The lie continuum
Why do politicians feel the need to lie about things the public doesn’t really care about anyway– especially when the Internet lets the whole world know about a lie immediately?
Case in point…
Everyone knows that England’s MI6 has been negotiating with the Taliban for many months in places like the outskirts of Lashkah Gah, and villages in the Upper Gereshk valley, Afghanistan. When the House of Commons asked Prime Minister Gordon Brown about this on 12 December, Brown said MI6 is not negotiating with the Taliban. ( Another source. And yet another source. It’s all over the Internet)
When more reports came out, Brown told Parliament, "Let me repeat —we are not negotiating with the (Taliban) leadership, and we do not propose to do so.”
Why does he lie so blatantly?
Some people think Brown lied out of fear of angering the Cheney regime. Recently the puppet Karzai government ordered a top European Union official and a United Nations staff member out of Afghanistan for negotiating with the Taliban. The Cheney regime said they were “threatening national security.”
But surely the Cheney regime knows what MI6 is doing in Afghanistan.
So why does Gordon Brown lie?
My theory: this is what happens when arrogance and incompetence appear in the same moron. Bush, for example, insisted that the National Security Agency was not spying on Americans. When Bush was proven a liar, he said he was proud of the program, and would continue it. The more incompetent he becomes, the more arrogant he becomes, and vice-versa.
"F**k you."
Then there’s Gordon Brown. Before he became Prime Minister in June 07, he was praised for efficiency because he always came up with money to keep the war going in Iraq and Afghanistan. Now his incompetence is front-page news in England, and is focused on the procedures of the Treasury, plus the incompetence of Alistair Darling (Brown's new Chancellor of the Exchequer).
Brown’s response?
“F**k you.”
The first thing he did when he became Prime Minister was to grant full independence to the Bank of England – so now it’s more like the U.S. Federal Reserve than ever.
Then came the Northern Rock banking debacle, which Brown placed on the shoulders of everyone. All Britons must bail out Northern Rock. Brown involved the Bank Of England, the Financial Services authority, and the Treasury.
Translation: the Bank of England is “independent” as long as it’s making a profit (like the U.S. Fed). If it loses money, or encounters difficulties, it’s not the Bank's problem, it's taxpayers' problem. The Bank is given absolute power, and when the Bank screws up, the people bail it out. Just like the U.S. Fed.
F**k you.
Then the Labour government somehow “lost” the personal financial data for about half of Britain’s citizens. Two disks that were not encrypted were put in the regular mail and “disappeared.” The British banking industry issued a security alert recommending that people immediately change any passwords associated with family member names.
People complain when their life savings are at risk, their personal identity / security is compromised, and their tax dollars are used as bailout money for bad decisions in the private sector. Brown’s approval rating is now at about 28 percent.
F**k you.
The Labour Party has held power since 1997 -- a long time by British standards. Unfortunately England won’t have another major election until 2009, which will be long enough for the sub-prime nightmare to hit everyone. .
England…get ready for another 7-7 false flag subway attack in 2008.
The Labour Party will need it.
Shortly after that in Australia, Kevin Rudd was elected Prime Minister and wasted no time in doing exactly the same thing for the Reserve Bank of Australia.