Bloggerheads

Today you need to ask yourself one very important question; why are you being pressured on the basis of public opinion and not on the actual merits of proposed anti-terror powers?

The answer to that question lies behind the ‘public opinion’ itself; it’s a facade erected along familiar lines by some very familiar players.

The bold assurance that the public is behind this results from two hurried and widely discredited surveys; one conducted amongst Labour members and one commissioned by Rupert Murdoch’s Sky News.

And it’s Rupert Murdoch’s Sun newspaper that today urges its readers to ‘shame their MP’, providing them with the relevant email addresses and with the opportunity to take part in yet another poll… this time when ‘yes’ is the only option (readers are urged to call 0906 361 2211 and register their support for the 90-day law; there is no number to call if you do not support this proposed legislation).

The Sun – Don’t let terror win: Today we urge our army of readers to demand their MP gives them every protection possible from terrorists. We have printed the names and e-mail addresses of the Parliamentary wobblers who voted against Tony Blair’s new Bill to make glorification of terror illegal – and who are likely to block the 90-day detention safeguard. Click here to find your MP and let them know EXACTLY what you expect them to do.

I’m sure I do not need to remind you that we were given similar assurances regarding another ‘imminent threat’… Iraq. Oh, and that it was the Sun newspaper that screamed the 45-minute WMD claim the loudest (and made the false claim that British troops in Cyprus were within range of these non-existent weapons).

This morning, on GMTV, a witless reporter held up a copy of the Sun and stated that this was a sign that the public fully backed Blair’s bold new initiatives. It is in this way that fiction becomes fact and our democracy is undermined.

This same GMTV reporter made the same ‘and there is so much more at stake’ claim raised by the Sun yesterday, that your failure to back the glorification bill threatened Blair’s premiership.

Finally, we get to the guts of it.

Regardless of what we can or cannot prove at this stage, the majority of the public hold the perception that Tony Blair manipulated intelligence in order to secure support for the invasion of Iraq. Then, too, we were urged time and again not to let the terrorists win, but any analyst not under Blair’s control will tell you:
– Iraq had no connection to Al Qaeda previous to this invasion
– That Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups were greatly enabled by this invasion (via the sudden release of millions of small arms & tonnes of explosives, the provision of a veritable playground in the Middle East, and – most dangerous of all – fodder that the terrorist groups could use for propaganda and recruitment).

Sadly, this is not something Tony Blair can admit. His current defence is as follows;

Nothing justifies terrorism, therefore any attempt to find a reason/cause behind the attacks on London can be dismissed out of hand.

Think about that…

1. Blair has to approach the ‘war’ on terror with a bloody big blind spot.
2. Because of the nature of the threat, Blair has to assure the public that he is operating in good faith on matters/facts/details/claims that – for reasons of national security – we cannot know about (when there is a very clear indication that he has abused this trust in the past).

Even if we depart from the central issue of terrorism, you need to acknowledge that the only people Blair can appoint to his cabinet or count on in the pursuit of his reforms have to have backed him over the war on Iraq then and continue to back him to this day. And anyone who can do that with a smile on their face is duplicitous, stupid or woefully misinformed. It’s no longer a case of the best man or woman for the job.

The closer you look at it, the more it appears that Blair’s position is untenable; the only thing that keeps him afloat is illusion and perception… and *this* is why you are being pressured on the basis of ‘public opinion’ and not on the actual merits of this proposed legislation.

Finally, it needs to be noted that – if you are not tempted by arbitrary numbers somewhere between 14 and 90 and if you are not comforted by the belated addition of a sunset clause – then your vote could very well result in Blair’s downfall…. but this is no reason to shy away from your decision. If anything, it should cast your vote in concrete.

The only way we can begin to approach terrorism sensibly, responsibly and effectively is to remove Blair.

The public needs to know that terrorism will not be tolerated – and neither will its manipulation for political gain.

And this is why – after you have voted against this legislation – you must also support the impeachment of Tony Blair.

Thank you for your time.

Tim Ireland
www.bloggerheads.com

And to think that just yesterday we were chatting about Blair’s credibility-contribution in the run-up to the Iraq war…

BBC – Australia foils ‘terror attack’: Australian police say they have foiled a terrorist attack in the final stages of its preparation, after 16 people were arrested in Sydney and Melbourne… The operation came nearly a week after Australia’s anti-terror laws were changed to give police greater powers.

Sydney Morning Herald – Terror raids: It’s now a question of trust: This morning’s sweeping anti-terror raids in the suburbs of Sydney and Melbourne are reassuring, in that they demonstrate — or so we must hope — the effectiveness of our police and intelligence agencies. Yes, they were assisted, says the federal government, by the amendments passed last week by parliament, but they do not — yet — make the case for the more draconian changes ahead.

PS…

1. Bloggers: Note that the SMH is now allowing comments directly under editorials.

2. Members of the reality-based community: Note how similar the ditto-heads are to those who continually invade the BBC website. I especially love the ‘Surely we can trust our elected leaders?’ comments.

Guardian – Blair’s litany of failures on Iraq – ambassador’s damning verdict: Tony Blair repeatedly passed up opportunities to put a brake on the rush to war in Iraq, a failure that may have contributed to the country’s present anarchy, according to Sir Christopher Meyer, Britain’s ambassador to Washington at the time, in his book DC Confidential, serialised in the Guardian from today.

Sir Christopher Meyer – Seduced by the glamour of American power

BBC – Iraq war linked to terror – Meyer: Sir Christopher Meyer told The Guardian “there is plenty of evidence” that “home-grown terrorism was partly radicalised and fuelled” by Iraq. Sir Christopher, based in Washington until 2003, said: “Don’t tell me being in Iraq has nothing to do with it.” A Downing Street spokesman told the BBC that events in Iraq could never justify a resort to terrorism. Speaking to Five Live, the spokesman added that Number 10 was not in the business of issuing statements to help people sell books.

I left that ‘selling books’ comment in for anyone who has watched Outfoxed and remembers how the Richard Clarke matter was handled, but the real ‘tell’ is yet another appearance of the specific false dichotomy Blair has relied on heavily since the attacks of 7 July; that nothing justifies terrorism, therefore any attempt to find a reason/cause behind the attacks on London can be dismissed out of hand.

Ooh, look where we are…. July 7. Blair. Murdoch. False dichotomies.

A good a time as any to show you the Sun wheeling out a relative of one of the victims in order to shore up Blair’s push for 90-days…

Sun – Victory for TERROR: MPs opposed to new anti-terror laws were last night accused of handing victory to the bombers… Grieving June Taylor, whose 24-year-old daughter Carrie died in the blast at Aldgate, said: “I will be bitterly disappointed if this Terror Bill is not passed… If this bill does not pass, it will seem as if the lives lost on July 7th have been forgotten.”

There’s also a wonderful quote from Anne Widdecombe, but I leave the response on this front to Anorak: The Sun asks you to write to these forgetful MPs, and to listen to Ann Widdecombe. “If we now end up with 28 days and someone on the 29th day goes out and kills someone, where will that leave us?” It’s hard to say. But perhaps in a similar spot than if we end up with the full 90 says and someone on the 91st day goes out and kills someone, or everyone.

The Scum have also published a ‘list of shame’, so their readers may write to; the MPs of all parties who put Tony Blair’s premiership in peril last week by voting against the glorification of terror

OMG! They’ve sided with terrorists, they don’t care if you get blowed up and they’ve put Tony Blair’s premiership in peril! Something has to be done about these people before they destroy society as we know it.

UPDATE – Two very good posts; one on your shocking complacency and one on yet more dodgy polling, this time from Rupert Murdoch.

UPDATE – Andrew Hayman (Downing St head of PR London Met head of counter-terrorism) on BBC News just now said; “This is not a game, it requires serious debate.”

1. What? Excuse me, but what?! A serious debate is exactly what we’re being denied, with Blair and his cronies running dodgy polls and (yet again) climbing over the bodies of the dead in order to claim the moral high ground. And you’re in on it too, Andy, you muppet.

2. For a bonus 10 points, please complete this sentence: “The rules of the _________ have changed.”