PDA

View Full Version : The Blair Belief Project


I Love Sharapova
Nov 7th, 2004, 07:05 AM
Column - Jonathan Metcalfe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



THE BLAIR BELIEF PROJECT


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

"I can only go one way, I've not got a reverse gear."
—From Tony Blair's speech to the Labour Party Conference,
September 30, 2003.


Back in 1997, I’m rather ashamed to say I voted for Tony Blair, as sick as I was with the relentless individualism of the Thatcher years and still under the naive influence that politics could actually change things.

It is clear that an endemic naiveté of which I was a part not only persists in contemporary politics but goes deeper into an almost pathological denial of the reality of our world. Along side the caricature that is Bush, the British Prime Minister embodies such pathology to perfection, gleefully leaping across the world stage with all the conviction of one who has thoroughly learnt his lines and who fervently hopes for the applause and adulation that he believes such a performance merits. The massive protests of the hoi-polloi (you and I) matters little to Tony as he casts his eye on those in the high boxes way above the stalls, giving him the nod and wink that he’s doing just fine.

He is a man with a mission and his mission is all consuming.

There is no doubt that he is passionately driven to do whatever it takes to make his delusions fit neatly into the lies and manipulations so prevalent on the geo-political scene. Indeed, our Tony has become a consummate propagandist for the cause of globalisation, world government advocates and the dismantling of the already diluted and suspect powers of the United Nations. Finally he has taken it upon himself to act as an apologist for George Bush with increasingly religious overtones in his speeches and interviews. Blair may genuinely see himself doing God’s will, holding hands with his neo-con, fundamentalist friends and generally living out his fantasies as world statesman and saviour of us all. Blair being primed for his role, has taken on the mantle of a mercurial messenger with great gusto and has made it his purpose to assimilate truth to one singular idea – that we should all be afraid, very afraid. So much so that we should give up the last vestiges of freedom for our own protection designed to lock out the terrorists forever so that when a comprehensive lock-down occurs the Blairs of this world can have a comfortable private pew on which to pray for a kindly "judgement" from a future history – should their be one.

Coupled with this determination to have a piece of Bush’s "divine guidance" this man harbours an egotistical vision that is partly driven by an intense obsession with the illusion of American democracy and its speedy exportation into British society. Certainly, New Labour is merely an extension of the New World International (dis)Order he so passionately believes in, where he has done more than any other Prime Minister to warp British society into one vast shopping-trolley of consumptive values and vested corporate interests. (Read George Monbiot’s Captive State for details). To this extent, he can be compared to Bill Clinton in that he has been responsible for hastening the erosion of civil society and welcoming in the culture of psychopathy. This in turn is laying the foundations for a further reduction in civil rights (most notably with the Civil Contingences Bill) where the ""War on Terror"" is in actuality nothing more than a "War on Truth."

Although Blair lied that he did not attend a Bilderberg Grp. meeting in 1993 it is easily verifiable that he was on the guest list report at the time. Why lie? Could it be that Blair was being primed for his task as "saviour"? Did someone whisper into his shell-like just how urgent the state of the world really was and that it was Tony’s mission – should he wish to accept it – that could mean order or chaos in the new millennium? This is one possibility. Perhaps he has since interpreted these whisperings as an indirect angelic intervention designed for him alone. Though ask any of the families of the 11,000 Iraqis killed in this abhorrent war whether that interpretation is correct and I don’t think their answer would be ambiguous. One thing does seem probable however, he has been manoeuvred into power, fed some frightening facts personally tailored to his ego which has then been basted with the hottest juices of the gravy train and the promise of a divine mission during the "End Times."

Regardless of the source of such role, we now have a perfect environment for Blair’s "calling" to flourish. He will stop at nothing to fulfil his delusional mission of "Blair knows best" which includes burying anything deep in his subconscious should it threaten his subjective take on events. All Truth is put through the Blair belief filter and clustered into centres of self-importance and delusions of grandeur, where any grains of truth are plucked from their original hypothesis and reinvented according to the inner mechanism of "feeding the need."

To repeatedly evoke the idea that the sacred values of the West are at stake is to indulge in some breath-taking hypocrisy. For all his lip service to diversity and human rights they do not remotely match his actions and his deep-seated fear that is so tainted with Revelations and Armageddon. Values to Blair mean to protect at any cost, a Christian, preferably business suited, modern, super-swanky-cool-Britannia kind of values. And as long as there is a McDonalds, a Wal-Mart, several hypermarkets and a Disneyland right outside everyone’s front door - with armoured plating to keep out Osama Bin laden clones - then our lives will be fulfilled. It is a shame he prefers to ignore the facts that the reason for the state of the world is due primarily to so called western democracies and the growing cult of consumerism and Christianity voraciously raping and pillaging any notion of the Sacred and the True right down to our present day. Thus we have a world which has not learnt its lessons, hosting an array of "Leaders" with a variety of pre-dispositions and personalities bound together by a common cabalistic creed: Power.

Many in the Military-Industrial Complex may also be convinced they are serving God while in reality they serve to protect themselves against their own fears that they obviously not in control and that the version of reality we have been educated to believe in is very far from the Truth.

Which brings us back to the slight wrinkle in Blair’s copious rants on Islamic extremism and the sanctity of Western values which is simply this: The "War on Terror" is a hoax of monumental proportions, underscored by a history of "normalized" deceit in which the US and Europe led operations to conquer and monopolize. We are now reaching an apotheosis of such a dynamic. When Blair harps on about these hallowed ideals of liberty, freedom and justice which he has vicariously trumpeted hither and thither, he refuses to acknowledge the glaring contradictions in all of his actions to date so that it becomes an horrific parody of one who wishes to reform the world, yet only succeeds in symbolizing the extent to which blind belief can lead to it’s exact opposite. For example, while on the one hand he sings the United Nations praises calling for a strengthening of its powers and on the other he abuses everything the UN stands for (even if only on paper) and ignores, twists and manipulates the security council resolutions in favour of an illegal war. He believes he has covered every possibility, bar that is, the chance that he may be gravely wrong.

In his professed determination to prevent Armageddon Tony Blair is actually courting a major conflagration in the Middle East by his own chosen ignorance of the facts. The illusion of an interconnected international world order where governments work together to usher in a new spiritual dispensation is a dangerous romantic fantasy at the very least, yet one in which has an historical basis excluding any notions of a "New Age" in human relationships and governance, rather one in which control is the literal Order of the day. This pattern of intent can be discerned from an objective analysis of geo-political history and human nature rather than any sensationalist conspiracy theory. The only networks forming in the corridors of power are those who crave only more power as social and environmental catastrophe draw closer. Indeed, their remit may well be to speed up this process and the consequent cull of the population via the deluded actions of Mr. Blair and others.

Before Blair was hand-picked to play his role in the ""War on Terror" he had long since become flushed with excitement that he would be playing with the big boys. This has not been a sudden conversion as people may think but a steady romance with the riches of globalisation and "Big is beautiful" ethos. He has imported the same techniques of deception from the US where Tony’s heart seems to go thumpety-thump at the merest mention of a hamburger or Chevrolet. His astonishing defence of hundreds of Iraqis murdered in Fallujah should give us an indication of the depth of this identification. It is thus no mistake that Blair is the darling of the neo-cons. Indeed, the smouldering love affair is mutual throughout most of middle America. Like many across the pond, their zeal has been bubbling away on the sheen of oil laden interests comprising of most of the US administration and the American Zionist network also gagging for a slice of the Action in Iraq and a chance to expand their hatred of all things Arab. As a precursor to such controls, the oil reserves in Iraq are one prize Blair and Bush are determined to secure knowing only too well that if they did not then Russian and French multinationals would move in. There are, I’m afraid no altruistic players here.

Consequently, Blair will not brook a bad word said against his American friends. After all, they are his kinda guys, not afraid to speak the truth - even when it’s false. Which is why Blair will probably decamp to be amongst his own kind once the Prime Ministerial panto has been played out. No doubt too like Margaret Thatcher he will be able to charge enormous sums for after dinner speeches. That is, should American laws at that time allow such displays of free speech…

Regarding Blair’s own personalized public speeches; they are sparse on facts, big on rhetoric, heavy with out-dated reports long since proved to be false and a constant stream of barely disguised biblical references and emotional pleas for a global crusade. There is also an undercurrent of defensiveness, a childish insistence to pre-empt our very thoughts in order to bolster his own belief that he is on the side of good and preferably on the right hand of God. Amen. Of course, in the final analysis this is not about doing God’s work or the upholding of human rights, or the long-term greater good, it is about Mr. Blair maintaining his beliefs and his self-image at any cost. Very probably he believes in what he is doing. Like any fledging despot with psychopathic tendencies the more you point out the gargantuan holes in his argument the more determined he will become to fill it, albeit temporarily, with feats of intellectual snake charming so slippery that your mouth hangs open at such verbal dexterity based solely on thin air.

Whether omitting salient points and slanting the topic in question or introducing a lie that is so convincingly parroted from some long discredited source it has an effect of rendering the listener dizzy with confusion. One is left with the impression that it does indeed come from a rather dog-eared script that is nevertheless being passed around to all those keen to squeeze out the last droplets of material gain from the fracturing status quo. And so, after listening to the many arbitrary "truths" and "vagaries of perception" the holes in his argument are patched by more and more rhetoric and impassioned pleas for the world to see the light. The tone is so earnest one almost wants to believe him. And so the holes remain "hidden" by obfuscation, disinformation, a complaint media and the ignorance and apathy of a sound byte culture.

But sound bytes are Tony Blair’s domain. Lies and subjective beliefs are dressed up in capable oratory and intelligent and emotive use of language. He has made it his own special mission to play the intellectual counterpart to Bush making him his friend and ally: a "burning Bush" if you will, a kindred spirit for his increasingly evangelical sensibilities. His ability to achieve such a fanatical drive and consistent refusals to apologise, as well as his Mephistophelian powers of persuasion lends credence to the accusations of psychopathy. After all, in the face of such suffering who in their right mind would call on us to "rejoice" at the "liberation" of Iraq? His body language, expression and public speaking are believable to many people not least to the New Labour party and much of the British public who backed his stance. In many of his speeches we see him pouring with sweat, literally putting his heart and "soul" into such performances. Even his recent heart electro-shock treatment suggests that our Tony is feeling the pressure. To resist reality and to adhere to lies twenty-four hours a day under the spotlight of the world stage is no easy task. When this pressure is partly symptomatic of a tenacious will to retain one’s self-image transplanted onto a tight-fitting belief system, it will take its wear and tear on the body. This is an intelligent man, a former barrister who knows the law attending Fettes College, "Scotland’s Eton" and later Oxford University where he graduated to practice this same law he now abuses. Lies are now part of the Blair package as former ministers Clare Short and Robin Cook revealed in extensive reports which have had an equal corroboration. Perhaps there is no real "Tony Blair", just an open place to rent whichever righteous cause provides the most elastoplasts to his patchwork ego. Indeed, his penchant for hanging on the coat tails of astonishingly egotistical spin doctors Peter Mandelson and Alistair Campbell should give us pause for thought.

As Blair is so keen to point out, we are all becoming ever more interrelated and interconnected. Which makes it all the more vital to understand that we must not except this as an excuse to fall into the fear-laden trap of "better the devil you know" where establishing a centralized system of global controls spawned from the hoax of the "War on Terror", is well and truly on the cards. Once again, if we value TRUE freedom and the vital principle of free-will then it means we must learn to think for ourselves and learn the language of deceit so that we may SEE what is being laid before us as truth.

Perhaps we should examine what it is that Blair has contributed to the cause of Freedom? From the whitewash of the Hutton and Butler Reports, (all appointed by Blair for the required outcome) to pathetic attempts to find intelligence via a student’s thesis from the Internet and an ever-present stream of arrogant denial and cynical manoeuvrings which are as transparent as they predictable - Tony Blair clings to office:

· Tony Blair is a liar, the man who headed the CIA’s Iraq Desk during the Gulf War said last night. "Bush and Blair want a war in Iraq and they are both prepared to lie if necessary in order to get one," said Dr. Stephen Pelletiere who recently retired as professor of National Security Affairs at the US Army War College. [Top Intel expert Brands Tony Blair a liar over Iraq, Kevin Dowling, Global-Intel]

· …Tony Blair refused to apologize for inadvertently 'misrepresenting' the dossier issued in February as 'intelligence' when large parts of it were culled from an article in a Middle East journal based on a PhD thesis." [Andrew Grice | The independent | July 9, 2003] "there was a selection of evidence to support a conclusion... intelligence was not being used to inform and shape policy, but to shape policy that was already settled", with contradictory evidence being ignored. [Patrick Wintour Guardian, June 18, 2003]

· "Prime Minister Tony Blair conceded privately that Iraq did not have the quickly deployable weapons of mass destruction that the British government cited as justification for war, former Foreign Secretary Robin Cook asserted today." [Warren Hoge | New York Times | October 5, 2003]

· The lawyers "said the war in Iraq breached international treaties such as the Charter of the United Nations, the Geneva Conventions and the ICC's own Statute." Top lawyers from Greece are travelling to the International Criminal Court in The Hague on Monday to file a lawsuit against senior UK officials. [Richard Galpin | British Broadcasting Corporation | July 28, 2003]

· President George Bush first asked Tony Blair to support the removal of Saddam Hussein from power at a private White House dinner nine days after the terror attacks of 11 September, 2001. According to Sir Christopher Meyer, the former British Ambassador to Washington, who was at the dinner, Blair told Bush he should not get distracted from the "War on Terror's" initial goal - dealing with the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. [David Rose Sunday April 4, 2004 The Observer]

· Tony Blair is facing a formal complaint to the international war-crimes tribunal by a panel of senior international legal experts for unlawfully waging war in Iraq. The panel of eight law professors, including experts from Oxford University and the London School of Economics, is studying evidence that alleges Britain has broken international treaties on war and human rights in Iraq.

· Dramatic new evidence from the intelligence services casts fresh doubts over Tony Blair's central claim that Iraq continued to produce chemical and biological weapons until the outbreak of war, The Observer can reveal. Newly disclosed Cabinet Office documents show that the Prime Minister's categorical assertion was based only on a single source and was attacked as 'too strong' by a senior intelligence official. The same official attacks the dossier's descriptions of the graphic effects of mustard gas and VX, a nerve agent, as 'grossly misleading'. [Martin Bright, Gaby Hinsliff and Antony Barnett Sunday September 14, 2003 The Observer]

· [The Niger Forgeries] When the Prime Minister is quizzed by the committee, he is expected to say that the Government had more than one source for the allegation. One British official said: "There were a number of sources for the text in our dossier on that and we stand by it." Last night the IAEA expressed surprise that Mr Blair did not take the opportunity offered by Mr Cook to abandon the allegation. Melissa Fleming, a spokeswoman for the IAEA, said: "These were blatant forgeries. We were able to determine that they were forgeries very quickly." [By Andrew Grice and David Usborne Independent June 5, 2003]

· Tony Blair’s credibility over weapons of mass destruction is set to face its sternest test after his special envoy to Iraq conceded yesterday Saddam Hussein had stockpiled none. Sir Jeremy Greenstock’s remarkably frank admission came as speculation mounted that two of Britain’s top spymasters and the government’s most senior law officer will be criticised by an official inquiry into the handling of intelligence on Saddam’s WMD. [Alison hardie Political correspondent]

· The Prime Minister shifted tack on Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction again today - fuelling doubts that hard evidence of their existence will ever be found. Challenged whether he believed pre-war intelligence about Iraqi arms was accurate, Tony Blair said he was convinced evidence would confirm Saddam's "complete determination" to obtain illegal weapons. [By Joe Murphy, Evening Standard Political Editor 8 June 2004]

· Tony Blair was warned two weeks before publication of the Iraq dossier that the intelligence was dodgy, it emerged last night. In a personal meeting with the PM, the head of MI6 Sir Richard Dearlove admitted one of the key sources on Saddam's chemical weapons was "on trial". He told the PM "the source remains unproven". But just 14 days later Mr Blair declared in the forward of the dossier that the chemical weapons intelligence was "beyond doubt". [Jul 16 2004 By Bob Roberts Deputy Political Editor]

· Downing Street secured vital changes to the Butler Report before its publication, watering down an explicit criticism of Tony Blair and the way he made the case for war in the House of Commons. [By Melissa Kite and Patrick Hennessy]

· So what of Tony Blair, the man who claims that human rights are so important that they justify going to war? Well, at the beginning of this year, he granted Uzbekistan an open licence to import whatever weapons from the United Kingdom Mr Karimov fancies. But his support goes far beyond that. The British ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, has repeatedly criticised Karimov's crushing of democracy movements and his use of torture to silence his opponents. Like Roger Casement, the foreign office envoy who exposed the atrocities in the Congo a century ago, Murray has been sending home dossiers which could scarcely fail to move anyone who cares about human rights. [ Tony Blair’s New Friend George Monbiot Monbiot.com/ 2003]


And so it goes on. This pathetic pussy-footing around the crucial issue that is the "War on Terror" the war in Iraq and the 9/11 attacks, which continue to be seen by most as a democratic reaction to the forces of evil, is astonishing to witness. Our submissive media spend their time highlighting the many pieces of shrapnel but fail to see and sense the heat of the explosion right under their very noses. They prefer to tow the establishment line mimicking the extreme and terminal state of media decay in the United States.

A further ruse for those running this sordid show, is to promote the "cock-up" theory and leave at the intelligence services’ door, thereby absolving Blair and Bush of any blame. The 9/11 commission is almost laughable in its pointless accusations of "what went wrong." How did the British Joint Intelligence committee and the CIA get it so wrong? Who had one two many coffee breaks? Let’s all focus endless reports on the awful intelligence and bypass the reality of the situation that intelligence is so far advanced that whether it is Israeli’s MOSSAD, MI6, CIA, or the NSA they can scope and manipulate almost whoever they wish with extreme ease. This is a basic fact. Which means we can dispense with the ludicrous suggestion that there "wasn’t enough intelligence data" or that somehow no one knew what was going on before it was too late. This is utter fantasy. We might as well believe that Mavis the cleaner with her bucket and mop accidentally pulled out the plug on the vast network of surveillance technology and departmental divisions of advanced methods of data gathering. Oops - that was it. All the defence systems were down on September 11 and everyone was playing tiddleywinks while a few jet airliners breezed into town. And actually The "disarming" of Iraq…or rather the "liberation" of Iraq…or perhaps the INVASION of Iraq and the slaughter of thousands by American Mongols was all a result of poor intelligence as well?

Once again: "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way."

Aside from copious documentation of beginners intelligence that something was brewing prior to the twin towers attacks which was repeatedly ignored, the only conclusion one can reach is that persons unknown within the intelligence agencies and security agencies on both sides of the Atlantic "got it wrong" by design.

The former UN weapons Inspector Scott Ritter proclaimed at the top of his voice that no weapons would be found for the same reason. It was all part of ploy - a fabrication for war. As the CIA director George Tenet was comfortably used as the scapegoat to usher in Porter Goss, a former CIA operative and a much more cosy sympathizer to Bush, here in the U.K. Blair appointed John Scarlett to head MI6, who was initially behind the dodgy dossier deception in the first place! The parallel process in the UK and the US is startling.

Perhaps most disturbing of all under Blair’s premiership is the lack of investigative journalism concerning the highly suspicious death of weapons expert Dr. David Kelly. This atrocious episode is now merely a footnote in the Blair juggernaut and the silence on this matter alone should set some very loud alarm bells ringing. Deaths of weapons experts linked to bio weaponry are not as rare as one would think and when Israel is yet again lurking in the background all bets are off as a Signs of the Times supplement report outlines.

Another article by Simon Aronowitz details information from Michael Shrimpton, a U.K. national security and guest on The Alex Jones Radio Show who expressed the view that Kelly was murdered "because he had been talking to the press and there was a fear of what else he might discuss with journalists. Furthermore, Kelly was due to return to Iraq and may have learned fresh information on that trip which Whitehall could not afford to trust him with." I suspect a rather more pertinent reason for his demise is the reports that Kelly had been hob-knobbing with Israeli scientists working on bioweaponry and Kelly’s scape-goating was getting a little too hot for them to handle.

Another one of those numerous but important "coincidences" shows that Kelly had strong links to a clandestine intelligence cell called Operation Rockingham which was effectively the British counterpart of the US Office of Special Plans. According to Neil Mackay of the Sunday Herald:

"BRITAIN ran a covert 'dirty tricks' operation designed specifically to produce misleading intelligence that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction to give the UK a justifiable excuse to wage war on Iraq. Operation Rockingham, established by the Defence Intelligence Staff within the Ministry of Defence in 1991, was set up to 'cherry-pick' intelligence proving an active Iraqi WMD programme and to ignore and quash intelligence which indicated that Saddam's stockpiles had been destroyed or wound down.

The existence of Operation Rockingham has been confirmed by Scott Ritter, the former UN chief weapons inspector, and a US military intelligence officer. He knew members of the Operation Rockingham team and described the unit as 'dangerous', but insisted they were not 'rogue agents' acting without government backing. 'This policy was coming from the very highest levels,' he added.

'Rockingham was spinning reports and emphasising reports that showed non-compliance (by Iraq with UN inspections) and quashing those which showed compliance. It was cherry-picking intelligence.'"

The report further adds:

"Many in British intelligence believe the planned parliamentary inquiry by MPs on the Intelligence and Security Committee will pass the blame for the use of selective intelligence to the JIC, [joint Intelligence committee] which includes senior intelligence figures.

Intelligence sources say this would be unfair as they claim the JIC was following political instructions. Blair has been under sustained criticism following allegations that intelligence on the threat from Iraq was 'sexed up' to make it more appealing to the public." [Revealed: the secret cabal which spun for Blair By Neil Mackay] [bold mine]

Once again, those "cherry-pickers" have been hard at work for it’s leaders. It further begs the question why in God’s name is such a man still Prime Minister? If this is not enough to get Blair swiftly booted from office I have no idea what is. But this is to slip back into the assumption that the "developed" world operates on democratic laws. We only need look towards the States to realize neo-con and Israeli interests have triumphed in the face of extraordinary crimes against humanity not least with the staging of 9/11. But still the vast majority of the population are asleep to the biggest lie since Pearl Harbour.

If this were not enough, there is another possible reason for the intensity of lies and deceit which now characterise the Blair and his government.

Reports surfaced last year concerning Blair’s protection of elite paedophile rings within government circles and his possible blackmailing by US forces in return for support for the Iraq war. While the activities of paedophiles operating with impunity in the higher echelons of power has long been known, the necessity to blackmail Tony Blair into support by threatening to reveal such poison within his own party and friends seems spurious given Blair’s religious convictions, personality and long-term obsession for all things corporate-American. Nevertheless, this theory may well play a part overall, which further increases culpability and darkens his projected image still further. (But Blair has never been one to be bothered by whom he associates with. Witness the holiday luxury with Silvio Berlusconi for one).

So, it could well be that the Christian mission given to him as oppose to relinquishing the reins of power and squealing on predations of another kind, may seem eminently preferable as Mike James mentions from his article on the same:

...The British intelligence services are actively engaged in preventing any further child sex revelations that could incite further hostility to an already unpopular Prime Minister and destroy the morale of troops set to invade Iraq. An intelligence officer told Mackay that "a 'rolling' Cabinet committee had been set up to work out how to deal with the potentially ruinous fall-out for both Tony Blair and the government if arrests occur."

Some commentators, mindful that one of Tony Blair's closest confidante's is a practising paedophile, are even suggesting that this particular scandal, and not Blair's repeated lies and fabricated reports in regard to Iraq, may well prove the downfall of a government mired in sleaze and corruption. The Sunday Times is reported to have obtained an FBI list of Labour MPs who have used credit cards to pay for internet child pornography, and Blair has responded by imposing a massive news blackout, failing however to stop the arrest of one of his most important aides, Phillip Lyon.

[…]

But it is now becoming shockingly clear that the slavish adherence of Tony Blair and Jack Straw to the Bush line on Iraq may have less to do with principled arguments, and much more to do with the fear of CIA and FBI revelations that would make them two of the most hated politicians in modern British political history.

[Blair's Protection of Elite Paedophile Rings Spells the End for His Career Propagandamatrix.com/]


I fear the author is wishfully thinking if he believes that any scandal in these modern times of perceptual myopia would cause the downfall of a government, unless it fitted into the spin of "problem-reaction-solution" to which the globe endlessly turns. And what have we heard since then? As usual, the establishment takes care of its own.

Irrespective of the likely truth of such allegations, the same pattern remains – Tony Blair and the rest of his crew are willing to adhere to nothing more than self-importance and self-aggrandisement at any price. It matters little that he may be protecting paedophiles and by extension his desperate need for an historic admiration. Tony Blair’s image is at stake and his image is inexorably entwined with the ""War on Terror." Protection of his own stake in power and the need to control is the primary issue and always has been. No one who has any conscience at all could behave in such a way unless of course it is from their deepest essence that they do so. Yes Mr. Blair, you will certainly be remembered but perhaps not in the way you may think.

While he "braves hotspots" and kisses Iraqi children for the latest photo opportunity his support has directly resulted in thousands of deaths and injuries to the same Iraqi population with the same sons and daughters, sisters and brothers. Will Blair kiss the corpses of children lying in the streets? Will he look the Iraqi mothers and fathers in the eye and tell them they died for a noble cause rather than the mad dash to monopolize oil reserves and consolidate a fascist Empire?

What would it mean to place our invisible selves on the eve and aftermath of every sniper’s bullet, every exploding mortar shell, every attack in the name of this imperial freedom? We would have our senses jolted into the immediacy of the moment, the actual physical, mental and emotional anguish and scarring; the gagging stench, the flies, the degradation and the dry-throated, wracking grief from loved ones lost. We would see first hand, as many have, away from sanitized T.V. images, the reality of the "War on Terror" and countless other propaganda exercises over time immemorial which have fuelled man’s insatiable need to consume. We would see the "Terror of the situation" and our own shame will surely rise up to meet us in our search for anything humane in Humanity.

Blair has found a safe place within so that he need not concern himself with such realities.

He conforms to one half of a human dynamic which presently dominates the state of this world. He is acting on these skewed beliefs and self-delusions and refusing to acknowledge the facts, as is his right. This is the basic organizational matrix of our so called civilisation after all. Nevertheless, Blair and his other friends are clearly abusing their positions of power and actively seeking to assimilate the awareness of the population into a vast elaborate hoax. Admittedly, many people seem only too willing to go along with his lies. This is their right. And it is OUR right to refuse to be manipulated and lied to by creatively defending the principle of truth and taking peaceable but resolute action to let it be known.

There is a "call" going out and it is being answered by those who resonate towards the Blair/Bush axis of predation. There is acquiescence and there is active support - both amount to the same thing: to oil the wheels of perpetual suffering and destruction. A revolution in thought and action applied to our own lives may be required rather rapidly for us to have any chance of splitting this present woeful reality into something more constructive.

Blair is on a "mission." What is yours?