Sign the petition – Blair must be held to account

20 August 2016

Well, clearly not that many people feel it’s important enough to haul the sociopath and war criminal Tony Blair into court for his crimes against humanity, as almost a month later and the count is now only around 16,800 people. A depressing reflection on our times don’t you think?

A new petition has been launched to bolster the campaign to hold Tony Blair to account by obtaining a House of Commons’ vote holding him in contempt of Parliament. Get 10,000 then Parliament has to respond (no response so far). Get 100,000 signatures and they have to debate it in Parliament.

Advertisements

Libya: Distractions and diversions By William Bowles

6 April 2011 — Strategic Culture Foundation

“This is pure hypocrisy and demagogy, they are already giving weapons to the rebels, and not only that: they are interfering in the struggle of the Libyan people,” he said, adding that this action is against international law and the United Nations Charter.” — Miguel D’Escoto

One thing should surely be clear and that is the pivotal role played by the corporate/state media in selling the Libyan ‘no-fly zone’ and the subsequent invasion by the Empire, albeit by first ‘softening up the enemy’ and then as illegal arms supplier. Thus the ‘rebels’, about whom absolutely nothing is known, become the West’s ‘democratic’ torch-bearers and all pretence at it being some kind of ‘humanitarian intervention’, is dropped.

Continue reading

Cutting Clare Short By William Bowles

3 February, 2010

blairshortBack in February 2004 I wrote a piece about the GCHQ worker Katherine Gun who really did ‘break ranks’ when she blew the lid on the UN spying operation and of Ms. Short’s role in the run-up to the invasion, bits of which I think are worth reprinting here:

“The dirty tricks campaign mounted against members of the UN Security Council that included bullying, bribery and blackmail by the US to get the half dozen recalcitrant members to endorse its invasion of Iraq (a campaign that amazingly failed), has yet again exposed the bumbling English political class as an inept and divided servant of US capital.

“Is there no end to Blair’s screw-ups? Apparently not as the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) decision not to continue with its case against Katherine Gun for breach of the Official Secrets Act reveals. Apparently afraid that the defence would use the illegal nature of the invasion as part of its defence and that a jury would agree with Ms Gun, at the very last minute the Crown decided not to continue with the prosecution.

/../

“More’s the pity that Ms Short didn’t have the ‘courage of her convictions’ back when it counted, before the war was launched. Her argument, that she thought she would have more influence within the government’s inner circle than outside it, rings hollow when you consider the nature of the present-day politician and the opportunistic nature of the ‘political’ process, where expediency rules. I find it difficult to believe that Ms Short was not aware of how the ruling class rules and Rule #1 is; don’t break ranks. This is after all, the same Ms Short who voted for the war last March.”

Continue reading

Inside the mind of a psychopath and the Chilcot ‘Inquiry’ By William Bowles

1 February 2010

blair_smug_appeaserReams have been written about the appearance of Tony Blair at the so-called inquiry. Very few if any have even come close to identifying the real nature of the beast called Tony Blair.

Were he a working class man, head of a crime gang for example, Blair’s ‘pathology’ would have been central to most mainstream media coverage, revealing the class bias in how the the media treat the ruling elites. His judgment, even his arrogance maybe questioned but not his mental state.

 


There seems to be some disagreement over what constitutes a sociopath or psychopath but in trawling the web I came across all kinds of definitions. For example,

not learning from experience
no sense of responsibility
inability to form meaningful relationships
inability to control impulses
lack of moral sense
chronically antisocial behavior
no change in behavior after punishment
emotional immaturity
lack of guilt
self-centeredness — 9types.com

Dictionary.com put it this way:

“[A] person, as a psychopathic personality, whose behavior is antisocial and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.“ — dictionary.com

All the sources I looked at came to pretty much the same conclusion and with all of them sharing the following criteria: No sense of responsibility; lack of moral sense; lack of guilt; self-centeredness; not learning from experience. Others stress the psychopath’s inability to empathize. And here’s a quote from another site that has gathered together a summation of all the different interpretations of the word/s.

“They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their victims.” — http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html

And under the heading of ‘Shallow Emotions’ we read:

“When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive. Outraged by insignificant matters, yet remaining unmoved and cold by what would upset a normal person. Since they are not genuine, neither are their promises.”

When searching through the sources I came across the following, also taken from the mcafee site that really hits the spot as a description not only of Tony Blair but of many people in positions that give them virtually absolute power over people’s lives (and deaths).

THE MALIGNANT PERSONALITY:

These people are mentally ill and extremely dangerous!

The following precautions will help to protect you from the destructive acts of which they are capable.

First, to recognize them, keep the following guidelines in mind.

(1) They are habitual liars. They seem incapable of either knowing or telling the truth about anything.

(2) They are egotistical to the point of narcissism. They really believe they are set apart from the rest of humanity by some special grace.

(3) They scapegoat; they are incapable of either having the insight or willingness to accept responsibility for anything they do. Whatever the problem, it is always someone else’s fault.

(4) They are remorselessly vindictive when thwarted or exposed.

(5) Genuine religious, moral, or other values play no part in their lives. They have no empathy for others and are capable of violence. Under older psychological terminology, they fall into the category of psychopath or sociopath, but unlike the typical psychopath, their behavior is masked by a superficial social facade.

If you have come into conflict with such a person or persons, do the following immediately!

(1) Notify your friends and relatives of what has happened. Do not be vague. Name names, and specify dates and circumstances. Identify witnesses if possible and provide supporting documentation if any is available.

Taken in part from MW — By Caroline Konrad — September 1999” — mcafee.cc

Blackwaters run deep By William Bowles

24 September, 2007

Mercenary armies are not new. Before conscription most wars were fought with hired hands, often consisting of soldiers from many countries serving under a single flag, so the use of mercenaries in Iraq, Afghanistan and the former Yugoslavia (and let us not forget the hired killers who fought under the South African flag all across Southern Africa, see below) should not come as a surprise, nor should the BBC’s constant use of the term “civilian contractor” instead of mercenary come as a surprise to us either.

Continue reading

Lies by Omission By William Bowles

6 October 2006

“An increasing number of people see a dark cloud hanging over Europe. They fear that the birthplace of the Enlightenment and the cradle of free speech is being silenced by the growing assertiveness of an intolerant strain of Islam.” — The Independent Editorial, Wednesday, 4 October 2006.

The London Independent’s editorial headed “Beware loose talk about a clash of civilisations” boggles the mind and my pen trembles and threatens to skitter right off the page of my ‘little red note book’ as I transcribe the words from this misleading and dangerous distortion of the facts. Continue reading

Climate of Fear By William Bowles

3 June 2006

Blair … backed down from plans to take a tough line on global warming and the Kyoto Treaty, which Washington still has not signed … In the end, Blair merely claimed: “We must act on climate change”, but did not go into detail.

Blair even made a joke about US interference, “I hope that isn’t the White House telling me they don’t agree with that. They act very quickly, these guys.” – London (AFP) May 28, 2006

So finally, the reality of global climate change hits the media? The BBC for example, is blasting the public with blood-curdling doccies with titles like ‘Climate Chaos’, the series, and they’ve roped in the venerable David Attenborough to host, along with the predictable line-up of ‘experts’ suitably equipped with charts and computer predictions of impending doom, in a propaganda barrage that seeks to shift the blame for global warming onto us, the public.

Continue reading

Wakey-Wakey! By William Bowles

7 April 2006

I’m tempted to say that the British have, with Tony Blair’s corporatist, security state, gotten no better than they deserve. After all, though deeply in debt, by and large they live in a kind of comfort zone albeit one that insulates them from the realities of a world gone totally insane.

Yet, a (pathetically) tiny number of us have realised that one step at a time, a fascist state (by a new name) is being erected around us and it would seem that short of an uprising (an extremely unlikely event) the final bricks of the cell that imprisons us are being firmly mortared into place.

After all, for the great majority of us, politics is something that produces nothing but snorts of derision or a fatalistic acceptance of the inevitability of being ‘protected from ourselves’ by a government and a state that is in a terminal state of denial.

It is a fact that Blair’s ‘New Labour’ has pulled off a coup d’etat right under our very noses and done it all in the name of ‘democracy’ or the right to vote every five years, a largely pointless exercise as it has brought us to exactly where we are now, with a government that does exactly as it pleases, in the ‘name of my vote’ albeit an actual minority of the electorate.

Thus the entire process of ‘parliamentary democracy’ is a complete sham, all done with smoke and mirrors.

I draw your attention to the bill currently going through its second reading without a word of protest apart from a handful of academics, which if/when passed, as the learned jurists of Cambridge University put it, effectively abolishes Parliamentary democracy (such as it is).

Perhaps it’s worth presenting for your edification [sic], the core of the eminent jurists’ concerns re the innocuous sounding ‘Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill’ (February 2005):

[Which] has been presented as a simple measure “streamlining” the Regulatory Reform Act 2001, by which, to help industry, the Government can reduce red tape by amending the Acts of Parliament that wove it. But it goes much further: if passed, the Government could rewrite almost any Act and, in some cases, enact new laws that at present only Parliament can make.

The Bill subjects this drastic power to limits, but these are few and weak. If enacted as it stands, we believe the Bill would make it possible for the Government, by delegated legislation, to do (inter alia) the following:

create a new offence of incitement to religious hatred, punishable with two years’ imprisonment;

curtail or abolish jury trial;

permit the Home Secretary to place citizens under house arrest;

allow the Prime Minister to sack judges;

rewrite the law on nationality and immigration;

“reform” Magna Carta (or what remains of it).

It would, in short, create a major shift of power within the state, which in other countries would require an amendment to the constitution; and one in which the winner would be the executive, and the loser Parliament. – See www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,59-2042165,00.html for the full text of the letter

Yet of course, the UK is a deeply conservative country, one that has barely completed a capitalist revolution let alone anything beyond. We are still ruled by a handful of nameless individuals who pull the strings of a cabal of narrow-minded and essentially reactionary individuals who, judging by the evidence to hand, would sell their own grandmothers for a pittance.

This Act would appear to be the final nail in the coffin of what passes for democracy for when added to the raft of other repressive measures that this ‘Labour’ government has passed, effectively seals our fate. Yet perhaps it’s no better than we deserve? We have after all, benefited from the wealth of empire, albeit an empire that rather than residing in the far-flung network of colonial administration, is now ruled by a handful of investment corporations, banks and insurance companies, that between them control the key industries that make imperialism possible; oil, weapons, media and a global trading and financial system that steals the wealth that makes it all possible, and finances the debt trap that has many of us in its vice-like grip.

But those of you interested in how we got to be where we are now, what we are witnessing is nothing more than the culmination of a process more than one hundred years in the making, namely the creation of a complex illusion, one that has all the appearance of USS Enterprise’s ‘Holodeck’, complete in all the details that make up a ‘reality’ invented in the offices of innumerable government ministries and constructed by the PR industry and an army of expert propagandists who deliver the final product directly into our living rooms.

Without an effective voice, alienated from one another, we retreat into our private nightmares. Yet it is a fact that underneath the façade of comfort there lurks a deep dissatisfaction with things as they are. Perhaps it’s because we know, deep in our hearts that our days are numbered if we continue to buy into the Big Lie?

A comment piece in one of the Guardian’s ‘blogs’ under the title ‘Blair’s inner circle and its ferocious grab for power’ contains the following:

From forcing through ID cards to the erosion of parliamentary scrutiny, a determined clique is hijacking our democracy

Piece by piece, month by month, Tony Blair’s administration is removing the safeguards that protect all of us from the whims of a government and the intrusions of a powerful state. It is engaged in a ferocious power-grab. Yet this story has not seized the imagination of the media or the public. In our failure to respond, the government must be reading a tacit acceptance that it can do what it chooses, because we either don’t notice or don’t care. www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1747771,00.html [my emph. WB]

The problem however is not that a ‘determined clique’ is ‘hijacking our democracy’ but that we’ve never had a real democracy in the first place. All that is happening now is what might be called the ‘end game’, a final tying of the knot.

As to ‘seizing the imagination’ of the media, I’m sorry to disabuse the writer of her illusions concerning the media but they are intrinsic to the process, they, after all, are amongst the chief benefactors of Blair’s ‘grab for power’.

And it’s going to take more than a few letters to the Guardian or a bunch of old farts at Cambridge Uni to bring about the changes we have to make if we are to save ourselves from ourselves.

And herein lies the central dilemma of our times for having renounced our belief in any kind of alternative to capitalism, we are left with nothing but our individual rantings and whinges and an ever-increasing retreat into a fictitious past or an equally fictitious present.

Thus it would seem that at least for a start, we have to free ourselves before even attempting free each other or will an ‘Earth in Revolt’ do it for us?

Beware the Ides of March By William Bowles

29 March 2006

If we want to secure our way of life, there is no alternative but to fight for it. That means standing up for our values not just in our own countries but the world over. We need to construct a global alliance for these global values and act through it. The immediate threat is from Islamist extremism.

We will not defeat this terror until we face up to the fact that its roots are deep and that it is not a passing spasm of anger but a global ideology at war with us and our way of life. Their case is that democracy is a Western concept we are forcing on an unwilling culture of Islam. The problem we have is that a part of opinion in our own countries agrees with them. – Tony Blair to the Australian parliament, 27 March, 2005.

Unlike many of my brethren (and not for the first time), I am seem to be out of step about the apocalyptic visions that are currently populating the Webosphere concerning an immanent invasion of Iran.

Continue reading

One nation under the sleaze By William Bowles

9 March 2006

The story below (L’affaire Berlusconi) was originally sent only to subscribers of the InI Newsletter (see what you’re missing by not subscribing!) but as the media and the government have done such a good job of burying the offending filth that is the Labour government and its corrupt members, I thought I should make it more generally available as well as expanding on it somewhat.

If there has been one single ‘achievement’ of postwar politics in the UK (and more generally in the so-called Western democracies), it has been the destruction of political participation by what used to be called the masses. So for example, the Labour Party has shed perhaps a quarter of a million members since coming to power in 1997.

Continue reading