Jump to content

 

 

UK Foreign Office or The Ministry of Spin ? (Private Eye)


Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, forlanssister said:

I suppose people believing what they want to believe because the truth is too uncomfortable to contemplate is perhaps simply a mechanism that allows some to cope and yes it appears to be abundant in this thread though I suspect we're seeing it in differing places. :ph34r:   

For some, without a doubt,....... although the majority aren't yet even close to that stage of contemplation and it'll need a major shock of sorts to provoke them into approaching that corner (at least, of the places I see).

 

IIRC on FF, I pointed toward Jack Irvine, his dark shadow over Ibrox and coined his 'Toxic' moniker.

If you asked him how difficult it would be to keep the punters in the dark and compliant over some of the subjects of the ilk I sometimes type about in The Lounge on here,...he'd say 'easy, with all the available tools, a piece of cake' and he'd probably express amazement that  Mark Regev and colleagues hadn't been able to nail Jeremy Corbyn. 

 

 

16 hours ago, forlanssister said:

It's more than obvious and not just in this thread that you don't regard the former Press TV, friend of Hamas and Hezbollah, Black September wreath laying Leader of the Labour Party's anti-semitisim as a problem, so be it that is your right but you can't in all honesty expect the rest of us to swallow it too. It goes without saying that Israel aren't strangers to political skulldugery if they weren't there simply wouldn't be an Israeli state in existence. It would be incredibly ignorant and negligent of Israel not to be active on the Corbyn front just as it would be of MI5 and MI6. The real offenders within the Labour Party are the Leadership of Corbyn, McDonnell and Milne.

 

Weird thing is I'm probably the one person on this site who has an actual real genuine grievance (not political) with the state of Israel. 

Bigger picture. For example, had Corbyn been PM and not Blair, we wouldn't have invaded Iraq (the worst and most costly Foreign Policy decision of my lifetime). In other words, Corbyn wouldn't have allowed us to be part of doing what the radical Saudi jihadists wanted us to do, ie. sounding the recruiting klaxon for them and there would have been less terrorist attacks in the UK.

 

Regards the current situation. My belief is that the need for political ideological change and counterbalance trumps any relatively minor concern, dislike or hatred for the individual by a country mile and some. I wouldn't have a problem if it were someone other than Corbyn, but only if he were to have similar politics.

 

Corbyn is simply leader of the opposition in Westminster, no one is forced to vote for him or his party.

He goes about his business, other agencies, interested parties and foreign governments engage in dark arts.

 

 

 

16 hours ago, forlanssister said:

 I've come to view the word progressive as the most abused word this millennium and I keep being reminded why I formed that view. Though I think you have a valid point re the use of "fascist" as it's predominantly used nowadays by fascists from the likes of Antifa etc. 

There is so much going on with so many different shades that labels will naturally become inaccurate but you have to call them something that is generally recognised as aiming in a particular direction. This problem tends to favour those who prefer to keep the proles divided.

 

 

16 hours ago, forlanssister said:

 "Tyrannical feudalism" has been around since the first man enslaved another which surely was the birth of capitalism and it has been evolving in various forms since then. "that hasn't known a Left wing government (4 decades and counting)" seems a long winded way of saying the old trope "wrong type of socialism". Mankind has evolved and survived because man learned to exploit what was round about him, animals, plants, the oceans, the forests etc...etc but most of all man has exploited man that's the way it has always been and always will be till the day we exploit ourselves out of existence. 

Broadly, I don't disagree. However breaking it down a little, I think the ordinary punter and his lot reached a high point (at least in the Western World) post WWII with the welfare reforms, the NHS, more disposable income, workers real bargaining power etc......until neoliberalism came along and got settled in.

 

Thereafter, it's increasingly downhill whilst the distribution of wealth and power got heavily skewed upwards.

Wealth and power effectively buyout the pillars of society like no living soul on this board has ever experienced in the West.

Hence, we arrive at tyrannical feudalism on steroids.

 

 

 

16 hours ago, forlanssister said:

I think that we've had more than a little havoc for at least a decade and before major changes can be made some stabilisation is what's required.

Yes, but I don't think you need to be Nostradamus to see plenty more havoc coming down the track. The more difficult thing would be to say exactly what form it will take. 

 

I have my doubts that I'll see real stability in what is left of my lifetime....and I don't plan in checking out in the forseeable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, buster. said:

He goes about his business, other agencies, interested parties and foreign governments engage in dark arts.

Another dark warning to unsettle me.

 

Help me here. These agencies, interested parties and foreign governments: tell me who they are so that I’ll know them when I see them and get the dog to sort them out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, buster. said:

For some, without a doubt,....... although the majority aren't yet even close to that stage of contemplation and it'll need a major shock of sorts to provoke them into approaching that corner (at least, of the places I see).

 

IIRC on FF, I pointed toward Jack Irvine, his dark shadow over Ibrox and coined his 'Toxic' moniker.

If you asked him how difficult it would be to keep the punters in the dark and compliant over some of the subjects of the ilk I sometimes type about in The Lounge on here,...he'd say 'easy, with all the available tools, a piece of cake' and he'd probably express amazement that  Mark Regev and colleagues hadn't been able to nail Jeremy Corbyn. 

 

Given we currently have the worst Conservative government certainly in my lifetime allied to the most inept leader ever yet when asked in a poll who would make the best Prime Minister; Theresa May, Jeremy Corbyn or Don't Know the latter tops the polls. To me that looks like Regev is playing a sterling hand.

 

47 minutes ago, buster. said:

Bigger picture. For example, had Corbyn been PM and not Blair, we wouldn't have invaded Iraq (the worst and most costly Foreign Policy decision of my lifetime). In other words, Corbyn wouldn't have allowed us to be part of doing what the radical Saudi jihadists wanted us to do, ie. sounding the recruiting klaxon for them and there would have been less terrorist attacks in the UK.

 

If Corbyn had been PM then we'd be little more than a colder version of Venezuela with Gerry Adams as Defence Secretary and Abu Hamza as his assistant. 

 

51 minutes ago, buster. said:

 

Regards the current situation. My belief is that the need for political ideological change and counterbalance trumps any relatively minor concern, dislike or hatred for the individual by a country mile and some. I wouldn't have a problem if it were someone other than Corbyn, but only if he were to have similar politics.

 

Careful what you wish for because regarding the current situation switch on your tv, read a newspaper or God forbid read the internet and you'll see a political ideological change happening in front of your very eyes. Populism is on the rise all over the world however that populism is of the right not the left.

 

59 minutes ago, buster. said:

Corbyn is simply leader of the opposition in Westminster, no one is forced to vote for him or his party.

He goes about his business, other agencies, interested parties and foreign governments engage in dark arts.

 

Oh dear c'mon man really, Corbyn & Co are as culpable as everyone else when it comes to the dark arts perhaps they just aren't as good at it as the others, vis-a-vis Robertson and Lawwell.

 

1 hour ago, buster. said:

There is so much going on with so many different shades that labels will naturally become inaccurate but you have to call them something that is generally recognised as aiming in a particular direction. This problem tends to favour those who prefer to keep the proles divided.

 

Perhaps the proles themselves have an innate tendency for division and need little encouragement in that regards.

 

1 hour ago, buster. said:

Broadly, I don't disagree. However breaking it down a little, I think the ordinary punter and his lot reached a high point (at least in the Western World) post WWII with the welfare reforms, the NHS, more disposable income, workers real bargaining power etc......until neoliberalism came along and got settled in.

 

Thereafter, it's increasingly downhill whilst the distribution of wealth and power got heavily skewed upwards.

Wealth and power effectively buyout the pillars of society like no living soul on this board has ever experienced in the West.

Hence, we arrive at tyrannical feudalism on steroids.

 

Are Corbyn's twin nirvana's of Cuba and Venezuela not the most manifest examples of tyrannical feudalism on steroids? Or do they get a free pass because they're nominally "Leftist". Given that the Castro and Chavez families amassed billions under their reigns I guess that the skewing and distribution of wealth isn't solely a neoliberalist trait?

 

1 hour ago, buster. said:

Yes, but I don't think you need to be Nostradamus to see plenty more havoc coming down the track. The more difficult thing would be to say exactly what form it will take. 

 

I have my doubts that I'll see real stability in what is left of my lifetime....and I don't plan in checking out in the forseeable.

I concur and have my doubts too but don't think the fault lays at the foot of a single ideology it's much more natural than that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, forlanssister said:

If Corbyn had been PM then we'd be little more than a colder version of Venezuela with Gerry Adams as Defence Secretary and Abu Hamza as his assistant.  

That is your version of Exaggerated Project Fear against the fact that an early 21stC Foreign Policy (FP)  coming from a Robin Cook and Jeremy Corbyn would not so much have avoided a very grave error, but would have refused to go along with a pack of lies. An example of the continuation of such a FP would be a refusal to support a Jihadist supporting Saudi Arabia. 

 

In other words, you can mention a list of the 'usual suspects' and frame Corbyn in beside them but the truth is that it has been many of those who have been in power who have been and are facilitating and indirectly supporting terrorist groups.

 

20 hours ago, forlanssister said:

Careful what you wish for because regarding the current situation switch on your tv, read a newspaper or God forbid read the internet and you'll see a political ideological change happening in front of your very eyes. Populism is on the rise all over the world however that populism is of the right not the left. 

When I said ideological change needed I thought I had made clear in what direction.

I think I've already expressed views on the organised and effective rise of populism on the right. They are much more practical in that they know they will find it much easier to grow and attain more power if they align themselves with parts of neoliberalism.

 

The NeoCons of Cheney et al found the alignment with neoliberalism an almost natural fit in 2000.

As discontent and disillusionment grew amongst the US people (eg. Iraq invasion, fundamental lies / financial fallout of 2008, fundamental banking lies) the neoliberal candidate lost (Clinton, a Presidential Candidate only because of more fundamental DNC lies). ...........From the right populist corner, Trump, the serial liar and Charles Green of US politics wins.

 

However, IMO it's other far right movements from around the Globe who are actually the more sinister and worrying. Especially when you have the likes of a bankrolled Bannon looking to contribute and help organise them. Major players seem to be investing in this.

 

 

20 hours ago, forlanssister said:

Oh dear c'mon man really, Corbyn & Co are as culpable as everyone else when it comes to the dark arts perhaps they just aren't as good at it as the others, vis-a-vis Robertson and Lawwell. 

C&Co are so busy on a constant defence from an array of powerful interests that I see little evidence of any effective counter.

 

20 hours ago, forlanssister said:

Perhaps the proles themselves have an innate tendency for division and need little encouragement in that regards. 

Yes, but in cases such as this, the divide and conquer tactic is used to the full because it is aimed at possibly the biggest major threat they could face. 

 

The importance of taking over/monopolising much of the media, neutering a free press and real investigative journalism is vital to those moving toward totalitarianism. 

 

20 hours ago, forlanssister said:

Are Corbyn's twin nirvana's of Cuba and Venezuela not the most manifest examples of tyrannical feudalism on steroids? Or do they get a free pass because they're nominally "Leftist". Given that the Castro and Chavez families amassed billions under their reigns I guess that the skewing and distribution of wealth isn't solely a neoliberalist trait? 

The issue at hand is what is happening here.

Previously you have said that tyrannical feudalism has been ever present since man started to exploit resources.

In theory, I don't disagree but I simply see differences in the scale of abuse/benefit at different times and places.

 

We are currently in an unprecedented set of negative circumstances (negative for the vast majority).

 

20 hours ago, forlanssister said:

I concur and have my doubts too but don't think the fault lays at the foot of a single ideology it's much more natural than that.

It's much more complex than just a single ideology but that idelology is the foundation and axis.

 

---------------------

 

 

Edit

Breaking News on the Revolution

George-Osborne.jpg

Edited by buster.
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, buster. said:

That is your version of Exaggerated Project Fear against the fact that an early 21stC Foreign Policy (FP)  coming from a Robin Cook and Jeremy Corbyn would not so much have avoided a very grave error, but would have refused to go along with a pack of lies. An example of the continuation of such a FP would be a refusal to support a Jihadist supporting Saudi Arabia. 

 

In other words, you can mention a list of the 'usual suspects' and frame Corbyn in beside them but the truth is that it has been many of those who have been in power who have been and are facilitating and indirectly supporting terrorist groups.

 

Jesus wept! Remind us again just how long Cook's "Ethical Foreign Policy" lasted because as far as I'm aware it lasted as long as it took for the words to leave his mouth. As for it's ok for Corbyn to be a terrorist supporter because others are too wtf really, you're better than that.

 

23 minutes ago, buster. said:

When I said ideological change needed I thought I had made clear in what direction.

I think I've already expressed views on the organised and effective rise of populism on the right. They are much more practical in that they know they will find it much easier to grow and attain more power if they align themselves with parts of neoliberalism.

 

You did indeed but your fantasy is being bitch slapped by the reality outside of your bubble. Despite the rise in  populism coming from the right it doesn't automatically follow those populists are all neoliberals far from it.

 

29 minutes ago, buster. said:

The NeoCons of Cheney et al found the alignment with neoliberalism an almost natural fit in 2000.

As discontent and disillusionment grew amongst the US people (eg. Iraq invasion, fundamental lies / financial fallout of 2008, fundamental banking lies) the neoliberal candidate lost (Clinton, a Presidential Candidate only because of more fundamental DNC lies). ...........From the right populist corner, Trump, the serial liar and Charles Green of US politics wins.

 

Trump only won because of the arrogance and the ignorance of the Democratic Party and their Clinton is God complex. Seriously how the f*&k was an intellectually redundant billionaire who lives in a gilded cage on New York's 5th Avenue more in tune with unemployed former steelworkers in the rust belt than the Democratic Party? 

 

38 minutes ago, buster. said:

However, IMO it's other far right movements from around the Globe who are actually the more sinister and worrying. Especially when you have the likes of a bankrolled Bannon looking to contribute and help organise them. Major players seem to be investing in this.

 

IMO it's the Populist Leftist Antifa and their brethren being funded by the likes of Soros who pose a greater risk to society. 

 

43 minutes ago, buster. said:

C&Co are so busy on a constant defence from an array of powerful interests that I see little evidence of any effective counter.

 

LOL...in other words as I said they simply aren't as good at playing the game eh?

 

45 minutes ago, buster. said:

Yes, but in cases such as this, the divide and conquer tactic is used to the full because it is aimed at possibly the biggest major threat they could face. 

 

All sides use divide an conquer as that's the prequel to the unity (or perhaps subjugation) you crave , the Corbynistas are giving us a real time demonstration with their entryism into the constituency Labour Parties of any MP that opposes ant-semitism.

 

1 hour ago, buster. said:

The importance of taking over/monopolising much of the media, neutering a free press and real investigative journalism is vital to those moving toward totalitarianism. 

 

Indeed it as we've been witnessing with the absurd Remainic wankfest going on in the media these last 2 years with the BBC and SKY trying to out anti-Brexit one another. Thing here is that my stance on Brexit is probably more in tune with Corbyn than any other party leader but alas he lacks the honesty to publicly declare it. It was real investigative journalism that has revealed much of Corbyn's terrorist support and outed his lies re the Black September wreath farce etc...etc.. so I sincerely doubt that we'd see much real investigative journalism under a Corbyn regime.

 

1 hour ago, buster. said:

The issue at hand is what is happening here.

Previously you have said that tyrannical feudalism has been ever present since man started to exploit resources.

In theory, I don't disagree but I simply see differences in the scale of abuse/benefit at different times and places.

 

Touched a nerve there eh?

 

That the scale of abuse/benefit has ebbed and flowed is self evident as that's the nature of the beast and currently it's way out of kilter of what could pass as acceptable but history is littered with evidence that a Leftist Revolution cannot provide the change required all it does is change the faces.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, buster. said:

C&Co are so busy on a constant defence from an array of powerful interests that I see little evidence of any effective counter

Here we go again. Name some of the powerful interests.

 

If I were anti-British to a greater or lesser degree like, say, Putin, Vradkar, Juncker, I would be desperate for Corbyn to be PM. The Boaty McBoatface of UK politics. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Corbyn doesn't like the EU. But he'll side with it to bring the Labour Party into power.  

 

Isn't it shocking when politicians behave hypocritically and use underhand tactics to promote their own interests?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.