Independent

Yup, that pretty much sums it up...

I want to see him hanged for treason if Prince Harry so much as gets a splinter. Do you think Brenda might wax wrathful and engage a few of her ancient privileges? It could be declared a public holiday with ice-cream and ritual flagellation of cabinet ministers.

Flagellation is too good for Geoff Hoon. He should be boiled in treacle until almost dead, then be nursed to recovery in a chemically induced coma until the next year. Repeat until he dies, then start on his kids.

If "Yes, Minister" and "Yes, Prime Minister" are at all accurate and if Blair is as much a victim of the Corporatocracy as are American leaders, then I think you might not want to put all the blame on Blair. It seems he was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. I'd place at least some of the blame on those who advise him, since they are more tied in to the interests of the World Bank and hence the contracts which come from the conquest of resource-rich countries, etc.

Really, if you get a chance, do read, "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" by John Perkins. I have one signed copy left if you want me to send it to you. His next book is coming out soon, too, "The Secret History of the American Empire." I'll be in line for that one, too, and I'll be talking with him about it as soon as we both have the time...probably after one of his local book-signings.

There's also always the book, "When Corporations Rule the World" which came out long before Perkins' book.

Blair really led from the front (well, from up Bush's bottom anyway) on Iraq, and obviously wished to be personally associated with the glorious vistory of Democracy over The Beast. There's strong evidence that the Prime Minister's office span, if not actually tampered with, intelligence to strengthen the case for war, so I'm happy to afford him responsibility for the bloody consequences of his folly.

It's interesting to consider whether British politics is as dominated by the corporations as in the US. I'm sure they exert a strong influence: the recent case in which the Attorney General (and Blair's best mate) Lord Goldsmith stopped the Serious Fraud Office investigation into accusations that BAE offered bribes to receive Saudi arms contracts demonstrates that. Blair's relationship with Murdoch is another case in point.

But I don't think the culture is quite as pervasive as in the US. Furthermore, if parliament does agree a sane cap on election spending, then that influence will decline.

I've been intending to pick up 'Confessions' as soon as my 'to read' pile goes down to, say five books.

I think "Yes, Minister" and "Yes, Prime Minister" is surprisingly accurate, and covers topics still very relavent today, ID cards, Europe, Wars, Road Funding, NHS spending etc etc

and I do think it's a case of; the most devious bastard in a given situation will uasually outwit the rest to get his way, reguardless of the people's best interest

Are you saying Blair is the most devious bastard in this situation?

I'll be interested to know if a sane cap actually IS placed on election spending in the UK, and I'd be pleasantly surprised if it is. Please let me know.

 

I don't think we'll get anywhere with it here. There is just too much power in the corporations, now, even more so since the time they were allowed to be considered as individuals by law, which really screwed things up. Sorry to be so vague about it, my understanding of it is more conceptual, and my memory of the details hazy, I just know that the decision gave corporations even more power to do ridiculous things for their own benefit without regard to others.

 

The USA went through great lengths to avoid a monarchy, placing many safeguards in the constitution, etc, but did not foresee the advent of huge, greedy corporations so the rules just don't apply, and now everything the US tried to safeguard against has come true tenfold, only the "monarchy" are the world's corporate heads.