Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5], 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ] |
| Subject: Bush in Canada | |
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) | [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] Date Posted: 15:35:13 12/01/04 Wed In reply to: Dave (UK) 's message, "however..." on 15:18:01 12/01/04 Wed I understand that President GWB amused one and all by saying that he "wanted to thank all the Canadian people who came out to wave, with all five fingers." There can't have been many! [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| [> [> [> Subject: Indeed | |
|
Author: Dave (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 16:26:35 12/01/04 Wed It’s nice to see some humour from the President in such circumstances. I doubt they will be laughing when the tanks roll over the border however, as we wonder who is next in line for regime change. Personally, I would hope that it is Blair. However I am certainly not inviting an American military endeavour to precipitate it. As a long-standing admirer of Gerald Warner’s Scotland on Sunday column, I will share with you one of my favourites, where his analysis of Blair’s psyche leads him to conclude that he is in fact, insane. Mad, bad and dangerous: liar Blair has lost touch with reality Gerald Warner SPRINGTIME for Tony: in strict calendar terms it may now be autumn, but for the standard bearers of the British totalitarian movement, converging on Brighton as a substitute Nuremberg, hubris is a powerful stimulant. The annual gathering of the Great Uncleanness is not a spectacle for weak stomachs. Everything that is most dictatorial, mean-spirited and degenerate in Britain will colonise the conference hall like plague bacilli. Among the swarming pathogens, the arrogance of unaccountable power has bred a blind confidence in Labour’s right to rule: did not the Leader himself, at a previous conference, proclaim "a thousand days for a thousand years"? The phenomenon that is the Great Charlatan has become one of the most serious threats Britain has faced. It has long been a contention of this column that we are in the grip of a madman. That conviction is now, belatedly, spreading. Writing about Tony Blair in a metropolitan newspaper last week, Stephen Glover made the suggestion that "in a very limited and controlled part of his brain - though also a potentially lethal one - he is not completely sane". It is a pity that it has taken so many deaths in Iraq for the penny to drop among the commentariat. The qualification anent "a very limited and controlled part of his brain" is the only element of that diagnosis which does not ring true. Blair is a complete flake: in any other avocation of society he would be a psychiatric couch potato. "Trust me, I’m a compulsive liar," is his Clinton-style pitch to the British electorate. For the Great Charlatan, who has charlatanry in his blood and bone, does not simply lie to get himself out of tough corners: he loves a good lie, just for the hell of it. Instance his claim, in a wireless interview in 1997, to have watched his "teenage hero" Jackie Milburn, of Newcastle United, from behind the goal at St James’s Park. As football fans quickly pointed out, Milburn had left Newcastle when Blair was four years old and there were no seats behind the goals until the 1990s. Yet Blair told this pointless porkie in the same year in which he became Prime Minister. Why? To make himself more blokeish; to share - if purely in his imagination - the experience of his constituency? So, how does one explain the inane lie that he told Des O’Connor about having stowed away at Newcastle airport on a flight for the Bahamas, when he was 14? In fact, no flight from Newcastle in those days ever went to the Bahamas, or even long-haul. This was a Richmal Crompton version of Blair: Just Tony. When a grown man indulges in such Walter Mitty fantasies, we can feel concern; when that man also has the power to unleash war, that concern becomes downright alarm. Blair has no apparent notion of the difference between truth and lies. We saw that from his earliest days in power - Bernie Ecclestone, et al - and then, more sinisterly, in the Iraq drama. Robin Cook has described how, on March 5, 2003, he told Blair that Saddam possessed no strategic weapons, only battlefield ordnance. Recently we have learned that, long before that, Jack Straw had warned Blair that chaos would result from any invasion. By the time Blair rose to mislead the House of Commons, intelligence that was "sporadic and patchy", "little" and "limited" had suddenly become "extensive, detailed and authoritative". Of course, the Great Charlatan does not want us to dwell on such morbid matters, so he has started to indulge in diversionary lectures on the moral vapidity of the 1960s, or the perils of global warming. Blair has become a saloon-bar bore, in the hope that public ennui will save him from the consequences of his war-mongering. That hope is vain. The taking hostage of British subjects, lured to Iraq by the government’s lies about growing stability, and increasing pressure on the garrison in Basra signal bad times ahead. The degree to which habitual lying has anæsthetised the Blairite spin doctors not only against truth, but any sense of irony, was illustrated last week when the Prime Minister’s spokesman insisted the government "will not negotiate with terrorists", while Blair was closeted at Chequers with Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness. That vignette of bland mendacity and self-deception shows how far Blair and his cronies have lost touch with reality. His war on the countryside is a further illustration of this. In the Blairite canon, it is unthinkable that rural Britain should defy and defeat Labour: ergo, it will not happen. Not half - just as Iraq is firmly under coalition control. Tony Blair is the megalomaniac self-delusionist who duped Britain into voting Labour in 1997. The hope of most delegates at Brighton is that, having served as a Trojan horse to reassure the voters of Middle Britain, he will soon leave the stage, so the Cro-Magnon Tendency can inherit the earth. Was ‘New’ Labour ever anything more than a vehicle for Blair and the gruesome clique of wine-bar spivs, entrepreneurs, control freaks and faddists around him to rape Britain? Obviously not; but neither was it particularly new. The Attlee/Cripps régime that devastated post-War Britain was less a government of horny-handed sons of toil than a centralising bureaucracy controlled by the real-life versions of Anthony Powell’s character Widmerpool, in A Dance to the Music of Time. Such an excrescence as Widmerpool would have fitted seamlessly into Blair’s New Labour imposture. As a cursory examination of the amoebic life forms at Brighton will confirm, this is not a political party so much as an infestation. A national fumigation is long overdue. If, like me, you share his sentiments, there are many more of his articles here. It is worth noting that his views do not entirely reconcile with mainstream Scottish political opinion. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> Subject: Dubya Humor Watch #2 | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 17:12:44 12/01/04 Wed Whether or not Mr President has someone to write his jokes for him, we can not deny that his speeches have some truly entertaining moments. I remember watching his speech at Buck House, just after David Blane had finished his 40 days' public starvation by Tower Bridge. "I understand that the last prominent American to visit London lived for a month in a glass box suspended over the Thames with no food," said Mr Bush. "I'm sure that many people in this city would be happy to make similar arrangements for me," he went on. "Well, they have a right to say that. They now have that right in Baghdad, too." Bravo Bush. Another of my favourites was his Thanksgiving speech in which he parodied the whole US election whilst talking about the turkey which he had just saved, clearly drawing a parallel between himself the lucky but ridiculous creature in the cage next to him. Look it up on the BBC website, if you can find it. Whatever one might feel about George W. Bush, can anyone honestly say that, e.g., Tony Blair has ever made us laugh with him? [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> Subject: and... | |
|
Author: Dave (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 17:54:02 12/01/04 Wed However, unlike Blair, some of his statements are unintentionally humorous ;-) [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> Subject: Another Duby classic | |
|
Author: Trixta (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 14:13:48 12/05/04 Sun On the subject... Pilfered (and paraphrased) from the Daily Record: Bush visits a school class in Florida (?) and sits in on the English class. The current topic is the definition of the word Tragedy, which Dubya gets to judge. Kid 1 steps forward and says that were he (the kid) to fall off his bike, this would be a tragedy. No, says Bush, that would be an accident. Kid 2 steps forward and says that were a busload of schoolkids to plunge into a ravine, that would be a tragedy. Not so, says Bush, that would be a great loss. Kid 3 steps forward and says that were Air Force One to crash into the ground, killing Mr. & Mrs. Pres. that would be a tragedy. Well done, says Bush. And why would that be a tragedy? he goes on to ask. Kid 3: Because it wouldn't be a great loss and probably wouldn't be an accident. :-) [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Something similar... | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 14:29:24 12/05/04 Sun I believe that Disraeli was once asked to distinguish between a misfortune and a calamity. Straight off the cuff, he said, "If Mr Gladstone were to fall into the Thames, that would be a misfortune. If someone were to pull him out again, that would be a calamity." [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> Subject: I first heard that joke told of former Brazilian president Fernando Henrique Cardoso | |
|
Author: Ian (Australia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 15:42:25 12/05/04 Sun [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |