Ooooh nooooo….Alistair is Morgan Stanley’s Darling
Little Osborne was at the Despatch Box this lunchtime CET, talking about “the lack of cooperation we are getting from Assad” the Syrian leader, adding, “which is of course why we want him out”.
Coming from a Government that has supposedly signed up to a ‘coalition’ against ISIL, sorry, sorry, Daesh, this seems an extraordinary thing to say, given that the Number One objective of ISIL is also to, er, get Assad out.
In fact, the totality of UK/US perfidy in Syria is now becoming pretty clear. Not long ago I posted about a supposed leak claiming that the US, UK and Turkey are at the same game – that is, their own interests – under the the guise they share called NATO.
It now appears even more certain that the UK is bombing oilfields alread targeted by a few US and myriad Russian strike bombers; these were allegedly abandoned by ISIL forces some time ago. In doing so, the British government is keeping on the right side of both the Americans and the Turks.
As for the Americans themselves, I understand that aerial photography by the Assad régime has established that at least 35% of the bombing raids there this week have attacked Syrian government forces and infrastructure. It is further alleged that Turkey’s blatant trespass into Iraqi territory ‘to defend our supporters against ISIL’ is nothing of the kind. Turkish officers have been liaising with ISIL forces there, and new covert routes to supply ISIL are being established. The Anglo-American axis is, for the time being at least, turning a blind eye to the duplicitous assistance being given to its enemy’s enemy by Ankara. But come the final decision about pipeline routes, something is going to have to give.
‘Gesture’ military action is everywhere when it comes to Syria. Even the German media have been giving geliebte Mutti a hammering about their Mussolini-style decision to join in at the last minute:
‘Has the the Federal German Government and the Federal Ministry of Defence the faintest idea what an army is actually there for? Germany, December 2015: the migrant crisis has evolved into a bona fide political crisis. The law, as it now stands under the Federal Republic of Germany, is acutely threatened because the government and the executive authority have lost control over the country’s borders, and they’ve lost control over who has access to German territory. Any government still in its right mind would enact emergency and civil protection measures in order to regain control of the situation…..This is not the Merkel government. It clearly doesn’t know what to do with such terms and basic principles. The government uses the German army (Bundeswehr) for its symbolic politics, then expects them to do more badly thought out, spontaneous assignments far away from Germany’s borders, when the army is already underfunded….’
Change the odd name here and there, and this could have been something We the NVEs of Britain put out two weeks ago.
Having made my limbo-low opinion of 97% of what Donald Trump says clear in previous columns, I make no apology now for saying that those who want to ban him from Britain are, as Claude Rains famously said, “the usual suspects” – and just as bad as he is. I don’t like bans: I’ve always felt the word is probably short for bananas. I also spent three years at Uni looking on in horror as the student body banned one harmless eccentric – or even worse, seer – after another. I’m still watching Anglo-American students doing it today. The only difference from half a century ago is that today, such hysterics need counselling to help them get over the trauma of somebody expressing uncertainty with the liberal agenda and its illogical views about “settled science”, gender and a host of other long-since discredited ideas.
Oddly enough, my beef with Trump is different to that of most people when it comes to the ‘Muslim ban’ thing. His idea is so archetypally US-élite driven, it brings me close to rage: “I know, let’s screw up an entire Mediterranean region spanning two continents, and then lock out everyone whose lives got messed up because of it”. But we are where we are, and I’m afraid I think his view will be the majority one in a few years time.
However, while he mouths off and gets trounced by US liberals holding crucifixes up to ward off the Bull Elephant, observe what the States there are doing behind your back:
Quite a majority, that one.
As if trying to convince us of our incipient insanity, the Maily Torygraph reports today that 83% of its readers think the Corbynista Labour Party is ‘a fringe movement’. Given it just won the Oldham by-election with an increased share of the vote, the Teletubbies of Sark perhaps need to rethink who the deranged folks are. But as a comms specialist, I would advise the Jeremies not to advertise in the Telegraph when looking to recruit new members.
Wading into the fray yet again, the most successful and only rock star Liberal Party leader of Labour Mr Tony Bluuurrgh wrote (in that socialist firebrand magazine The Spectator) this week that CorbyLabour “not only isn’t getting the answers we need, it isn’t even asking the right questions any more”.
So in deference to Moral Tone, I thought I’d line up some questions the Blairites will never ask, the answers to which we will never be given:
1. Why did Tony sell the Northern Rock deposit book to JP Morgan (with whom he has a 7-figure contract) and leave us the UK taxpayers to pick up the tab for the toxic mortgage book?
2. Why has Tony never been indicted for blatantly lying to this country’s Sovereign Body about the WOMD danger to Britain from Sadam Hussein?
3. When is the Chilcot Report into the Iraqi War going to appear, and will it include the recorded fact that Gordon Brown lied to the Enquiry about the budgets he gave UK soldiers in order to fight the War?
4. As Mr Blair stands accused of perverting the course of Justice on the question of arms sales to corrupt members of the Saudi Royal Family (a mafia operation still bankrolling Islamist atrocities on a grand scale) at what point will the Metropolitan Police apprehend and charge him with this alleged crime?
5. Can Tony Blair explain why, in 2006, he was adamant one day at 9.30am that he would never let Gordon Brown take over at Number Ten, but then two hours later – ashen faced – he confessed to Labour MP Frank Field that he had done that very thing?
All these things were done and then covered up behind our backs. But now here’s a new one, hot off the presses: for the Chancellor who followed Gordon Brown-Banknose – Alistair Darling – has just signed a contract with banking firm Morgan Stanley.
Just think of the possibilities for British power in all this: a relatively simple merger between JP and Stanley could produce a new force in banking affairs to rival The Elders of Goldman-Saxburg. Working name Blair Morgan Darling, it could yet restore Queen Elizabeth II as Empress of America and Queen of all the Anglophones.
So yes, oddball Daily Barclaygaffe, Labour may be a fringe movement….but where are the Teletubbies when it comes to questions and answers? Why, somewhere on the Channel Island of Onan, methinks.