Thursday, August 16, 2012

A simple question for British readers

First Blair, now Cameron. My British friends, aren't you sick of being led by politicians who continually bow to Washington?

We used to be your colony.

Oh...and for my readers who still blindly worship at the altar of Hillary:
There is no question in my mind that President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have pressured British Prime Minister David Cameron into taking this step. The Obama administration’s reaction to the Wikileaks release of State Department cables with a relatively low level of classification has been astonishingly wrong-headed. The Pentagon Papers case in the 1970s established the principle that the US government had a right to try to keep its documents secret from us, but that if the documents were revealed, they could be freely published and cited by the public. In contrast, the current stance of the US government is that classified documents remain classified and US government property even if they have been published!
joseph; What are they thinking? What kind of pressure can the State Dept put on the Brits. Murray leaves the impression his sources are suggesting the storming may yet, occur.

What the Fuck?

The winners are never tried for their war crimes, Bush, Cheney and Obama will walk. Hillary can say she was just following orders.
One can worship and still not believe they are never wrong. The difference is, OBAMA IS A BANKER.


OBAMA IS A BANKER. I don't want a banker for president. Yes, Romney is the CEO of Bankers.
To answer your question - the issue of US dominance over the UK is never seriously raised here. British troops are in Afghanistan, and that's that. It does not behoove the lower orders to question why. Bear in mind that most people watch images of Americans shooting people every day. There is complete cultural dominance, which is also not questioned. The US is rarely portrayed in news media here as a foreign country. They often refer to 'the president' etc., and they don't mean Hollande, Putin, Gauck or Higgins. You are probably aware that the CIA Head of Station attends the weekly meetings of the top UK intelligence body, the Joint Intelligence Committee. It's a protectorate. Sadly there is no drift among people who were previously supportive or apathetic towards opposition to US domination. The position isn't recognised, and the question isn't asked.
John Michael Greer has an interesting take on our relations with Great Britain. (

"The potential war aims of any of Britain’s early 20th century rivals are easy enough to imagine or, for that matter, to look up. First, the British Empire would have been dismantled, such portions of it as the conquering nation wanted would have been seized, other parts would have been allowed self-government under the overall control of the new imperial power, and a few token colonies would be left under British control where that suited the conqueror’s interests. Second, the British government would become a permanent and subordinate ally of the new imperial power. Third, Britain’s military would have been reduced to a fraction of its previous size, and the British government would be obligated to provide troops and ships to support the new imperial power when the latter decided on a military adventure. Fourth, Britain would be expected to pay a large sum of money as reparations for the costs of the war. Finally, to guarantee all these things, the British government would have been forced to accept an occupying force in Britain, and permanent military bases would be signed over to the new imperial power in Britain and its remaining colonies. That, by and large, is what happened to defeated nations in the wars of the 19th and 20th centuries."

"Now compare that list to the relations between Great Britain and the United States from 1945 to the present. That’s the thing that can’t be mentioned to this day in polite company: the British empire ended in the early 1940s when the United States conquered and occupied Britain."
Im incensed by it. One of the reasons i moved backto the us is i saw no point being in a country that couldnt or wouldnt protect me froman obviously corrupt foreign power. Im safer in the us.

The point is that the uk is weak and needs america to live. Our banks need access to american markets. Our rich would be poor if america willed it. So they do whatever you ask and hope to curry favor with a madman. Pointless.

Dont they realise that the current pres hates them for the colonoial past, even as he loves hahanging out with bankers now?

Craig murray has an interesting comment which you have probably already seen

Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?