Well, BREXIT is so “old news” now. Now we have the Chilcot Report to blather on and on and on about while all the usual suspects revisit an old feeding frenzy with a new and ravenous appetite.
I saw a movie a while ago, an animation actually, called “UP”, in which some of the characters were easily and immediately distracted from their old passion of the moment to their new passion of the moment. I believe the trigger word was: “SQUIRREL!” screamed loudly at the characters whereupon they would chaotically abandon their current bone in hot pursuit of the new bone.
Such is the character and characteristics of the entire Progressive universe. We have “moved on” from the “end of the world” called BREXIT to a “brave new world” in which the multiple targets of events involving Clinton email scandals and the rehashing of war arguments now 14 years old refreshed by the 20-20 hindsight of the Chilcot Report.
This 10 million British Pound boat anchor posing as an objective investigative report has breathed new life into old zombies. I have not seen so much unreasoned spittle and drool since “some village is missing an idiot”. How many million acres were felled to produce this epic?
It is akin to the Obama Care bill in being about 3 times longer than the Bible and about as useful, in any meaningful way, as the proverbial tits on a boar. That horse has been well and truly dead for over a decade! To paraphrase a popular leftist meme “Move On! Get a Life!”
This rancid old bone could only be attractive to the undead feeding on the dead who glibly demand that we “move on” within hours of any progressive atrocity but happily revisit any event of any age in history which might allow them to continue their perennial circle jerk about the evil “BusHitler” or some “dead white male”.
And as usual, they missed the only positive item in the entire report. I admit I have only perused the “Executive Summary”. I see no reason to disagree with any of the findings. But the whole point of the story is missed in the reportage and outrage as all the usual suspects yet again clamor of the heads of Bush and Blair.
The real documented tangible point of this story is that the entire government bureaucracy of both Britain and the U.S. on which Blair and Bush relied for information and support were ignorant and incompetent beyond words, with the hugely significant exception of their respective military establishments.
As usual all the blather and the clamor come from the very people and the entire class of people represented by these champions of Humanist values who were shown unequivocally to be the incompetent buffoons they really were. It is clear from reading the summary that virtually all the military objectives were accomplished in a month.
Then the social scope creep began and the second guessing and the incompetence behind the scenes took over and poisoned the well of reality. Ever since it became obvious that the “social work” was going to fail the managers have been looking for someone to blame, some figurehead to execute.
Once again, as so many times and generations before, the military selflessly and extremely competently delivered the results required by their civilian masters, the bureaucrats and managers, regardless of how incompetent and misguided, those masters were. And that “fact” is completely ignored to enter into a feeding frenzy demanding the blood of the targeted political perps.
I am disinclined to attribute evil or malice when simple incompetence and magical thinking can account for the observed developments but these characteristics and practices sow the fields for the future success of evil. Now we have ISIS and the Daesh.
And to some of the commenters I have a question. Evil hates Truth and Light. This has been a maxim for at least 4000 years. To dislike Truth and Light enough to smear anyone who disagrees with one’s feelings smacks of “The Dark Side”.
So, all you easily distracted mob, let me guess: you are White, English, Academic, Liberal, Democrat, Feminist, pro-baby-murder, pro-euthanasia, anti-religion, perhaps even “GAY” or “LGBT”, might work in federal “social services” or some sort of “soft” politically correct enclave like academia, the publicly funded media or some other funded NGO, where “studies” and “feelings” matter much more than facts and reality.
The question is not “Do you agree with us?” The question is “Are we correct?” Are our positions truly “not simply wrong, but also immoral, stupid, feeble, cowardly and self-deceiving”? Instead of attacking us based on your feelings, why don’t you simply show factually why and where our opinions are not correct and yours are correct?
Of course if this is beyond your abilities then you can always get everything YOU need over at “https://www.facebook.com/beingliberal.org/. Your ball…