuable as a continuing reason why we should have all our freedoms taken away by the extremists of left and right together.

AlterNet: Blogs: PEEK: Why we can't capture Bin Laden: "Here's another theory, wacko though it may seem. Some have suggested that the worst thing that could happen to the fragile right wing coalition would be for Roe v. Wade to be overturned. Its existence and promises to overturn it are simply too powerful a rallying cry to be replaced.

Could the capture of Bin Laden function similarly? Could the continued freedom of Bin Laden function as a free-floating bogeyman for the Bush administration to whip out when fear ebbs and civil liberties come to the fore?

Naah, that's just crazy talk."

Fathers 4 Justice halts operations - Yahoo! News UK

Fathers 4 Justice halts operations - Yahoo! News UK

Little Leo, so much like my son J, just two years older.

I wonder what life is like for him inside the Government's spy ders web.

This was another piece of Blairco spin.
There was never a real threat against the boy.
Hey, but Blair needs all the sympathy he can get as his education minister blunders from error to disaster.

AlterNet: War on Iraq: Iraq: Deconstructing the Reconstruction

A Marshall Plan for the middle East?

Haliburton and Co have stolen so much money that even Bush is drawing back from offering these people any more.
What are the Iraqis getting.

Power? No
Water? No
Oil? No
An army. Hey, they have recruits, but the money for new weapons was stolen, Billions.

AlterNet: War on Iraq: Iraq: Deconstructing the Reconstruction: "Score another one for the 'stay the course' hypocrites in the White House. Last week, I wrote about the president talking up our progress in Afghanistan while cutting U.S. troops and funding. Now he's doing the speaking-out-of-both-sides-of-his-mouth trick when it comes to the rebuilding of Iraq.

In a speech in front of a veterans' group last week, Bush said of Iraq: 'On the economic side, we will continue reconstruction efforts and help Iraq's new government implement difficult reforms that are necessary to build a modern economy and a better life.'

But this presidential promise is directly contradicted by recent reports that the administration has decided not to seek any more funds for reconstruction in the new budget -- effectively signaling an end to an effort that was once touted as a Middle East version of the Marshall Plan."

AlterNet: Rights and Liberties: The Torture Policy

Why bother to repeat myself?
Well, someone might pay attention eventually.

The Government knows that if you lie long enough and sincerely enough people believe you.

So why not keep repeating the truth?

AlterNet: Rights and Liberties: The Torture Policy: "In England, The Guardian reported Thursday on new information it had received about the British government's knowledge of the US practice of rendition - the secret transfer of terror suspects to interrogation centers in Europe and Asia where they may have been tortured. The paper reported that the leaked document shows the Blair government is trying to 'stifle' attempts by members of Parliament to find out just how much Britain knew about what some MPs are calling the CIA's 'torture flights.'"

Thursday, January 19, 2006

BBC NEWS | UK | Wales | Archbishop's anti-war message

Remember this.

So many of us spoke and marched against this bloody murderous disaster of a war.

We must hold the perpetrators, the traitors to account.
These were crimes against humanity.
What we need most of all from the 21 century is that world leaders cannot any longer get away with that.

BBC NEWS | UK | Wales | Archbishop's anti-war message: "'The strategists who know the possible ramifications of politics miss the huge and obvious things and wreak yet more havoc and suffering.'

Despite better communications, intelligence and surveillance than ever before, the innocent continue to be killed, he said.

'Here we all are, tangled in the same net ... stepping deeper and deeper into tragedy', he added.

Dr Williams has previously warned against the dangers of war and urged the government to find a diplomatic solution.

On the anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks he described war as 'at best the lesser evil' and added that attacking Saddam Hussein could bring 'real cost to our own humanity'."

The Scots have their own dossier

The Scots have a detailed dossier on the dodgy dealings of Blair and co supporting the kidnapping of people and their export for torture.

Bad news for you Mr Blair

SNP reveals 'CIA flight' dossier

The SNP has published a report on suspected US intelligence flights through Scottish airports. The document lists in detail the planes, dates on which they landed and 10 firms which allegedly operated on behalf of the CIA.
[ Portrait ]

The publication comes as inquiries continue into “rendition flights” by the Council of Europe, European Parliament and an all party group of the House of Commons.

SNP Foreign Affairs and Defence spokesman, Angus Robertson MP, has sent the report to First Minister Jack McConnell urging the Scottish Executive to “use every avenue open to it through the criminal justice system to establish whether there has been the illegal transportation of people through Scottish airports and discourage it ever happening in the future”.

The report lists 10 firms which allegedly operate as CIA shell companies and details the plane types, registration numbers and dates which they landed at Prestwick, Glasgow and Edinburgh airports. Among the planes was a Gulfstream jet (Registration number N379P/N8068V) nicknamed the “Guantanamo Bay Express” and was reportedly used to transport suspects to the US prison on Cuba. That plane is listed in the report as having landed five times at Glasgow and Prestwick airports between 2002 and the end of 2004.

SNP reveals 'CIA flight' dossier — SNP - Scottish National Party

the Scottish Nationalists have a dodgy (for Blairco) dossier on renditions through Scotland.

The Government will go on wriggling but the questions will go on getting more detailed.
This one is not going away any more than Iraq has gone away.

We do not want a Government that supports torture in any way.

SNP reveals 'CIA flight' dossier — SNP - Scottish National Party: "SNP reveals 'CIA flight' dossier
The SNP has published a report on suspected US intelligence flights through Scottish airports. The document lists in detail the planes, dates on which they landed and 10 firms which allegedly operated on behalf of the CIA.
[ Portrait ]

The publication comes as inquiries continue into “rendition flights” by the Council of Europe, European Parliament and an all party group of the House of Commons.

SNP Foreign Affairs and Defence spokesman, Angus Robertson MP, has sent the report to First Minister Jack McConnell urging the Scottish Executive to “use every avenue open to it through the criminal justice system to establish whether there has been the illegal transportation of people through Scottish airports and discourage it ever happening in the future”."

Rendering unto Caesar. Leaked avoidance advice from the FO to Blair.

Blair said he knows nothing about our involvement with US renditions apart fromn a couple in the Clinton era.

The Foreign Office has had a memo leaked suggesting he avoid anything specific and move subjects as fast as possible.

It may not be incriminating but it reveals a conspiracy to evade the truth.

Ms Rice says the Americans don't torture, but they do do what us Europeans would call torture.

We just don't ask what they are up to with those planes so we can plead ignorance.

I think that the Government could be donbe for conspiracy with another (the US) to commit crime.

AlterNet: The President Does Not Know Best

Der Fuhrer knows best

he does.

AlterNet: The President Does Not Know Best: "It has been widely reported that even Bush appointees, such as former Assistant Attorney General James B. Comey, and possibly former Attorney General John Ashcroft, objected to the NSA's wide-ranging warrantless spying. After 20 years as a federal prosecutor, I am absolutely certain that the vast majority of career attorneys at DOJ and criminal prosecutors from U.S. Attorneys' Offices around the country, as well as federal law enforcement agents, would have refused to participate knowingly in this program. Bush and his coterie knew that their legal arguments were weak and intellectually dishonest, if not ludicrous, so rather than making their case honestly, even to their own people, they avoided dissent by acting in secret and affirmatively misleading the entire country. Using a tragically familiar modus operandi, Bush has carried out his unlawful spying scheme by acting not as a unitary executive (whatever that is), but as a solitary executive -- as if the President Knows Best."

AlterNet: The Return of Bush's Brownshirts

yes the old slow boat chicken shitters are back, trying to destroy Murtha the way they did Kerry.

Will it work this time?

Who cares?
All it takes for BushBlairco sorry I should have said evil is for good men to do nothing.

The women as I said earlier are off their asses.

AlterNet: The Return of Bush's Brownshirts: "Here we go again. Buckle up, the bad boys are back in town.

Murtha's War Hero Status Called Into Question

( -- Having ascended to the national stage as one of the most vocal critics of President Bush's handling of the war in Iraq, Pennsylvania Democratic Congressman John Murtha has long downplayed the controversy and the bitterness surrounding the two Purple Hearts he was awarded for military service in Vietnam.

(CNSNews bills itself as 'The Right News, Right Now,' and you can find it quoted and pointers to it on Christian-right sites like Pat Robertson's 700 Club and the Gospel News Network.)"

POLITICS: Women's Anti-War Petition Circles the Globe

While Salman Rushdie thinks Islam is afraid of female power maybe Bushco should start worrying.
American women are linking up with women around the globe to oppose the Iraq war.

POLITICS: Women's Anti-War Petition Circles the Globe: "POLITICS:
Women's Anti-War Petition Circles the Globe
Haider Rizvi

NEW YORK, Jan 16 (IPS) - Eminent female writers, artists, lawmakers and social activists in the United States are reaching out to women leaders across the world in an attempt to forge a global alliance against the U.S.-led war in Iraq.

A U.S.-based women's group has launched a global campaign to gather 100,000 signatures by Mar. 8, International Women's Day, when they will be delivered to the White House and U.S. embassies around the world.

'We are unleashing a global chorus of women's voices shouting, 'Enough!' said Medea Benjamin, cofounder of CODEPINK: Women for Peace, a California-based rights advocacy group that has spearheaded the global women's campaign, called 'Women Say No to War'. "

Is It Warm in Here? Another story on irreparable climate change

from Lovelock to Lovejoy.

How curious!

Another ecoscientist this time American thinks it may be too late for the planet.
The writer thinks that Americans are unlikely to notice till it is too late, if it is not so already.

Is It Warm in Here?: "Lovejoy fears that changes in the Amazon's ecosystem may be irreversible. Scientists reported last month that there is an Amazonian drought apparently caused by new patterns in Atlantic currents that, in turn, are similar to projected climate change. With less rainfall, the tropical forests are beginning to dry out. They burn more easily, and, in the continuous feedback loops of their ecosystem, these drier forests return less moisture to the atmosphere, which means even less rain. When the forest trees are deprived of rain, their mortality can increase by a factor of six, and similar devastation affects other species, too.

'When do you wreck it as a system?' Lovejoy wonders. 'It's like going up to the edge of a cliff, not really knowing where it is. Common sense says you shouldn't discover where the edge is by passing over it, but that's what we're doing with deforestation and climate change.'"