It's not that significant, but it is typical.
British politics and the media that comment on it are trapped in a permanent spiral of putrefying idiocy. Politicians are - with rare exceptions - liars. We all know about Bliar and Iraq, of course. And it's hard not to suppress a snigger - or a groan, depending on your mood - when Cameron starts referring to Gandhi (and don't get me started on that single braincelled creature `Lord' Geldof). But is it too much to expect that those newspaper columnists who are extremely well-paid to pore over their pronouncements and interpret them for us should filter them for some kind of truth?
Don't be stupid, of course it is! Here's a supreme idiot for you - Andrew Rawnsley in today's Observer, on Blair's exit strategy - "But he is bound to be tempted to look for 'tops', which could include the withdrawal of British troops from an Iraq which is clearly on the path to improvement". Clearly on the path to improvement. Yes, the idiot really did say that. When did he last go to Iraq? Here's a letter from a Baghdad resident to George W.Bush (the Butcher of Fallujah). Who knows more about the situation in Iraq - someone who lives there or a `journalist' (i.e. paid propagandist) who sits on his fat overpaid arse in London and repeats whatever some Blairite lackey feeds him?
Is there a single newspaper commentator who isn't simply an echo of the liars of the British political class? Rags like the Observer - and their braindead propagandists - are simply a complete waste of time. You'd get more truth from the Beano.
