Re: Interesting article...

The message <fuKdncIcIeqdQXXenZ2dnUVZ_sOdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
from jJohn Klausner <somis.7@xxxxxxxxxxxx> contains these words:

http://tinyurl.com/d7ncg

Things everywhere sure are changing...
SueK

Where to start! The author, expat Brit Val Mc Queen, has cobbled
together a string of completely unrelated material, forged another
journalist's report, and turned it into a dogs dinner of outright lies
and misrepresentations. If you want to understand something about
Britain, at LEAST read a journo who doesn't fabricate and misrepresent,
and who doesn't have such a blatantly biased political stance. Here's
just a flavour of that: She writes


..>"Unlike his long line of predecessors, Blair is curiously uninterested
in the history and traditions of >the countries which make up the United
Kingdom and the historical development of laws, including >the freedom
of speech and thought that the British have enjoyed -- in sharp contrast
to citizens of >European countries -- for 800 years. Sometimes he seems
to be barely aware of the nature of the >people he is governing and
anyway, the past is another country. Enjoying far greater power than the
President of the United States, Blair has, in the words of conservative
columnist Melanie Phillips, >"ripped the heart out of the ? British
constitution" and "has behaved like a constitutional vandal,
fragmenting the United Kingdom and destroying the independence of the
second chamber."

First, the link to Melanie Phillips'article (which is about a radio
theme tune) shows MP did not write those words about Tony Blair. She
wrote them about Gordon Brown, who is currently engaged in positioning
himself to oust Tony Blair and get his job as PM.

It pains me to defend Tony Blair, but even his worst enemies, if they
had an ounce of knowledge about British politics, could not accuse
either him or Gordon Brown of being uninterested in the history and
traditions of the countries which make up the UK. Both are Scots, not
English Gordon Brown's home base and parliamentary constituency, is in
Scotland. That means he is only a member of Westminster Parliament
because his home country, Scotland, voted and sent him there.

"fragmenting the United Kingdom", is also ludicrous. Northern Ireland
has been struggling internally for self-governance since before either
entered politics and Blair has worked harder and done more good there
than his Conservative predecessors.Scotland has always had an
independent, very different legal and educational systems and devolved
to its own Scottish Parliament by its own volition; as did Wales. All
four countries have always maintained separate, very distinct histories,
cultures and languages. They could (and did) only devolve power through
their own volition, not because brown or Blair caused it.

As for "destroying the independence of the 2nd chamber"; this refers
to the long -over due reform of the House of Lords, the Upper House of
Parliament. No longer is it permanently populated by generations of
inherited-title aristocrats, unelected, qualified only by birth. Its
members are now drawn from every section of society, chosen on proven
merit in their field, and hold post for life. That means, they owe no
loyalty to whatever political party currently holds government. Their
children will not inherit their post. The upper house is now far, far
more independent than ever before and have proved it by blocking the
agenda of Blair, the architect of their reformation.

"Enjoying far more power than the US President" is also a ludicrously
stupid description of Blair's appointment. For a start, a Prime
Minister has no military position or status. Nor does he appoint the
Judiciary. TB has, in recent weeks, been defied, outvoted and thwarted
by his own Parliamentary party and right now is being forced into a
serious policy U-turn to prevent another occurrence (which would almost
certainly bring a call for his resignation)

Janet.



.

Loading