Freedom under (law) Blair

After the berlin wall fell ... "For the first time in history since the apex of Roman rule, one nation and one government and one military ruled supreme over the known world. The movement conservatives, having lost communism as the main target for their energies and ire, turned inward and laid siege to their fellow citizens. The ultimate goal of this was to purge from debate and consideration anyone who did not approve of empire, and anyone who did not fit the Christian Reconstructionist mold they wished to build American society around.
The rise of George W. Bush, leader of the evangelical/political wing of American Christianity since 1996, to the office of the president has been the fulfillment of the dreams of movement conservatives. September 11 cemented their ascendancy. Now, permanent war and rule by fear are accepted without question. Now, the news media owned by the combine opens the public dialogue to these radicals while painting them as moderate, rational Americans. Now, the dominance of the military/industrial/petroleum combine is unquestioned. Now, the idea that America is engaged in a holy war has been widely disseminated." Rivers Pitt. Perhaps I should call this blog Bleary England today in honour of Hazel Blears, Blair's mouth piece of the moment. Our eyes and ears are being fogged up. We can no longer see simple truths clearly. Bare face lying can be shoved before us as fact. She is right when she says most people are behind the governements fear campaign, though. They are sleepwalkers. The junior Home office (Interior) Minister has been put up to defend the Government's decision to use the House of Commons as a rubber stamp for their bill to end Freedom under Law. I will not try to compete with many more skilled comentators than I, who have all pointed out that it is a gross insult to our political system to rush through a motion that ends our most essential political freedom in a few hours of debate. This is the ultimate proof that we, the electorate, need not consider ourselves as part of the political process. New Labour has a commons majority. Why bother with debate? It is the biggest turn off you could think of, in terms of political debate, when it should be the biggest wake up call. "No", says Blears, "Not rushed and ill thought through. It is swift!" Is this what happens to a woman when she moves ahead in Blairy England. I call it "mindless macha". If the Lords cannot turn the tide on this issue, we are all Blair's creatures. We will all be a part of the New American Century. The BBC no longer offers strong resistence. How long will it be before all the media loses independence here too?