Tony Blair's speech LABOUR PARTY R.I.P.

Tony Blair's speech LABOUR PARTY R.I.P.

An analysis, commentary and discussion of Tony Blair's speech at the
Labour Party Conference 2005.

A very long article. The HIGHLIGHTS can act as an index (search the document for words or phrases from the HIGHLIGHTS). A DISCUSSION appears at the end. It may be worth reading the HIGHLIGHTS and DISCUSSION and heading into the main text for extended comments on an issue of interest.



HIGHLIGHTS (can also be used as an index)

By insisting that he clings onto power as long as possible, Blair has condemned the Labour party. Labour Party R.I.P.

Blair presents the concept of "our values" suggesting Labour Party unity "from Dennis Skinner through to Tony Blair." "our values" includes solidarity, social justice, tolerence and respect. These claims are disputed. The Labour Party does not have unity through shared values and argument and examples are presented showing that Bliar does not display the claimed values.

Blair claims to have won the "battle of values". The claim is disputed at length.

Blair continues by claiming that "the British people share these values". The claim is disputed.

Blair signals an attack on the welfare state in true Thatcherite fashion.

Hypocrite Blair states that "global warming is too serious for the world any longer to ignore its danger or split into opposing factions on it" while joining Dubya's opposing faction that ignores global warming.

Bliar suggests that "countries like ours [cannot] allow the security of our energy supplies [to] be dependent on some of the most unstable parts of the world".

Blair is caught lying when he claims to support international climate change agreements. This claim is directly contradicted by Blair's speech at the Clinton Global Initiative in New York. Pants on fire.

Bliar proposes that there is no need to debate globalisation since it is inevitable. Blair shows his adoration of unrestrained Capatalism.

Blair claims to have resolved pensioner poverty. Pants on fire.

Blair spins top-up fees.

Blair has trouble counting.

Blair claims that he wishes he had gone further with all his reforms. This statement exposes Blair as a Fascist since his anti-terrorism laws are excessively authoritarian.

Blair praises the privatisation of UK schools by enrepaneurs and Evangalists.

Blair discusses his 'respect agenda'.

Blair proposes that allowing law-abiding people to live in safety requires that innocent law-abiding people are wrongly convicted or executed as in the case of Jean Charles de Menezes.

Danger: Blair intends to outflank the judiciary by creating a new tier in the criminal justice system.

Bliar claims that "politics is the answer. Not terror." This is countered since Blair's terrorism laws are routinely used against political activists and politics can be terrorism under Blair's anti-terorist laws. The Bliar is silencing dissent. Includes examples.

Blair evades the facts that he is enthusiastic in his support of Dubya, the Neo-Con Christian-Zionists and the Project for the New American Century and discusses a film instead.

The Bliar suggests that the reason for the Iraq war was regime change. Countered that Bliar & Co claimed that it was to remove alleged and non-existent weapons of mass destruction. Remember them? Also quotes PNAC document "the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.(p14)

Basra. USUK must end the brutal occupation of Iraq.

Blair suggests that Islamists were responsible for the London explosions of July 7, 2005. Our analysis suggests otherwise and we have some supporting evidence. The evidence is not disclosed.

Blair suggests a non-existant connection between 911 and invading Iraq.

Blair claims to act against gloobal warming. Hypocrite.

Blair claims to "fight behind the standard of democracy" in Afghanistan and Iraq. There is no intention for Iraq to move to democracy. UK is undermining the transition to 'democracy' / Western Capatalism in Iraq through the use of unlawful combatant terrorists. There is not, and never has been an exit strategy because USUK does not intend to exit.

Blair says he's now grown-up.

Bliar warns the Labour Party not to accuse him of betrayal or question his integrity or motives.

Happy-clappy Catholic-Protestant tolerant-intolerant Blair plays to the Christians by using the US Evangelical term 'change-maker'.





Blair's speech [commented]

Thank you for the hard work, faith and courage that means I stand before you as the first leader in the Labour Party's history to win three full consecutive terms in office.

[The General election showed without any doubt that Tony Blair is a liability to the Labour Party. Blair avoided meeting the public to avoid showing the strength of hatred against him. He took to visiting schools where he was 'boomed' (spin for booed) and took to appearing with Gordon Brown toward the end of the election campaign to give the impression that Gordon Brown would soon be taking over.

The Labour Party was returned to government with a vastly reduced majority and many marginal seats. The illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq emerged as an election issue despite Labour's attempts to "move on". By insisting that he clings onto power as long as possible, Blair has condemned the Labour party.

Labour Party R.I.P.]


Amid all the change and progress since our first election victory,
it was interesting to see in the film there the pictures of the
Good Friday Agreement in April 1998, and then finally, yesterday,
the completion of IRA decommissioning.

It has taken many years, and a lot of hard work, but every minute of
every hour of every all-night negotiation will have been worth it if
it brings lasting peace to Northern Ireland.

And there is a lesson from Northern Ireland. Nothing good comes
easy. And in Government, whatever the noise around you, you just have
to persevere with the things that really matter.

The question now:

How do we secure the future

For our party and

For our country?

The answer lies in understanding why we can celebrate these victories.

New Labour was never just a clever way to win.

It was a fundamental re-casting of progressive politics so that the values we believed in, became relevant to the time we lived in.

[New Labour is a mix of Thatcherism and doing absolutely anything to keep Blair in power.]


The world is on the move again: the change in the early 21st century even greater than that of the late 20th century.

So now in turn, we have to change again. Not step back from New Labour but step up to a new mark a changing world is setting for us.

The danger of government is fatigue; the benefit, experience.

I tell you my conclusion after 8 years of being Prime Minister.

The challenge we face is not in our values. It is how we put them into practice in a world fast forwarding to the future at unprecedented speed.

[Blair does not yet define "our values". "fast forwarding to the future at unprecedented speed" is a strange phrase. It is not accepted that the speed of change has increased. Is Bliar finding it difficult to keep up?]

Over these eight years we have won the battle of values.

[What battle of values? Bliar's values are Neo-Con and similar to Thatcher. When was this battle of values Bliar claims to have won? Certainly not at the general election because the War Party's vote was hugely reduced. Not in the Iraq war because huge opposition was shown by the UK electorate. Bliar & co lost the Iraq war argument absolutely. We knew full well that there were no WMDs and that USUK were desperate to take go to war. Blair lied and lied and lied to support the Neo-Cons in their lust for war and destruction.

Blair & Co have not even won the battle of values inside the Labour Party. The conference defeated Bliar & Co on supportive action, privatising the NHS and pensions. Bliar' response - "We'll just ignore that." The Labour Party conference does not create policy. That's done by the Blair dictatorship. Labour Party members only function now is to clap Il Duce & Co.

So what are Blair's "our values". I suppose it must be Fascism, taking part in illegal, unnecessary and unprovoked wars for the Christian-Zionist Neo-Cons, slaughtering tens of thousands of innocent civilians, the use of depleted uranium and cluster bombs, severe restrictions on civil rights.

McLabour have never ever won this "battle of values". They have done what the they like with a total disregard for the law, the Labour Party or the electorate's desires and repeatedly evaded responsibility and accountability for their actions. Blair's a sick puppy trying to suggest that he has any morality.]

The age we live in is democratic not deferential.

[That's just bullshit. This statement applies globally and not only to UK. Later in his speech Blair applauds the low labour costs in China of all places. So where is the democracy in China, Iraq, Indonesia, Uzbekistan, Colombia and hundreds of other places. Rather than there being democracy globally, Blair and the UK government is a force against democracy World-wide. The UK's support of torture through use of evidence gained through torture, it's support of "extraordinary rendition" (including the use of UK airports) and it's war crimes (e.g. attacking sovereign nations that do not pose any threat, slaughter of tens of thousands of civilians, use of depleted uranium, etc) actively opposes democracy globally. Blair & Co are evil bastards and they must go.

The UK is fast aproaching a totalitarian state with Blair & Co making huge attacks on civil liberties. Walter Wolfgang, 82 years old was roughly ejected from the Labour Party Conference for daring to criticise former Defence Secretary Jack Straw over Iraq. Not only was Mr. Wolfgang ejected from the conference. He was arrested under the Prevention of Terrorism Act. Protestors are routinely arrested before they are able to make their protests.

 http://www.schnews.org.uk/archive/news514.htm

A small protest at the start of the EU Justice & Home Affairs ministers meeting in Newcastle earlier this month was stopped before it even got going, after cops nicked all six people for 'conspiracy to commit criminal damage.'

The plan was for protesters to dress in orange boiler suits with bar-coded foreheads, and a 12 square foot ID card to highlight the increasing restrictions on civil liberties being considered by ministers under the pretext of fighting the "War on Terror".

But before they could even protest about our civil liberties being eroded they were er, arrested. One woman whose daughter was nicked then had her home raided by a vanload of cops who took amongst other things a Green Party magazine, a flyer for a T-shirt company picked up at the Make Poverty History rally and a leaflet by Cures without Cruelty!ENDS QUOTE

There's Blair's 'democracy' for you. Total bullshit.]

We believe in solidarity.

[Blair throws in a socialist term. An obvious example that Bliar & Co do not believe in solidarity is that the Labour Party will not ammend the law to provide solidarity action as voted in the Labour Party conference. Bliar, Bliar, pants on fire.]

We believe in social justice; in opportunity not for a privileged few but for all, whatever their start in life."

[The "social justice" reference is for the Christian Socialists Movement (of which Blair is a member). Not accepted since inequality has increased under Nu Labor.]

We believe in tolerance and respect, in strong communities standing by and standing up for the weak, the sick, the helpless.

[Bliar & Co are not tolerant - they are instead intolerant seeking to give the impresssion of tolerance and reasonableness. Bliar's Nu Labour have banned demonstrations in an extended area around Parliament and repeatedly tries to lock people up without trials or evidence - how is that tolerant?

Strong communities are needed to stand up for the weak, the sick and the helpless. That's because Blair does not recognise that the government should provide for the weak, the sick and the helpless. He believes that communities should provide and care for them and than the welfare state should be reduced.]

We all believe this. It's what makes us Labour, from Dennis Skinner through to Tony Blair, though there I'm sure Dennis would want me to say, the similarity ends.

[Strange that Bliar refers to himself as Tony Blair]

In our values, we are united.

[What a load of crap. There are huge numbers of Labour members that do not share Blair's values. The government suffered defeats on solidarity action, privatising the NHS and pensions and many Labour members oppose the Iraq war and continuing brutal occupation. Labour membership has halved since 1997 and still has some way to go. The Labour party is divided over Bliar & Co.]

And the British people share these values.

[The British people do not share Blair and New Labour's values. Blair is claiming a popular mandate which simply does not exist. If the British people shared his values they would not have given Labour a kicking at the election.]

There is only one Government since the war that has cut unemployment, created 2 million more jobs, had 8 years of growth without recession and halved interest rates from the previous Government."

[Unemplyment rises for the last seven months in UK.]

And cut waiting lists in hospitals, improved cancer and heart care, achieved the best ever school results, halved the number of failing schools, seen a five-fold increase in the best ones; achieved record numbers of police and cut crime."

[killed 100,000 Iraqis, wounded hundreds of thousands more, lied to Parliament and the people to pursue the Idiot President's wars ...]

No Government but a Labour one would have introduced the New Deal and given one million young people the chance of a decent job."

[New Deal is forced or compulsory labour contrary to Article 4. HRA]

Only a Labour Government would have stopped the scandal of pensioner poverty or introduced the winter fuel allowance.

[Stopped the scandal of pensioner poverty? What a claim. Manic? Deluded? Pants on fire.]

This is a country today that increasingly sets the standard."

[for Fascism.]


The pace of change can either overwhelm us, or make our lives better and our country stronger.

What we can't do is pretend it is not happening.

I hear people say we have to stop and debate globalisation. You might as well debate whether autumn should follow summer."

[Bliar saying there is no need to debate globalisation since it is inevitable. This is a very flawed argument since debate can decide how to affect, impact and interact with globalisation. He is asserting his Neo-Liberal crudentials, his worship of Capitalism and the power of the market.]

They're not debating it in China and India. They are seizing its possibilities, in a way that will transform their lives and ours."

[and that doesn't involve discussion and debate?]

Yes, both nations still have millions living in poverty. But they are on the move. Or look at Vietnam or Thailand. Then wait for the South Americans, and in time, with our help, the Africans.

[(Don't dwell on the millions living in poverty). Should Blair be praising China?]

All these nations have labour costs a fraction of ours.

[Virtually slave labour which 'developed' countries are exploiting.]

All can import the technology.

[what technology is 'the technology'? Is Blair poncing arms again?]

All of them will attract capital as it moves, trillions of dollars of it, double what was available even 10 years ago, to find the best return."

[Blair adores Capitalism.]

The character of this changing world is indifferent to tradition.

Unforgiving of frailty."

[Blair is lauding Strength, Fascism.]

No respecter of past reputations.

It has no custom and practice.

It is replete with opportunities, but they only go to those swift to adapt, slow to complain, open, willing and able to change."

[and exploit their workers and crack down on human rights.]

Unless we "own" the future, unless our values are matched by a completely honest understanding of the reality now upon us and the next about to hit us, we will fail.

[Reality occasionally hits the Blair ;) Blair is misusing the reality word, suggesting that there are numerous realities. It's good to see that reality hits Blair. I expect that it hits him quite hard at times. To suggest that there is a "next reality" shows that Bliar does not understand the concept of reality. He is deluded.

Owning the future is a Fascist reference. Tomorrow belongs to us.]

And then the values we believe in, become idle sentiments ripe for disillusion and disappointment."

In the era of rapid globalisation, there is no mystery about what works: an open, liberal economy, prepared constantly to change to remain competitive.

[and exploit workers and crack down on human rights. Blair the Neo-Liberal]

The new world rewards those who are open to it.

Foreign investment improves our economy.

Or take immigration.

We know we need strict controls. They are being put in place, along with Identity Cards, also necessary in a changing world."

[More restrictions on civil liberties. When has the world not changed?]

But one of the most satisfying things about the election was that the country saw through the Tories nasty, unprincipled campaign on immigration. People who come to work and make their lives here make Britain not weaker but stronger.

[As if Nu Labour did not run a nasty racist campaign on immigration.]

But there is a lesson here too.

The temptation is to use Government to try to protect ourselves against the onslaught of globalisation by shutting it out; to think we protect a workforce by regulation; a company by Government subsidy; an industry by tariffs.

It doesn't work today.

Because the dam holding back the global economy burst years ago.

The competition can't be shut out, it can only be beaten.

And the greatest error progressive politics can make, is, to think that somehow this more open and liberal world makes our values redundant, that the choice is either to cling onto the European social model of the past; or be helpless, swept along by the flow."

[Inconsistent Argument. Said earlier that there was no need to debate globalisation.

What on earth is surrendering to globalization the Neo-Liberal way if not being swept along by the flow of global Capatalism?]

On the contrary, social solidarity remains the only way to secure the future of a country like Britain."

[what does Bliar mean by social solidarity?]

However, today its purpose is not to resist the force of globalisation but to prepare for it, and to garner its vast potential benefits.

[undefined 'social solidarity' does this?]

That's why education is Government's number one priority, why we are investing:

7 times the amount the Tories were each year in school buildings; and in computers and teachers and skills.

Why we are doubling the science budget.

Why we reformed universities funding so they had the resources to keep up with the world's best. And yes it was tough. And yes, the Lib Dems exploited it with their usual ruthless opportunism but it was the right thing to do."

[That's top-up fees spun]

Because the only secure economic future for Britain lies in one thing,

Not low wages

Not old-fashioned conflict

But knowledge, skills, intelligence, the talents Britain has in abundance if only we set them free."

[Blair can't even count. That's three or four things]

In the first two terms we corrected the weaknesses of the Tory years.

Boom and bust economics.

Chronic under-investment in public services."

[...]

Mass unemployment.

[Unemployment has been rising in UK under Blair for the last 7 months.]

But our job was never simply to repair the Tory damage; it was to create an inheritance for future generations by taking the tough decisions needed to secure our future. That is the task in the years ahead.

[Inheritence for future generations? But burn-more-oil Blair has just fallen into line with his master Dubya by abandoning the climate.]

We know how hard it is for families to balance work and home life.

Over the next few years, we will open up for the first time ever, a new frontier of the welfare state, affordable, wrap-around childcare between the hours of 8am - 6pm for all who need it.

[Blair & Co's hard-working families fetish.]

We will get more people off benefit and into work.

[Not if the past seven months is any indication.]

Let's be frank about why so many people are on incapacity benefit. Under the Tories, it was used to conceal unemployment. Next month, we will publish proposals radically to reform the benefit for the future and help people who can work, back into the work force where they belong."

[People are on Incapacity Benefit because they are ill and cannot work. It is not easy to claim Incapacity Benefit and medical evidence is needed. Blair intends huge attacks on the welfare state in true Thatcherite fashion. Once again it is the weak, poor and helpless that the Labour party attacks. That's why strong communities are needed to stand up for weak, poor and helpless.]

In December, we receive the report of the Pensions Commission. Next year we will publish our plans for reform.

There will be a proper basic state pension; and alongside it, because, in the modern world the state cannot provide it all, a simple easy way for people to save and to reap the rewards of their savings."

[Tax the rich to pay for pensions. Blair's Labour party is largely responsible for the pensions crisis. There may be an future article about the Mirror pensions scandal and Labour's dirty washing ... ]

Next year too, building on Britain's Kyoto commitments, we will publish proposals on energy policy."

[UK is unlikely to meet Kyoto commitments.

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4284502.stm

Labour came to power in 1997 on a manifesto that promised to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 20% from 1990 levels by the year 2010.


But emissions of carbon dioxide, and of greenhouse gases
overall, are rising.

Last year, the government admitted that the 20% figure for
CO2 would not be met. The latest figures also suggest that
the UK is veering off the course required to meet its much
more modest Kyoto Protocol target of reducing greenhouse
gas emissions by 12.5% from 1990 levels.ENDS QUOTE]

Global warming is too serious for the world any longer to ignore its danger or split into opposing factions on it.

[Capitalism has brought us to this point of the World's destruction.

 http://www.truthout.org/issues_05/092605EB.shtml

Tony Blair has admitted that he is changing his views on combating
global warming to mirror those of President Bush - and oppose
negotiating international treaties such as the Kyoto Protocol.

His admission, which has outraged environmentalists on both sides
of the Atlantic, flies in the face of his promises made in the
past two years and undermines the agreement he masterminded at
this summer's Gleneagles Summit. And it endangers talks that opened
in Ottawa this weekend on a new treaty to combat climate change.

The U-turn will inevitably bring accusations that he has,
once again, sold out to Mr. Bush, just at the time that the US
President is coming under unprecedented pressure to change his
policy in the wake of hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Last week
the UK Government's chief scientific advisor, Sir David King,
said that global warming might have increased their severity.

Over the past two years Mr. Blair has consistently claimed
global leadership in tackling what he described as "long
term, the single most important issue we face as a global
community" and has stressed that it "can only properly
be addressed through international agreements." President
Bush repeatedly expressed anger at his position.

Sharing a platform with the US Secretary of State,
Condoleezza Rice, in New York this month, Mr. Blair
confessed: "Probably I'm changing my thinking about
this," adding that he hoped the world's nations would
"not negotiate international treaties."

This contradicts his assertion in a speech a year
ago - which drew a private rebuke from the Bush
administration - that "a problem that is global
in cause and scope can only be fully addressed
through international agreement."

It also denies what his ministers claimed to
be his main achievement on global warming at
Gleneagles. He had succeeded in getting all
the leaders except Mr. Bush to sign up to
negotiating a successor to the Kyoto treaty,
and in arranging a meeting between the G8
and leading developing countries to discuss it.

But instead of endorsing agreed limits on
the pollution that causes climate change,
Mr. Blair told this month's meeting at
the Clinton Global Initiative that he was
putting his faith in "developing science
and technology" - precisely Mr. Bush's
position.

He justified his change of heart
by saying that countries would not
negotiate environmental treaties that
cut their growth or consumption -
another of the President's main
contentions. But in another speech
last April he said it was "quite
false" to suppose that environmental
protection would inhibit growth.

Last night, Tony Juniper, executive
director of Friends of the Earth,
called the Prime Minister's
volte-face "unbelievable":
"Having failed to practise what
he preaches, he is now changing
his preaching to match his
practice."QUOTE ENDS

and hypocrite Bliar is splitting into opposing factions by supporting Dubya's position of ignoring the climate. It looks like arrogant USUK vs. the rest of the World once again.]

And for how much longer can countries like ours allow the security of our energy supply be dependent on some of the most unstable parts of the world?"

For both reasons the G8 Agreement must be made to work so we develop together the technology that allows prosperous nations to adapt and emerging ones to grow sustainably; and that means an assessment of all options, including civil nuclear power."

[Blair is caught lying again. The "G8 agreement must be made to work" and the article quoted above are inconsistent. One must be a lie.

Perhaps Tony "when I say 'emphatically not' I mean 'yes'" Blair doesn't realises that he is lying. He is a fantasist and his comments about different realities supports this point. He is a fantasist who engages in Doublethink

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink

Doublethink means, according to George Orwell's dystopian novel
Nineteen Eighty-Four:

the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind
simultaneously, and accepting both of them. ... To tell deliberate
lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that
has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary
again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is
needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the
while to take account of the reality which one denies all this
is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink
it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word
one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of
doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely,
with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth. (pages 176-177)


Nuclear power is expensive, dangerous and produces highly-radioactive waste for which there is NO method of disposal. UK's Windscale reprocessing plant (renamed to 'Sellafield') has a poor safety record with a recent huge leak that went undetected for months.]

In transport, we will continue to develop proposals for a fundamental change in its funding, including road pricing."

[The problem of human induced climatic change requires radical action on transportation. Rail should be preferred over road e.g. by Royal Mail. Air transport should be heavily taxed and discouraged.]

[Blair bullshit follows.]

And next year too we will address the future of local government. A new and ambitious blueprint strengthening the leadership of our cities, giving good councils new freedoms and devolving more power to neighbourhoods.

Over the Parliament our aim is to increase home ownership by one million and in particular help young families struggling to be first-time buyers. Twenty years ago we gifted the ground of aspiration to the Tories. Today we've got it back and we'll never yield it up to them again."

[Nu Labour have produced the housing crisis.]

And to back all this up, to ensure our future priorities in spending can be secured, we will publish next July the Fundamental Savings Review of all Government spending: where we can save, where we need to spend more; how we keep investment flowing in to our priorities but keep our tax system competitive for our economy and help hard-working families to increase their prosperity."

[The 'hard-working families' fetish again]

The truth is command public services today are no more acceptable than a command economy.

The 21st century's expectations in public services are a world away from those of 1945.

People demand quality, choice, high standards. Why? Because in every other walk of life they demand them.

And they are paying their taxes, so they feel they are entitled to them.

If we misunderstand this, we will make a mistake of the proportions of council house sales in the 1980's."

[New Labour policy is to attack Councils' provision of social housing.]

We know what makes a good school. Good leadership; great teachers; strong discipline; a love of learning."

[Strong discipline betrays Blair's authoritarianism.]

We know what makes good healthcare. Quick access; committed care; clean, comfortable surroundings."

[So why is Bliar's New Labour unable to provide this?]

But what happens if you can't get them?

[You suffer and die as in Nu Labour's UK. Bliar's govt has extremely poor reputation on health care e.g. MRSA, NHS dentistry, increases in STDs and poor provision of STD services, poor and non-existant mental health provision. NHS users know that the standard is still poor but that the statistics are rigged so that Nu Lab can claim to be improving the NHS.]

If you've the money, you buy better.

That is an affront to every progressive value we believe in.

There's a great myth here: which is that we don't have a market in services now. We do. It's called private schools and private healthcare."

[We don't have a market in public services and there is no need for a market in public services. Ordinary people do not participate in that market. Bliar is extending the market into public services and he's giving the best parts of the NHS away to the private sector.]

But it's only open to the well-off.

There is another myth: choice is a New Labour invention.

Wrong. Choice is what wealthy people have exercised for centuries. The Tories have always been comfortable with that. But for Labour choice is too important to be the monopoly of the wealthy.

A final myth: the way to keep universal services universal is to make them uniform.

Again, wrong. The way to keep services universal is to make them of such quality that enough of those who can afford to go private, opt to stay in the public service.

I will never return us to selection aged 11 in our schools."

[Implies that there is not selection at 11 in UK.]

I will never allow the NHS to charge for treatment.

[What about charges for dental treatment?]

Under the Warwick accord we are ending the two-tier workforce.

But it isn't fair when parents have no option but to send their child to a poor local school.

Or a patient can't get diagnostic tests done in six months when the technology and the capacity exist to deliver it in days."

[Blair & Co are responsible for these long waiting lists.]

The wealthy by their wealth can change that in their lives. I want decent hardworking families to have the same power."

[only hard-working families?]

Every time I've ever introduced a reform in Government, I wish in retrospect I had gone further."

[This is very scary. Perhaps Fascist Blair would like to ban freedom of speech entirely and do away with court hearings? Doing away with court hearing actually comes later in the speech.]

Specialist schools, denounced at the time, have performed better than traditional comprehensives. Fact.

City Academies are massively over-subscribed. Fact."

[Why does Blair think that people want schools privatised and unaccountable controlled by business-leaders and religious extremists? Why does Blair think that such people can do better than those from a teaching background? What is it about entrepaneurs and Evangalists that transcend the teaching abilities of teachers?]

And the beneficiaries are not fat cats. They are some of the poorest families in the poorest parts of Britain.

We only got big falls in waiting times after introducing competition for routine surgery. Fact.

That is why the NHS reforms, to break down the old monolith, bring in new providers, allow patients choice, must continue. Money alone won't work. Money and reform will and if we stick with it, by 2008 we will, for the first time in the NHS's history, offer booked appointments at the patient's convenience and a maximum wait of 18 weeks from the GP to the operating theatre with an average wait of 9 weeks. Not the 18 months just to get off the consultants' list, we inherited from the Tories but 18 weeks for the whole thing.


[The whole notion of choice in the NHS is just bullshit and spin. If you need treatment, you need treatment. Where does choice arise?]

Now if reform delivers that change for our people, regardless of wealth, tell me how we justify refusing to do it?

[The NHS is not Blair's to sell or give away to business. What is needed is improvements to the NHS. If more money is needed, tax the rich. The electorate will kick the Labour Party for this.]

This autumn, we will publish our Education White Paper. It will open up the system to new providers and new partners, allow greater parental choice, expand Foundation, Academy and extended schools. Again reform, again some of it difficult. But all with one purpose: to let nothing block the way to higher standards, and greater achievement for our children. The greatest injustice I know is when good education is the preserve of the privileged. We are changing that injustice.

Yes, we have lifted many children out of poverty, many families too, but we haven't decisively altered the balance of advantage away from background to merit.

The wealth of your parents is still the biggest decider of your future.

If there's one thing above all that motivates me it is to redeem the pledge I made to give the chance of a first-class education not only for Britain's elite but for all Britain's children.

The same adjustment to the modern world challenges traditional thinking on law and order.

It is true: crime overall is down, burglary and car crime by big numbers.

But it's not the point.

Respect is about more than crime. It's about the loss of a value which is a necessary part of any strong community; proper behaviour; good conduct; the unselfish notion that the other person matters."

[Blair has no right to discuss respect. Respect for the UK electorate - repeatedly lying to the electorate and Parliament for an illegal war. Respect for international law - illegal invasion, takes part in shock and awe, 100,000+ civilian deaths, Project for the New American Century.

The "other person matters" is very hypocritical of megalomaniac Bliar. Clearly Iraqi other people do not matter to the Bliar.]

The roots of this are deep and are formed partly by the same forces of change at work in our economy: the break up of traditional communities and family structures, changing lifestyles."

[forces of change at work in our economy?]

The bonds of cohesion have been loosened. They cannot be tied again the same way."

[?]

But, in a different way they can and, again based on my experience, I want to say how I think it can be done."

[after 8 years, Blair decides to address the loosened bonds of cohesion in our society.]

For 8 years I have battered the criminal justice system to get it to change.

[Fascist Blair wants a Fascist criminal justice system.]

And it was only when we started to introduce special ASB laws, we really made a difference.

And I now understand why. The system itself is the problem. We are trying to fight 21st century crime - ASB, drug-dealing, binge-drinking, organised crime - with 19th century methods, as if we still lived in the time of Dickens.

The whole of our system starts from the proposition that its duty is to protect the innocent from being wrongly convicted.

Don't misunderstand me. That must be the duty of any criminal justice system.

But surely our primary duty should be to allow law-abiding people to live in safety.

[Blair is saying that allowing law-abiding people to live in safety requires that innocent law-abiding people are wrongly convicted or executed as in the case of Jean Charles de Menezes.]

It means a complete change of thinking.

[Fascism.]

It doesn't mean abandoning human rights.

[Yes it does.]

It means deciding whose come first.

I believe three things work.

First, a radical extension of summary powers to police and local authorities to take on the wrong doers.

[wrong doers is a strange expression reminiscent of the Idiot President. Danger: A classic New Labour tactic is to outflank the opposition. Blair & Co intend to outflank the judiciary by giving huge judicial powers to New Labour's favourite policeman as he suggested recently. Policeman Ian Blair is happy to appear awfully close to Bliar & Co, a siuation which we would have not seen even a few years ago. The police as a public authority should behave and appear to behave impartially. Ian Blair is the policeman that should be investigating and prosecuting Bliar & Co with war crimes under the International Criminal Court Act.]

We will publish plans to do this by the end of the year. They will tackle specifically binge-drinking, drug-dealing and organised crime; and develop existing laws on ASB.

Second, we need a uniformed presence on the street in every community. Officers on the beat is what the public have wanted for years and they're right. I have seen teams of police and CSOs in action. It works. We want them across the whole of Britain over the next few years.

Third, give our young people places to go so that they're off the street.

[Blair has been banning young people from streets using ASBOs. Punishments are available without crimes being committed in Blair's Britain.]

Invest in our youth services.

More competitive sport in schools.

Give Head Teachers the full disciplinary powers they want.

[Blair's authoritarianism again. He has got it in for children, hasn't he? Is it since he was 'boomed'?]

End the farce of half a dozen agencies all spending hundreds of thousands of pounds on problem families.

Identify these families early, have them handled by one lead agency and give it whatever powers it needs to affect change or impose sanctions.

[Mere suspicion no doubt. Have to watch all families closely to identify them all early.

I could write a good argument about New Labour abusing their authority and interfering directly with a family because of their anti-Blair politics. Couldn't I Bliar, R . I . P . A ., Shagger, Accuser?]

And give local communities the powers they need to hold people to account.

[What about the power to hold Tony Blair accountable for his lies and war crimes?]

Today is not the era of the big state; but a strategic one: empowering, enabling, putting decision making in the hands of people not government.

[? Must be one of Blair's alternative realities.]

One day when I am asked by someone whose neighbourhood is plagued with anti-social behaviour; or whose local school is failing or hospital is poor, "what are you going to do about it?", I want to be able to reply: "We have given you the resources. We have given you the powers. Now tell me what you are going to do about it."

[bullshit]

Today, of course, we face a new challenge: global terrorism.

[Thanks to the actions of Tony Blair and George Dubya Bush. It is not strictly global i.e. there are countries that are not targetted, and Blair is trying to evade responsibility by describingg it as global.]

Let us state one thing.

These terrorists do not, never have and never will represent the decent, humane and principled faith of Islam.

[It appears from recent events in Basra that some of the terrorists are Blair's own terrorists.]

Muslims, like all of us, abhor terrorism. Like all of us, are its victims.

It is, as ever, only fringe fanatics we face.

But we need to make it clear.

When people come to our country, they have and should have the full rights we believe in. There should be no second-class citizens in Britain. But citizenship comes with a duty: to give loyalty to our nation, its values and our way of life. If people have a grievance, politics is the answer. Not terror.

[Politics can be terrorism according to the definition in Blair's laws and Blairis quick to use terrorism laws against political activists e.g. Walter Wolfgang. Blair's new proposed terrorism laws do not define terrorism so that it is effectively whatever the government decides.]

Terrorism brings home to us this now obvious truth of the modern world. Nations, even the largest, need to work together for their common good.

Isolationism is as backward as protectionism. For a country the size of Britain, there is no securing our future without strong alliances.

When I became Prime Minister I took a decision: always be at the forefront where decisions are made not at the back where they're handed down.

[megalomaniac]

That is why at every point, no matter how difficult we remain strong partners in Europe. By all means let us fight for reform in Europe; but to isolate ourselves from the world's largest commercial market in which over 50% of our trade is done, is just a crazy policy for Britain in the 21st century.

Britain should also remain the strongest ally of the United States. I know there's a bit of us that would like me to do a Hugh Grant in Love Actually and tell America where to get off. But the difference between a good film and real life is that in real life there's the next day, the next year, the next lifetime to contemplate the ruinous consequences of easy applause.

[Blair evades the facts that he is enthusiastic in his support of Dubya, the Neo-Con Christian-Zionists and the Project for the New American Century and discusses a film instead.]

I never doubted after September 11th that our place was alongside America and I don't doubt it now.

And for a very simple reason. Terrorism struck most dramatically in New York but it was aimed then, and is aimed now, at us all, at our way of life.

This is a global struggle.

Today it is at its fiercest in Iraq.

[Due to USUK's illegal invasion and occupation and UK terrorist actions in Iraq.]

It has allied itself there with every reactionary element in the Middle East.

[As Blair was warned before invading Iraq.]

Their aim: to wreck this December's first ever direct election for the Government of Iraq.

[No. It is a war of liberation from illegal occupation. They want USUK to leave.]

I know there are people, good people, who disagreed with the decision to remove Saddam by force.

[To go to war for regime change is illegal under international law. This is the latest excuse given by Blair for the illegal invasion of Iraq. Blair & Co originally claimed that it invaded Iraq due to Iraq's posession of non-existant Weapons of Mass Destruction. This was despite the fact that the Weapons Inspectors had failed to find any WMDs. We all knew Bliar & Co were lying when Blix's team repeatedly found nothing and Blair published lies plaguarised from the internet. That Blair has not been forced to resign on many occasions is astonishing. The UK Labour Party and Labour MPs are responsible for failing to sack Blair.

The real reasons for the war against Iraq are published by the Project for the New American Century  http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf "the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.(p14)"]

But for two years, British troops whose bravery and dedication we salute, along with those of 27 other nations, have been in Iraq with full United Nations authority and in support of the Iraqi Government.

[Not really the issue. Blear & Co repeatedly lied for the Neo-Cons' and Israel's wars.]

Yes, several hundred people stoned British troops in Basra.

[They were angry that UK forces are engaged in terrorist bombings and that they had just killed a policeman. Blair sent Brigadier General Gordon Kerr to Iraq to escape prosecution for similar crimes in Northern Ireland. The UK's unlawful combatants were probably under Kerr's instructions. It is clear that UK is part of the problem in Iraq and that USUK must end the brutal occupation of Iraq.]

Yes, several thousand run the terrorist insurgency around Baghdad.

[Iraq is infiltrated by Iraqis.]

And yes, as a result of the fighting, innocent people tragically die.

[and yes, Blair is hugely responsible for these deaths. Blair should have resigned countless times over Iraq and his lies.]

But 8 œ million Iraqis showed which future they wanted when they came out and voted in January's elections.

And the way to stop the innocent dying is not to retreat, to withdraw, to hand these people over to the mercy of religious fanatics or relics of Saddam, but to stand up for their right to decide their Government in the same democratic way the British people do.

[What arrogance. That Iraqis cannot determine their own lives. That Iraq must be run as a Capitalist state along Western lines. It is clear from recent events in Basra that UK is part of the problem not the solution.]

Ten days ago, after years of struggle, finally in Afghanistan, 6 million people voted freely to decide their own future.

How dare the terrorists justify their campaign of hate by claiming they are angry about Afghanistan? Was it better under their Taleban?

[Fallacious argument. It should be compared to aims not whether better under their Taleban.]

They use Iraq and Afghanistan, just as they use the cause of Palestine, whilst trying to destroy by terror the only solution that will ever work: a secure Israel living side-by-side with a viable independent and democratic Palestine.

Just as they chose the day of the G8 when the world was trying to address the heartbreaking poverty of Africa, to kill innocent people in London.

[It is not accepted that the London explosions were perpetrated by Islamic terrorists. Our analysis reaches a different conclusion and has some supporting evidence. The evidence is compelling but not conclusive and appears to be unique i.e. nobody else is relying on it. It does not indicate who was responsible but challenges the official tale.

It is important for the police to demonstrate that justice is done rather than justice actually being done. This can be seen in previous murders investigated by the Metropolitan police e.g. the murders of Rachel Nicholl and Jill Dando. We have yet to be presented with any evidence that the four accused were responsible and the car is obviously planted psyops nonsense intended to implicate the four
alleged bombers.

Blair's TV statement with the G8 leaders is interesting. Was it Dubya waving at us from the Chinook helicopter at Auchterader? Waving goodbye to us? Waving goodbye to anti-war protestors?]

Strip away their fake claims of grievance and see them for what they are: terrorists who use 21st century technology to fight a pre-medieval religious war that is utterly alien to the future of humankind.

[a religious war that Blair and Bush started. Remember Dubya's crusade?]

I know we could have hidden away at the back after September 11th and let others take the strain.

[Blair is suggesting some non-existant connection between 911 and invading Iraq. Saddam Hussein and Iraq had absolutely no connection with 911. This is Dubya's lie. Has Blair run out of his own lies?]

But that is not Britain at its best.

Nor is it this Party.

When we campaign for justice in Africa, that is a progressive cause.

[?]

When we push for peace in Palestine, it is a progressive cause.

[?]

When we act against global warming, it is a progressive cause.

[But Blair is not acting against global warming - or is he not acting against global warming in the States but is in UK?]

And when we fight behind the standard of democracy in Afghanistan or Iraq or Kosovo or Sierra Leone, for me that too is a progressive cause.

[There is no intention for Iraq to move to democracy. UK is undermining the transition to 'democracy' / Western Capatalism in Iraq through the use of unlawful combatant terrorists.

There is not, and never has been an exit strategy because USUK does not intend to exit.]

[Blair bullshit follows]

In each case, Britain in these last 8 years has been at the front. Not always succeeding, but never a spectator. In the modern world, for all the pain it can bring, it is the only place to be.

It's a daunting agenda isn't it; and in every area of policy we are called upon to adjust our sights, re-think, renew.

But have confidence.

We are well up to it.

No-one else is.

The Conservatives remain lost in the fog of ancient memories; though at some point, be warned, they will emerge.

Who would have thought that the Conservatives would still be debating which way to go after 8 years in opposition?

Or the Liberals, still debating which way to go after 80 years in opposition?

The Tories without a leader.

The Lib Dems too.

I say this to any true social democrat in the Lib Dems: "You've lost. You're in the old Liberal Party now."

Street fighters in local politics. Utterly unserious on the national stage.

The seats we lost to them at the last election will not be won back by aping them but by exposing them, for what they are: a party of protest. Never a party of Government.

My advice: never underestimate the Tories; never over-estimate the Lib Dems.

We are a Party of Government, a third term Government.

Without New Labour we might have won once. Even twice. But not three times and now still dominant. Why?

New Labour was first and foremost about disentangling ends and means.

Political parties love to tie themselves up in doctrine.

They develop comfort zones.

Policy becomes ideology, sometimes theology. To challenge it, is heresy.

[Walter Wolfgang.]

To agree it, is a sign you belong.

But real people in the real world think instinctively, free from doctrine. Not free from values. But free to apply them differently in different times.

[Echoes Bliar's "I only know what I believe." statement. That Blair thinks instinctively is dangerous. It means that he does not have to consider such inconvenient things as facts, arguments and different perspectives.

Is it fair to apply the comment to Blair himself since he is a real person in the real world rather than a political party? It is fair since Blair can only draw on his own experience. ...]

New Labour reconnected us to them.

[Quite obviously not, since Blair is hugely unpopular.]

We have become a grown up Party capable of leading a grown up nation.

[uh, what? grown-up party?]

But that is not all New Labour stands for.

One thing I've learnt, and I learnt it from Neil Kinnock and it is now so ingrained it's like a strip of granite running through my being. It's about leadership. Not mine alone. Ours together. It's about facing hard challenges and meeting them. Without it you can govern as a reflex to an unpopular Conservative Government; but you can't lead a generation in the progressive way.

[leadership ... ours together. then it's not leadership.]

Government is not a state of office but a state of mind. A willingness to accept the burden of true leadership.

[No. Government is a state of office.]

And when you govern, so much can be done.

[Blair bullshit follows.]

Think of the things the headlines rarely touch.

The first ever proper law on domestic violence.

1 million pensioners homes insulated.

350,000 miners with compensation.

Paid holidays for all workers.

Equalising the law on consent and civil partnerships.

And do you know how many visits to Britain's museums last year? 34 million. Why? Free museum entry.

The achievements of Government are not always measured by the causes that decide elections but in the quiet advances that decide the character and culture of a nation.

In Government, we can change lives.

When I listened on Sunday to the tributes to Jim Callaghan, I recalled the 90th birthday party we gave for him in Downing Street a few years back

Around the room. Denis Healey talking to Roy Jenkins. Tony Benn with Shirley Williams, Michael Foot, Jack Jones. What brilliance; and what a pity. Because the seeds of 18 years of opposition were not sown in 1979, but in the 1960s when great challenges came upon us. And instead of understanding we were simply being tested by the forces of change, we lived out a sad episode of charges of betrayal, questioning integrity and motives.

[Bliar's warns the Labour Party not to accuse him of betrayal or question his integrity or motives.]

They were great people. But we were not ready then to see change was coming, accept it and then shape it to progressive ends. United, we should have been the advocates of economic and industrial change in the changing world. And if we had been, how many fewer lives would have been destroyed? How much harsh and bitter medicine for some of the poorest in our society might have been avoided?

[How many lives have been destroyed by Bliar & Co?]

People suffered in those 18 years because we let them down.

We did so not because we meant to, but because we forgot that the first rule of any party with aspirations to Government is to understand first the aspirations of people and how they change with time.

Today, the fresh challenges beckon.

[Blair bullshit follows.]

In 1997, we responded.

In 2005, we have to respond again.

Some day, some party will make this country at ease with globalisation.

Let it be this one.

Some day, we will forge a new consensus on our public services.

Let it be us who believe in them and let us do it now.

Some day, some party will respond to the public's anger at the defeatism that has too often gripped our response to social disorder. Let it be the Party that understands compassion as well as firmness is the only way a true community can be made.

Let ours be the Party, the one with the values of social justice, equality, fairness, that helps Britain turn a friendly face to the future.

When we made a decision about bidding for the Olympics, I'll be honest.

I didn't think we could do it.

But I also thought, come on, at least give it a try.

And it was a risk.

But we proved something important in taking it.

That Britain was a country not just with memories but with dreams.

But such nations aren't built by dreamers.

They rise by the patient courage of the change-maker.

That's what we have been in New Labour. The change-makers.

[Change-maker is a US evangelical term. Happy-clappy Catholic-Protestant tolerant-intolerant Blair is playing to the Christians.]

That's how we must stay.

Then the fourth Election can be won and the future will be ours to share.

[Blair? share?]



DISCUSSION

Is it fair to attribute this speech to Bliar? Blair would have had spin-doctors and speech-writers to assist in preparing this speech. However, he would have had the final say and it is presented as his speech, an important speech to the Labour Party.

There are many parts of the speech that raise concerns. Amoung the more serious are the intention to outflank the judiciary by introducing a new tier into the criminal justice system, that protecting the innocent from wrongful-conviction is secondary, the climate change lie, the attacks on the welfare state and the wholeharted commitment to unrestrained global Capitalism. That Blair says that he wished he went further with all his reforms is very worrying.

New Labour's 'hard-working families fetish' is divisive and operates by splitting Bliar's opposition. Those who identify with the label will consider themselves superior and different to those outside the group e.g. unmarried mothers, single adults, the aged. Similarly, Bliar's attack on incapacity benefit is also divisive. He's painting the sick and disabled as scroungers. He actually says that they belong in the work force.

Blair presents lies over the reasons for the Iraq war and that he supports international agreements on climate change.

Megalomaniac Blair intends to seriously attack civil liberties and the welfare state in UK. The Labour Party and Labour MPs must resist Blair's excesses. Blair and Reid should resign over the use of UK unlawful combatants in Basra.

Blair should have resigned so many times over Iraq. Blair is actively detested after so many lies and sucking up to Dubya. People understand that he is a pathological liar - a fantasist that simply cannot stop telling lies. Deranged and deluded, your Prime Minister is a nutter. The Labour Party is getting destroyed by Bliar's continuing leadership.

Oppose the New Fascists. Oppose New Labour.