Thursday, May 31, 2007

International Statesman and nutter meet in Libya

Tony Blair, on his tour of Africa met with Colonel Muammar Gaddafi in the Libyan desert yesterday.

Now the big question is, who is the deluded nutter and who the statesman?

The Telegraph has this.
Posted by at

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

False premise ~ they're both deluded nutters ;-)

1:44 am, May 31, 2007
Benedict White said...

Harry, "False premise ~ they're both deluded nutters ;-) "

Sugar! (or words to that effect) I had forgotten that combination!

1:50 am, May 31, 2007
Anonymous said...

I like that deluded nutters ,can I add two more that should be with them ,Cameron and Osborne ,I think they have lost us the next GE .

11:16 am, May 31, 2007
Anonymous said...

"Cameron and Osborne ,I think they have lost us the next GE."
I would disagree, I think that the electoral mountain we have to climb to win the next GE can be squarely blamed on the "usual suspects". They seem to think that we should run a right wing debating society instead of a united, effective opposition party which appeals to a wider audience.
They would like to see Cameron and Osborne fail because they do not wish to see the leadership emboldened beyond their control by a GE win.

11:26 am, May 31, 2007
Anonymous said...

chris d,

Spot on.

5:02 pm, May 31, 2007
Anonymous said...

Cameroon is a wuzz
Hug a hoodie.
Snog a jihadi.
No policies, no Honesty.
He'll do anything for a vote.
A shallow vote whore

7:56 pm, May 31, 2007
Benedict White said...

Anonymous, With regret I am unable to agree with you.

ChrisD and Marquee Mark, absolutely.

Erik forgive me, but if you would like a clue on what "hug a hoodie" actually means, could I refer you to an article I prepared much earlier here:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2006/07/hugging-hoodies.html
or
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2006/07/hugging-hoodies-part-ii.html
and indeed
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2006/11/hugging-hoodies-part-iii-tough-love-and.html
of you could read a whole series on youth crime here:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/search/label/Youth%20Crime

1:03 am, June 01, 2007
Anonymous said...

bennie baby, don't you know how to post links?
What makes you think that because I don't link through your site, that I am un-aware of hugging hoodies facts?
For Chr--t sake man, change the habit of a lifetime, - - break away from the banal responses.
"deluded nutters", "prats", and other idiotic denunciations of political opposites bespeak of shallow thinking, lack, (even disregard) of facts and logical thinking.
There is absolutely NO COHERENCE in current conservative thinking on any major issue.
The future of the UK is umbilically tied to an extreme left leaning, undemocratically governed collection of foul thinking despots, who are giving away 2000 years of cultural developement, in favour of ...Eurabia administered by stealth, deceit, lies, obfustication, where details of nation destroying significance are well hidden underneath thousands, nay millions of deceitfull words.
Our politicians, media, press, etc refuse to even mention what is actually going-on underneath the veneer.They, AND YOU AND CAMEROON are guilty of lieing by ommision concerning these facts.
The "conceit", as Hayek would have called it, and incidently prophecied, will ruin a block of 350million people and condemn them to a future of restricted thought, delineated thinking patterns/expressions, poverty, and submission.
WHERE ARE YOUR POLICIES THAT RELATE TO THESE STATEMENTS? WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO GO BEFORE THE ELECTORATE AND EXPLAIN WHAT IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING? MAN, ARE YOU BLIND TO THE REALITIES OF TODAY, TO THE CANCER EATING AWAY AT OUR SOCIETY?, OF THE NONSENSE AND LIES SPOUTING FROM STATE FINANCED BBC?, BRUSSELS, STRASBOURG, ETC, ETC
I have gven you isolated information to illustrate this, I have asked you questions relating to this, and other points. - - WELL?
Do you have a policy?
Where do the conservatives sit on these questions?
Or is the answer, as usual "on our fat, lazy, go along with it because it's too complicated and the electorate won't understand it, pimpled, arses"??????

8:37 am, June 02, 2007
Anonymous said...

In dictatorships, you need courage to fight evil; in the free world, you need courage to see the evil."
—Natan Sharansky

Where is your courage and your spectacles, Benny?
What sort of world do you want?
Or is the answer the mass migration of thinking people that is currently gaining strength.
Is that what it comes down to?
To Cameroon, and you, and all like you, - sound bites and photo ops are just bullshit.
POLICIES, POLICIES, POLICIES. AND THEIR IMPLEMENTATION ARE WHAT MATTER.
Cameroon, and almost the entire party are a joke. You toady up to the current Gov't's idiotic ideologies and wooly thinking.
You all consistantly fail to speak out, even when given the opportunity by al-bbc.
Al-bbc, and al-guardian are currently calling the shots!
Are you afraid to speak out?, or is current legislation curtailing your right to free speech and the free expression of you views?, as it is mine.
Sheesh You just don't cut it!

11:27 am, June 02, 2007
Anonymous said...

Erik - Two superb posts. Bat Ye'or and Oriana Fallaci both have discussed the agreement between the Europeans and Arabs 50 years ago for a Eurabia to develop - without the peoples of Britain and Europe ever having a say, or ever even being told there is an issue and an agenda.

You say to Benedict, "You toady up to the current Gov't's idiotic ideologies and wooly thinking." This government isn't capable of woolly thinking on this subject, unless by "government" you mean the dimwitted inepts Tessa Jowell, Patricia Hewitt, Harriet Harmon, Margaret Beckett, Patricia Hodge, etc. They are window dressing. Soothing. Non-threatening. Rather stupid. Complacent.

The real government is, and has been for 10 years, Tony Blair and Peter Mandelson. There is not a department that Blair doesn't have a shadow executive running out of Downing St, including the MoD.

I don't know whether Gordon Brown is on this. But the engines of "New" Labour and its execution are Tony Blair and Mandelson. And fat Cherie.

And this knowledge, indeed, may be what John Prescott has that has given him such a secure grip on Tony Blair for 10 years.

9:23 pm, June 02, 2007
Anonymous said...

Thanks, Verity.
Yes, I am familiar with the authors you mention, and probably a dozen more.
I have linked to a collection of fjordman on this blog, and others, but failed to elicit any response.
The carthaginian fields of Zana will shortly be transported to leicester, coventry, sheffield, leeds, bradford, luton, dewsbury, bolton, manchester, and many areas of londonistan.
Questions are
1) Who will be the romans, and who the carthaginians?
2)Will we still be local to see it, or will we have voted with our feet??
The current selection processes that give rise to politicians are very poor at selecting candidates remotely suited to national responsibilities. It would seem the prime qualification, on anything other than the rank banal, is the ability to smile, shake your hand, look you in the eye, while lying through their teeth, on every subject!!

10:08 pm, June 02, 2007
Anonymous said...

Fjordman is eagle-eyed, astute and writes like an angel. He is wonderful.

I voted with my feet when Blair got in. I had been living overseas and had moved back, I hoped permanently, to Britain. And then I saw Tony Blair on my mother's TV and I knew immediately that he would get in. And that he would have a very malevolent influence. It took me a couple of years to organise it, but I was out of the country as soon as was practicable.

Understanding that the government is never going to respond to them, because their wishes are not on its agenda, 3.5 million others have also gone, and the juggernath is rolling. These are all people who were able to find employment, and able to qualify for permission to reside, in their new countries.

Little by little, what will be left is the welfare consuming dregs and the "settlers". There will come a time, if Labour gets back in, that intelligent, educated, income-producing people who wish to leave permanently will be required to get an emigrant visa. This will be because the government can't afford any more diminution of tax revenues. They will be required to leave a certain amount of their capital in Britain and only move the whole thing out over some extended span.

After that, if there is no revolution, people packing up and leaving won't be allowed to take the proceeds of selling their house out of the country because they need the money for the welfare voters.

The only hope for Britain is a military coup. And, I'm sorry to say, the Queen doesn't have the nerve to endorse it. Charles wants to be Defender of Faith, so he's out.

Sauve qui peu!

10:44 pm, June 02, 2007
Anonymous said...

Verity, interesting your comments on charlie boy.
here are a few links to read Some are good, some not.
You are probably aware of them.

11:02 pm, June 02, 2007
Anonymous said...

Erik - I've seen all this excited speculation in the American media before because they do not understand that British royalty gets its power from its position as Defender of The Faith - of the Anglican church.

It's all moronic, ill-informed nonsense and I can't be bothered to plod through it.

You write of my "comments on charlie boy". Not "comments". I made one comment on HRH Prince Charles,which is that he naively wants inclusivity with the Church of England for a religion he does not understand. The reason he doesn't understand it is, it has been "explained" to him by people with an agenda who are skilled in taqqya and kitman and flattery.

Anyone with half an eye for human nature can see that Prince Charles is a deeply conservative soul who just wants everyone to get fair dos.

Of course he has appeared in Middle Eastern get ups. He wears leis in Hawaii and bone necklaces and funny hats among various African tribes. He has a go at joining in tribal dances. He tries to demonstrate that he does not feel "above" anyone, which is rather sweet.

That he wants to be the Defender of Faith is part of his desire for inclusivitiy. Obsessive focus by the American media on this idiotic construct detracts from the real agenda, which has nothing to do with the Royal Family: Eurabia.

This will be to the advantage of the Peter Mandelsons, Tony Blairs and their French, Spanish and Italian cohorts. My own belief - I will be interested in your thoughts - is that it is part of the construct that Mitterand had, of les deux rives de France.

Why France would want the Magreb is another question, but I don't know the answer.

11:44 pm, June 02, 2007
Anonymous said...

Thanks for your posts, Verity. They raise some interesting points that I am looking at.
Meanwhile, you say
Little by little, what will be left is the welfare consuming dregs and the "settlers". There will come a time, if Labour gets back in, that intelligent, educated, income-producing people who wish to leave permanently will be required to get an emigrant visa. This will be because the government can't afford any more diminution of tax revenues. They will be required to leave a certain amount of their capital in Britain and only move the whole thing out over some extended span.

After that, if there is no revolution, people packing up and leaving won't be allowed to take the proceeds of selling their house out of the country because they need the money for the welfare voters.
Such regulations, in the current global economy, would firmly establish this country as a neo-communist banana republic, given current international capital flows into the city, etc, etc, and takes a stretch of the imagination.
Do you have any knowledge, or links to support these statements. I would be most interested to see them.
Of some interest to me on a personal level, as I am seeking, in the medium term, to re-locate to a more amenable regime, is the location of your residential choice in order to avoid the predations of life in Blairshire/Eurabia.
I'll come back later on your other interesting points, as today involves family.
E

11:47 am, June 03, 2007
Anonymous said...

Erik - No. I have no inside knowledge of any kind, but I have a folk memory of a time when Brits were only allowed to take £50 out of the country (and hoteliers on the Continent would cringe when they saw them coming because they knew they had no money). I do not even know if this was under a Labour or Conservative government. But Britain needed the money in Britain. And if such rigid, punitive fiscal controls were necessary once, they could become so again, especially now the dependency community is so much larger.

I can see this happening again. Many people who are selling up are successful professionals. Their houses will be worth over half a million pounds. If a 500 of these people are going every month, that's 250m pounds leaving the country every month. Times 12, it soon adds up. That's a big drain when you're running the largest and most wasteful health service in the world - free to all - and have tens of thousands of "settlers" with four or five children each all on child allowances and all needing school places, besides the lazy, feckless indigenes and, most tragic, our pensioners.

This may be a naive assumption on my part, but I wouldn't like to chance it. Not bearing in mind the duplicity of the socialists and, probably, the copycat-socialists known as the Conservatives.

In answer to your question, yes, I ran from Blairshire, socialism with all its arrogant assumptions of control over the population, a generation of children who were destined to grow into loutish, unemployable adults, the intentional diminution of my culture, the breakdown in our civil society and the people too whipped by harshly applied political correctness, the soft term for Thought Fascism, to object - etc.

3:32 pm, June 03, 2007
Anonymous said...

The origins and initial progress of Eurabia are set out in this link

here, and explain, in part, the reasons.

Wikipedia has this to say, and adds facts not contained in the above link

here, and also has this on Bat Ye’or

here

You aroused my interest by including the Maghreb, and the “Twin Banks of France” comment, - which I took to mean the north and south coasts of the Mediterranean, and pondered the reason for French desires for the Maghreb.

No analysis of links to the Maghreb would be complete without a look at the life of Charles De Gaul

here and in particular the time spent there after WW11 in Algeria, during the rebellion.

This link throws a little more light on those times

here

Wikipedia has this to say about the maghreb
here



The main reason for French interest in the Maghreb, other than national pride, which featured highly in the early days, is clearly the vast oil and gas reserves, particularly in Algeria, where currently al-Qeda is focussing it’s fight to destabilize the country.

here

here

The British were interested in the area, for the same reason.

here

But before finalising on the Maghreb, let us return to Eurabia.

Given the background of a duplicitous EEC in the ‘70s, we mustn’t forget former French President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, and his invitation to a genocidal maniac, Ayatollah Khomeini to reside in France.

here and plan the Iranian revolution. Iran is now one of the global exporter of State sponsored terrorism.

d’Estaing is the very man who created the much hated constitution, which will now be visited on the heads, hearts, and wallets of the EU population,

here

through the back door of lies and deceit.
here

A more complete “Eurabia Code” by Fjordman, a story of lies and deceit concerning Eurabia can be found at this link.
here
and a complete Fjordman archive, updated regularly, can be found here.
here

The original concept of the EU block was as a three part balance, - Europe/eurabia, USA, USSR. With the fall of the USSR, Europe, and particularly France, substituted China as the replacement in the overall strategy to undermine the USA.
here

And China certainly learned from the experience.

here

Throughout this period the deception continued

here

here

and there are thousands of other articles.

To return to the Maghreb, the knot around the throat of the EU population tightens. Or does it?

The newly elected Sarkozi has proposed a Mediterranean bloc

here

Far larger than the orginal 2 banks of France.

Reaction in the Maghreb to the election of Sarkozi has been mixed

here

The significant point in his Med proposals is the inclusion of Israel. Is this a break from the recent French policy of seeking to criminalise and marginalise Israel at every opportunity, or another emerging tactic designed to give more of the same.

Is this the beginning of the end of the crazy Eurabia attempt? Has sanity returned to the body politic?
Will we be able to rapidly pick up the pieces, before demographics take over the situation?
Does this mark a move to the right for European thinking, and the EU body politic?
Will proposals of this Group finally be taken seriously?

here
Meanwhile Saudi continues to fund Sunni extremism and education throughout the World, absent any sanctions.

1:32 am, June 04, 2007
Anonymous said...

I have absolutely no interest in 99m links. I read blogs for commentary by fellow informed bloggers.

2:14 am, June 04, 2007
Anonymous said...

Erik - I do apologise for being short with you, but I have moved away. I still care about the future of my country, although it is no longer recognisably my country, but if Europe wants to turn into Eurabia, who cares? I only care about the fortunes of Britain and hope they can somehow be turned around - although with Cameron next up to bat, I despair.

The coarsening of Britain is truly distressing, as is the vandalism of our wonderful history. I supposed nothing lasts forever and perhaps the Romans who were the sad witnesses to the decline of Rome felt the same way. They too must have asked themselves, "How did it happen?"

I do not see a recovery during the next 50 years or so, and by then it will be too late.

Again, I apologise for not reading your links, but I've read it all before.

5:14 pm, June 04, 2007
Anonymous said...

No problem, Verity.
I enjoyed the exercise.
A good few of the links, I had already book-marked, but the Maghreb angle was new, and interesting.
Perhaps with Sarkozi there may be hope.
Certain threats today, made against female journalists, in the "occupied territories" may finally convince the left of the truth that confronts them.
Then again maybe they won't. (sigh)
I hope, where-ever you are, life is pleasant, and you are prospering.
Maybe we'll meet again
E

7:02 pm, June 04, 2007

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)