Jan 25

A sobering week in which the UK’s ruling elite tried to subtly differentiate themselves from the Saudis. Not because they wanted to but because despite the press largely being apologists for the Saudis there is only so much lipstick on pigs will achieve. Thus meaningless clown Prince Charles is dispatched to the funeral of a man who the last 3 Govts have fawned over to buy weapons*.

Believers in freedom will note how our leaders fawn all over a vile country which represents values they mendaciously claim to despise. They claim to be appalled by the ultimate expressions of Saudi ideology in the likes of IS and Boko Haran whilst supporting it! They throw our troops to pretend to fight this ‘threat’ when all that matters is the Black Gold. Such slaves are they to Saudi they choke off attempts to move away from Oil as a fuel.

The neo Liberals (Lib Lab Con) go even further and use a terrorist threat that is a byproduct of their support for Saudi to bring in the kind of authoritarian society they desire here by trying for Saudi internet policies.

* How in hock is US Govt sending POTUS? This after their surrender following 9-11 by removing their bases from Saudi and starting wars as bin Laden asked them. Or maybe Major, Blair, Brown and Cameron should be there in reality. Netanyahu can’t go but sure he’ll be there in spirit with his allies at this time of loss.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Jun 14

The good thing about being in favour of wars is that generally speaking when you’re backing UK/US winning it’s easy. Triumphant rhetoric flows like the Rhine. Justification rhetoric is almost a doddle as inevitably the opposition ‘leader’ is a vile despot our politicians constrained by history, aided by  a compliant media, cannot easily be said to be as evil as.

Anyway after 12 years the Iraq policy unwinds. After the last 2 Presidents said Mission Accomplished and a Strong Stable Iraq and began selling them weapons (seriously WTF does Iraq need with £3 Bn of F16s with half the country destitute?). It reminds me of the Chinese building an enormous wall and the Mongols being let through the gate by an army who no longer cared! After 12 years of Neo Con/Liberal bollocks the fundamentalist loons have just been allowed to walk in. All the 100s of Bns of dollars of weapons and training a complete waste.

America and UK well done you went into Iraq to fight a non existent al Queda and now have created a Sunni fundamentalist army that may be worse. Orwell was a fool who only foresaw how you would create a pretend enemy not then make it real. That is alchemy. That is genius. That is sick, man. American Hustle, indeed.

Sadly Rumsfeld and co gloated and enjoyed themselves. The rational felt sad then and sadder now. A nation of cunts rose up with their Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys… Yet whose side are the cowards? Whose side stood by to be mocked? Who stood against the easy rhetoric crowd?

Hawks, for what it’s worth it’s worse than we feared then. Yours Doves.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , ,

Apr 25

Hundreds of Nigerian school girls have been kidnapped by vile Islamic whatevers ITN and Channel 4 News call them but known as Boko Haram. It is horrible this male cult of bullshit referred to as  fundamentalist Islam and anyone watching would be horrified at attempts to not educate women – except for extreme religious people of course (see some purportedly Christian US States trying to nationalise women’s bodies). Yet what did ITN or Channel 4 not mention?

That we in the West support Boko Haram who are funded by our ally Saudi Arabia. The same as the al Queada rebels in Syria we support them too. We don’t support them in Afghanistan directly of course as then we’d be killing our own soldiers but the Saudis do and we support them and sell them weapons. So we oppose Jihadists in Somalia, Afghanistan and Pakistan and don’t like them in Nigeria but are quite happy to supply their backers with arms. Which means we really are happy to play both ends and wonder why people hate us?

The West’s support for Saudi makes no sense of course but it’s not a conspiracy it’s just a lot of people with a vested interest looking after their own patch. It’s conformist leaders who get info solely from briefings from media and lobbyists, who in turn are briefed by vested interests and unofficial spokespeople in a circular debate between so called intelligence and so called security services, Mainstream Media and Govt.

This troika is on display if people choose to look because the last one with the last Labour Govt broke down – oik like working classers Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson who aspired to be something are to be knocked down of course no one who counts is. The people who excused/supported/benefited from their excess sit in sinecures, some like David ‘Torture’ Miliband even hope to come back. Just as William Hague will likely retire to a humanitarian post having supported Saudi jihadis and opposed them without having the smarts to see the contradiction – a man who can sit in a cabinet that allows/supports the abuse of women at Yarls Wood and can then ponce about in photo shoots with Jolie campaigning against rape in war!

Does it make the likes of Hague or Miliband or Obama evil? Or does it just show how vacuous and credulous they are? A conspiracy? It’s not a conspiracy it’s far too simplistic and there is no veneer on it. Being able to conspire is not something you can accuse anyone I mention above of doing.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Mar 10

I guess it’s hard to be a member of the Labour Govt. You have all this high faluting education like Brown and Miliband and then make arguments that anyone with a germ of intellect will reject as you try to argue at the level of floating voters in marginals. That’s the nice view the chilling view is that Blair, Brown and Miliband are just stupid and no one foreign should pay a brass razoo for a British education. The subjective view would be that they are fatuous liars who see their own self interests as facts and think the rest of us are morons. I favour a mixture of all 3 explanations.

David Miliband’s latest assault on sense was demanding bogus Afghan President Hamed Karzai negotiate with the Taleban. Quite why with Western money flowing and his own security guaranteed he would bother is the question. Why given we supposedly have to be there to protect Britain’s streets we would sue for peace is another question.Or is Miliband suggesting that Al Queda and the Taleban are two entirely different things?

The bullshit just piles up in Afghanistan. If it’s so important why was it a background campaign till Iraq bubbled down? Would the Obama administration now it has the facts have opted to dig a deeper hole before realising they had to stop digging, only to cave to vested interests rather than admit error?

If the US pulled out tomorrow is anyone sane suggesting Britain would stay to defend our streets as is claimed? If not why not?

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , ,

Jan 22

Apparently there are 47 people at the torture/prison/’your call’ camp Guantanamo Bay that cannot be prosecuted in a court of law. There’s no evidence against them. They are not war criminals either. A country that believed in  Freedom and Justice would release them is a reasonable conclusion.

It will really define if the War on Terror’s claim of being about Freedom and Democracy is a non sequitur as it often seems – an answer to a different question.  Or that at least some of the seemingly mere rhetoric is believed by someone in the Obama Administration.

In many ways what weak politicians fear is that one of these 47 does something nasty to an American(s) down the line. Well life’s a bitch but we claim to operate a criminal system that way so tough. With so many recruits and potential recruits out there the later of actions of a particular individual are unlikely to make much difference. In the same way that big rival club will line up a striker whether you sell yours to them or not – it should not factor in a judicial decision.

It’s not as though in the spat with al Queda the US has not already corresponded with the major demand of Osama bin Laden and left the Holy Land [Saudia Arabia] – or met his private hope they would invade Muslim countries and cause a reaction from Muslims. Indeed even he must struggle to believe the Allies would make the war appear a Fundamentalist Crusade against Islam with things like biblical messages embedded in Allied weaponry – see today’s earlier post below.

I cannot quite see personally, and don’t think the explanations of the Administration explain either, why this war is still ongoing in an inconsequential place like Afghanistan.

9-11 was 8 years ago. What positive is still being achieved?

While Guantanamo stays open it certainly cannot be about a superior justice system or human rights.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , ,

Dec 26

A London based Nigerian on a flight out of the Netherlands tried to detonate a thigh based bomb on an NWA flight – NWA is that a point being made or me being un-PC.

NATO will be in a quandry as of course this thing can’t happen as we are in Afghanistan to prevent it. I mean who can believe that al Queda would be so devious as to recruit and train people elsewhere. Or that herberts could claim to be al Queda and do this after a few chats with some nutters and a couple of how to emails and scanning a few web pages.

Mocking aside NATO’s wide ranging operations in Afghanistan serve little of the stated purpose. It’s probably wrong of people like me to suggest a complete withdrawl as arguably we owe something to women getting educated and others who have supported us. However it does not need a full scale invasion or a surge against peoples who are no threat to us. We do not need to capture the whole country with 100s of thousands of troops.

It is pressing on the Western Govts for me to wake up to declining economic power and the sheer pointlessness of using military power in this way. Even if it could work bang for the buck it’s a waste of resources and were I a humanitarian a bigger waste of people.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , ,

Nov 29

In an act of blinding hypocrisy copied from Hillary Clinton Gordon Brown told Pakistan they must do more in their bloodthirsty surge to eliminate al Queda. Pakistan apparently has to be more successful than than the British and Americans have been after 8 years feeding Islamic extremism with justification, energy and rationale. 8 years of doing almost everything that Osama bin Laden would have wanted in 2001.

Coming from Brown it’s a statement of so little self awareness and so utterly otiose mercifully it will be ignored by people outside the UK, we hope at least. It could feed more domestic terrorism by further enraging elements of the Pakistani community domestically. Brown actually has no say as his anxious wait for Barack Obama to commit more troops to Afghanistan shows us. So why is Brown lecturing Pakistan? This is for domestic consumption as it would seem that Brown’s strategy is to stoke the al Queda fear button as it justifies his fight against the barely related Taliban next door – don’t even try to see the logic he’s not trying to convince anyone who has read up on the issue.

Brown also made Karzai’s Afghan Govt like another department of his Govt by demanding it meets targets. It would take amazing stupidity if after 12 years of target led failure Brown believes that setting and meeting targets achieves anything real. What will Britain do if Karzai does not meet targets or Pakistan says enough in its civil war? Whatever the Americans tell it to do.

On target setting take the Basildon and Thurrock health trust which was meeting all it’s rating and targets. Target setting does not work used as the only tool as people can meet targets for say the number of soldiers in an army without actually having what is really required trained fighting men up for the fight. Karzai can cut his personal graft by a few million and show his Swiss bank accounts are not growing as fast without actually cutting endemic corruption.

Canute like Brown will hope to say the Afghan war is justified by al Queda in Pakistan and try to sell a story that the Afghan leader is meeting  targets in a few months just as Basildon and Thurrock met its targets.  This is his election strategy and nothing to do with terrorism, like the war in Afghanistan.

Canute was apparently better known as Cnut the Great and Brown is a Great C….

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Nov 11

It made my flesh crawl yesterday to watch our country’s Prime Minister confess to shyness and grovel before a grieving mother. Brown did not so much walk into The Sun’s trap as build it for them and shut the door himself.

Peter Mandelson is probably the only thing between a bad position and a melt down of Brown’s Govt. Nonetheless his attack on The Sun as ‘crude’ is hypocritical from a man quoted as calling Murdoch acolyte Rebekah Wade a ‘Cunt’ – although she is in both US and UK vernacular.

Also from the govt that used polarising as not just a rhetoric but analysis, policy and reason. Seriously this is the Govt that said if you were not in favour of creating loads of highly paid and pensioned managers in the NHS and spending money with out real reform you were a dinosaur. If you were not in agreement with handing over lorry loads of money to PPP/PFI spivs you were in favour of letting children die for lack of ventilators. If you were not in favour of war for its own sake you were a lickspittle supporter of Saddam just as Carter, Reagan, Galloway and Rumsfeld had been and Galloway still was. If you were not in favour of fighting over desert against an enemy who had disappeared there was not a Rizla between you and al Queda.

What goes around comes around, eh.

What Mandy might like to mention to Brown is Murdoch does not piss in the wind. He is against Brown because he is finished. The British have stood by complete incompetence as Mrs Thatcher and her chancellors showed as they lurched from one silly economic policy to the next before Ken Clarke and Major built the late 90s and noughties good times (only for Brown to squander in a fit of hubris and stupidity). However they can spot a buffoon like Brown who waited 11 years to be Prime Minister without ethos or goals, merely for his own ego.

If Labour had any balls (not Ed Balls whose name is ironic) they’d make Mandy leader as he is the only one left with any fight. However laughable his attack he can still make one.

It’s not The Sun’s crudity but our leader’s craven weakness that is the problem.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,