Blair To Labour - You can't survive without me!

I´ve thought for years Blair was mentally ill.He is and it´s getting worse.Blair as do many of his hangerson have a known mental illness.

Pathological Liar

Pathological liars, or "mythomaniacs," may be suffering from histrionic personality disorder or narcissistic personality disorder. The following comments basically reflect a pathological liar who has the characteristics of histrionic personality disorder.

Some characteristics:

1. Exaggerates things that are ridiculous.

2. One-upping. Whatever you do, this person can do it better. You will never top them in their own mind, because they have a concerted need to be better than everyone else. This also applies to being right. If you try to confront an individual like this, no matter how lovingly and well-intentioned you might be - this will probably not be effective. It's threatening their fantasy of themselves, so they would rather argue with you and bring out the sharp knives than admit that there's anything wrong with them.

3. They "construct" a reality around themselves. They don't value the truth, especially if they don't see it as hurting anyone. If you call them on a lie and they are backed into a corner, they will act very defensively and say ugly things (most likely but depends on personality), but they may eventually start to act like, "Well, what's the difference? You're making a big deal out of nothing!" (again, to refocus the conversation to your wrongdoing instead of theirs).

4. Because these people don't value honesty, a lot of times they will not value loyalty. So watch what you tell them. They will not only tell others, but they will embellish to make you look worse. Their loyalty is fleeting, and because they are insecure people, they will find solace in confiding to whomever is in their favor at the moment.

5. They may be somewhat of a hypochondriac. This can come in especially useful when caught in a lie, for example, they can claim that they have been sick, or that there's some mysteriously "illness" that has them all stressed out. It's another excuse tool for their behavior.

6. Obviously, they will contradict what they say. This will become very clear over time. They usually aren't smart enough to keep track of so many lies (who would be?).

Here are some ways to tell someone is a pathological liar contributed by another FAQ Farmer:

* They lie about even the smallest things. For example, saying "I brushed my teeth today," when they didn't.

* They add exaggerations to every sentence.

* They change their story all the time.

* They act very defensively when you question their statements.

* They believe what they say is true, when everyone else knows it isn't.

Here's an alternate "checklist":

Pathological Liars

There is a reason why you are asked in court to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. It is because most of the time that is not what people do. Everyone lies sometime. There are many reasons to lie. Sometimes it is to not hurt someone's feelings. Sometimes a lie is for our own advantage. Some people lie in conducting business and in their personal lives. Most adults are aware of when they lie.

Young children sometimes have problems telling fantasy from reality. When a 3-year-old insists that he flew to Mars this morning, he may not be lying on purpose. He may not even be aware that it is a lie. Children with good imaginations often take longer to learn what a lie really is. It is important to work with children to teach them about fantasy and reality, instead of punishing them for these kinds of beliefs.

A pathological liar believes in the lies, at least at the time that she or he is talking. Their stories tend to be very dramatic. They often portray the person as being smarter, braver, more attractive, or more interesting than she or he really is. Sometimes people begin to catch onto pathological liars because of obvious flaws in the stories. A fairly young man will describe his heroics in the Vietnam war. A homely woman will talk about all the men who fell instantly in love with her. Sometimes the flaws may be more subtle and it may take a knowledgeable person to find them. Often it happens that a pathological liar will be caught out at a party by someone who really was a pilot, really lived in Africa, or really was a fashion model.

Suspect a pathological liar if:

*

the stories seem too dramatic or unrealistic
*

the lies seem to serve no purpose except to impress people or
*

the lies can easily be shown up

Sometimes pathological lying appears to be related to physical causes, such as problems in the brain. Other times they appear to be related to low self-esteem. In any case, good diagnosis and treatment is needed. Contact your healthcare provider for assistance and referrals if needed.

Bliar in a nutshell I´d say!

We differ SLIGHTLY - in terms of the SPECIES of liar.
The link above declares.

"I have found a few differences in pathological liar and a "slime ball" liar. Pathological liars cannot tell that they are lying they actually believe the lie as soon as it comes out of their mouth. They lie about unimportant things that don't really matter to anyone. This can be caused by mental defect but isn't always. Slime-ball liars lie about things that make them look better or embellish to get attention. They also lie to keep their butts out of trouble and to get what they want."

We therefore respectfully submit that Bliar is a SLIME-BALL Liar.

I don't see why the iron chancellor doesn't wholeheartedly accept the stalinist ten year blair-reich, he can always say up yours when the ex prime minister is off pimping for our betters.

After all, the current prime minister has shown how few the constraints are on the office.

As for the pre natal asbo, he's just updating the jesuit promise for our fast changing world, I can imagine the memo: 'give me the child (replace with foetus) at 7 (add months)...'

Interviewed on the colour television this morning he used the bewildered 'how can any sensible person object' position, as he does with everything.

have you guys seen this video???brillant stuff.this deserves to get to number 1

It does indeed deserve to get to No 1, anyone want to take bets on whether MTV (Viacom) ban the video, I'm sure Senator McCain (Viacom are his financial backing) won't like it.

When I saw Tony carrying on about the evil foetuses, it was clear that during his stay on Cliff Richard Island he had completely lost his mind, and who wouldn't?

It reminded me of this:

kilroy.avi

Yes, Paul, Gordon could indeed do that. It saves his having to make a principled stand. He just sits there and takes the throne next May.

But...

Blair has admitted responsibility for 50000 lives. Might that not suggest that he is prepared to go to war again, just to stay in power? And if Britain does get pulled into a war with Iran before next May, how easy will it be then to change the leader - especially with Reid as Blair's home front enforcer?

If Brown cannot see that this is at least a possibility, he is not fit to be prime minister anyway!

Keith Olbermann blasts Rumsfeld for calling those that question the current administration disloyal and unpatriotic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PxJN7XUQVQ

Keith Olbermann blasts Rumsfeld for calling those that question the current administration disloyal and unpatriotic.

Arf! 'Evil foetuses' - love it.

Perfect illustration of Blair's dislocation from reality-based politics. What next? - evil sperm, evil DNA?

nah its all about evil thoughts and deeds which are spawned from evil dna and wicked sperm,,I´m sure that many young women from deprived anti social backgrounds will be screened in the future and sterilized,the sort of thing the nazis experimented with I think,,,the "master race" syndrome.No doubt about it Blair is out to fuckin lunch.

What with the pre natal asbo today, combined with Tonys desire to go for the "source of the problem" you can see where this is leading can't you..

George Carlin - Who Really Controls America.this is funny and painfully true.Applies equaly to the UK as well.Enjoy

Blair has admitted responsibility for 50000 lives.

I'd like to see where he has admitted that

Might that not suggest that he is prepared to go to war again, just to stay in power? And if Britain does get pulled into a war with Iran before next May, how easy will it be then to change the leader - especially with Reid as Blair's home front enforcer?

Much as I despise him, the decision is not his. The agression against iran will have to be a lebanon style air destruction. There is little the UK can add to this, hence no need to participate.

If Brown cannot see that this is at least a possibility, he is not fit to be prime minister anyway!

I'm sure the brooding first lord of the treasury has gone through every possibility

A pathological liar believes the lie he or she is telling to be true. So, he isn't lying. Because there is an “unjustified” sense of grievance felt by many Muslims". They've had it for years. I've been round enough to know.
Also. Since, they send in missiles loaded with ballbearings into towns!! Then, why can't the Israelis' load cluster war heads on their missiles and AIM for the rocket launchers?

There is an obvious fallacy with pre-natal ASBOs. Although many criminals come from chaotic backgrounds, most people from chaotic backgrounds do not become criminals. So unless you can predict which ones will, you are faced with the task of intervening in millions of families to prevent hundreds of criminals. A waste of time, or what?

You get the same problem every time an oddball attacks an innocent victim. All the wisacres gather for the TV cameras and say things like 'he always was a bit of an oddball'. So do we incarcerate all the oddballs to protect against the 1 percent who commit violent crimes? If we did there would be hundreds of thousands of oddballs in long-term captivity and a couple of dozen innocent victims still alive.

The worst thing about the pre-natal ASBO is that Blair's solution is compulsory brainwashing (= 'parenting education'). There's no evidence that it works, and even if it did it would be insufferable as an obligatory state policy.

Compare this with the 9 Glasgow firemen who have been sentenced to political re-education for refusing to attend a gay demo. Whatever you might think about their social attitudes, surely it is incompatible with any concept of a liberal society that people should succumb to brainwashing as a condition of employment.

This attack on teenage mothers is all well and good, but what chance has it of detecting dangerous psychopaths such as himself before they can do any damage? I think we should know.

Quote from the New Statesman, 7th August, 2006:

"...

At a Downing Street reception not long ago, a guest had the temerity to ask Tony Blair: "How do you sleep at night, knowing that you've been responsible for the deaths of 100,000 Iraqis?" The Prime Minister is said to have retorted: "I think you'll find it's closer to 50,000."

..."

Check it out, Paul:
http://www.newstatesman.com/200608070017

And it emerges that thousands of British muslims have been radicalised enough to join the resistance in Iraq. It appears that the death toll over there is now running at 1000 per month. I can again give you a quote if you wish.

This has all been the result of the illegal act of destabilising a sovereign country by invading it. A war crime of considerable magnitude that the "Internanal Community" should not ignore. Not only that, but telling massive lies to deceive people into supporting it.

By his silence, Brown contributed to this war. By his prompt action now, he could wipe some of the blood off his own hands, become Blair's successor sooner, and get British troops out sooner. This would also be a popular political move, but it requires guts... or balls. Does Gordon have them in sufficient supply?

Quote from the New Statesman, 7th August, 2006:

at a Downing Street reception not long ago, a guest had the temerity to ask Tony Blair: "How do you sleep at night, knowing that you've been responsible for the deaths of 100,000 Iraqis?" The Prime Minister is said to have retorted: "I think you'll find it's closer to 50,000."

A bit of elite hearsay/gossip is hardly an admission, indeed 'correcting ' his accuser on a point of detail shows how mobile his moral centre is. He avoids a direct answer, shifts the ground by denigrating his accuser through an appeal to authority and ,as ever ,'moves on'. He is the power of positive thinking incarnate.

And it emerges that thousands of British muslims have been radicalised enough to join the resistance in Iraq.

Where has this emerged? From the now unstaunchable flow of scare stories we are provided with about 'global terrorism'?

It appears that the death toll over there is now running at 1000 per month. I can again give you a quote if you wish.

There is no need to further convince me of the level of slaughter he has been party to

This has all been the result of the illegal act of destabilising a sovereign country by invading it. A war crime of considerable magnitude that the "Internanal Community" should not ignore. Not only that, but telling massive lies to deceive people into supporting it.

Tragically, there is no working mechanism to prosecute these crimes. All we get are kangaroo courts for stage villians,usually former allies, like milosevic and hussein.

By his silence, Brown contributed to this war. By his prompt action now, he could wipe some of the blood off his own hands, become Blair's successor sooner, and get British troops out sooner. This would also be a popular political move, but it requires guts... or balls. Does Gordon have them in sufficient supply?

In our barren political landscape, brown has only the the appeal of the least worst option. I've always been suspect of 'the prince over the water' concept of gogs. While he may not be cut from the same cloth as blair, he has been tailored to fit.
Will he break off from the US madhouse, the blood and soil state of Israel, the historical inevitability of 'globalisation'? While I think the good that has come from the government domestically has come from brown alone, I consider him to be all too aware of the limitations of elected power as circumscribed by political overlords such as murdoch (which the chinese government has shown to be largely illusory, but carries great weight in the world of 'realism')

As this thread has had a psychriatric/psychological bent, I think emotive notions of 'guts' and 'balls' are the last thing we want. I always think the prime minister has spent his period in office over-compensating for being tagged 'bambi' in his early days.

This video is a must.

It's people like Tony that make illegal wars possible, help innocent children die and push our reputation to new lows inconceivable in 1997. Our name is in tatters and Tony Blair is a war criminal.
Found guilty of nineteen separate crimes by the Members of the International War Crimes Tribunal including "Killing and Injuring a Defenseless Population throughout Yugoslavia" and "Using Depleted Uranium, Cluster Bombs and Other Prohibited Weapons"

Agreed, Anonymous. This video should be on mainstream TV. Makes the "liquid bomb" alleged plot look even more "alleged".

As a point of interest, it is possible that even Blair isn't aware what is going on. That he is just a deluded front man who had been nurtured and radicalised over many years, by forces unknown, for reasons that have been increasingly clear since Afghanistan was targetted in late 2001.

Peace won't just happen. But it CAN happen, if enough people want it. IF people MAKE politicians accountable they will be forced to scrutinise the facts more closely, and people like the "well meaning" but psychologically flawed Tony Blair will NOT become puppets to values and ideologies they don't begin to understand.

When we can't have a frank and open discussion about Britains role in the world, British democracy in it's current and contradictory state, human rights at home and abroad, religion, terrorism, Israel, chemical weapons and the immunity of key players from prosecution we are failing as a nation.

We are becoming a nanny state, a nanny with a crime sheet longer than Blair's nose. The most interesting and important news is censored in Britain regularly. If we don't hold Blair personally responsible what will dissuade future leaders from selling another illegal and shamefully unpopular war through deception. He shouldn't have done a deal with the devil in the first place if you ask me and we shouldn't have to pay for his ignorance.

I don't want to live in a fascist country where we're arrested for voicing our opinions. I don't want to have armed police patrolling our underground and cities to protect us from the "terrorists". We can't protest outside parliament, police can shoot innocent people 6 times (in the head) and the person responsible gets promoted, the case gets whitewashed and we just accept it through fear of the thought police.

What would be a worst case scenario in the eyes of Blair is the inevitable public condemnation and legal issues which will arise when the dust settles. The only way he can save his backside is by intimidating us in to submission/silence or pushing fascism and destroying our principles as a nation. He's fecking evil.

Evil - yes!

Bliar will hang. He has stolen money from the nation, and like a third world despot, salted this away in his (no longer secret) offshore bank accounts. But this pales in the light of incontravertible evidence of his war crimes and his crimes against humanity. In addition the man has committed treason.

Terror police 'monitor thousands'
"Not just terrorists not just attackers but the people who might be tempted to support or encourage," he said.

i.e. everyone who does not support Tony Blair's wars on the Middle East.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/5306580.stm

This has been going on for decades. Cheltenham "monitor" the phones and email of thousands of "risks". "Risk" is broadly defined.

It is a source of immense ammusement to us to know that a bunch of inept spooks listens in to our "conversations". Words such as "gold", "offshore", "bomb" and even "underground" trigger some tosspot freak to pick up the headphones.

LOL

With his MI5 background, has anybody considered the possibility that Blair's true mission was not only to finish off what Thatcher started but to finish off what was left of the Labour Party as well as our residual freedoms?

In order to get ahead of the rest of this never-ending queue, I hereby volunteer to be his torturer and ultimately his executioner! :^)

I have one point about that "I think you'll find it's... 50000" business, which I haven't seen anyone else pick up on.

It will be very hard for the questioner to find out what number it is, largely because Tony Blair has made any attempt to count. This goes against the Geneva Convention, and also means that he and his Labour cronies can make up any old shite they want, and be safe from contradiction.

Put a "not" somewhere in there, to make it make sense!

It makes you wonder quite what he gets up to when he's on holiday. Clearly the sun got to his head a bit more than usual this time. Perhaps he should buy a straw hat...

A bit of elite hearsay/gossip is hardly an admission

It is far from hear-say, there is video footage of this and i myself have watched it. he answers the question so arrogantly and shows clearly how devoid he is of any sense of what he ahs just admitted to..Hopefully i will find it for you and link you to it, how easy you dismiss considering the amount of evidence alone on Blair to swing him from the nearest yardarm.

The video is a classic propaganda piece. Supposition presented as fact, experts presenting their revelations, cooked up evidence, referances to obscure documents. Everyone knows. Be like everyone. I love the "even Hollywood actors" bit. Of course, actors do tend to rise to political promenence in the USA, but quoting the drugs, hookers, porn, unstable and violent Charlie Sheen is going a little far, isn't it. And the "False Flag" thing. The video doesn't show the following Wikipedia warning, "The neutrality of this article is disputed.....". Look it up. The whole thing is crock cooked up for 911 kooks, moonbats dumb enough to believe it.

Hopefully i will find it for you and link you to it, how easy you dismiss considering the amount of evidence alone on Blair to swing him from the nearest yardarm.

Don't go to any trouble on my account, I'll happily accept he said this but I don't really see it as an admission of his crimes, let alone a mea culpa.

That the iraq invasion was a war crime is beyond debate
Article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter prohibits any nation from using force against another. The charter allows for only two exceptions to this rule: when force is required in self-defense (Article 51) or when the Security Council authorizes the use of force to protect international peace and security (Chapter VII).

There was no threat, there was no security council resolution.

Unfortunately, there will be no prosecution.

And it emerges that thousands of British muslims have been radicalised enough to join the resistance in Iraq.

If you are going to inform me about anything, I'd love to the source for this claim

"Much as I despise him, the decision is not his. The agression against iran will have to be a lebanon style air destruction. There is little the UK can add to this, hence no need to participate." (Fri, 16.21)

Paul, why would UK not be involved in any air war against Iran?

We were heavily - and crucially - involved in the air war in Iraq, during the sanctions years. USA is a long way from the Middle Eastern theatre of war, and not even Stealth bombers can fly that far without refueling. Which is why a 9 year old girl was served with a Section 44 for protesting near RAF Fairford, where Stealths are based and US bombing campaigns prepare and refuel.

Fairford is one of America's most important US bases. No war happens without using it. During Shock and Awe, the B2 Stealth bombers were taking off night and day. See Paul Rogers article Countdown to War for details on how fundamentally critical to US aims the UK's involvement is for attacking Iran. And how to spot the start of action before sleepy MPs/journalists do.

This involvement will not be debated in Parliament, for it is a foregone conclusion; Blair has no need to bring the sheep into it. It will also be glossed over by our illustrious media, like the extent of the fighting in Afghanistan, which has been compared to that in WW2 and Korea in terms of ferocity by military Top Brass with nothing comparable since then. Even Iraq is reported like someone else's war.

Nothing to see here, move along please.

It's people like Tony that make illegal wars possible, help innocent children die and push our reputation to new lows inconceivable in 1997. Our name is in tatters and Tony Blair is a war criminal.

It is not just Blair.
It's people who voted for Blair/Labour again after the war while disagreeing totally with it and many more of Blair's policies, simply because he nominally leads the "Labour" Party, who allowed Iraq to happen.

That supire bunch of shites, the Labour Party - both PLP and CLP - have blood on their hands. It is people who contiue to think they can change the Labour party "from within", from Hain down to the humble stooge who posts Labour Party leaflets through your door.

Without accountability through electoral sanction, political leaders grow bolder and more deluded that they are in tune with voters and that God speaks only to them. They only get worse.

I heard this, Paul, on the BBC TV 10 o'clock news one day last week.

The person who said it had the name Stephenson, and he was talking on behalf of the Met. Police.

The full programme that included the clip from Stephenson was broadcast on BBC2 last night. Stephenson may have been scaremongering but he definitely said thousands. He may have been referring also to "supporters" of terrorism, whatever that means, but that was ambiguous on the news broadcast last week.

Why would I want to make such things up, Paul? The evidence against Blair is massive.

Error in that last comment...

The name I was looking for was Peter Clarke. Apologies to anyone called "Stephenson" and please excuse the poor memory for names. Two articles confirming the BBC programme and Clarke's comments currently in the CLG column:

http://www.blairwatch.co.uk/node/683

And it emerges that thousands of British muslims have been radicalised enough to join the resistance in Iraq.

The articles don't support this assertion at all, just that the plods and spooks are spying on many people

I think while the prime minister may well personally support such an enormity, he doesn't have the power to aid it.

Iraq was a tough sell,(months of using 'weaponsofmassdestruction' in every sentence), his support for israel in lebanon provoked only baffled revulsion (in my experience anyway, and despite the very biased coverage), noone knows what the fuck our brave lads are doing in afghanistan, and we don't even have enough squaddies left to break a fireman's strike in liverpool.

In my opinion, he is superfluous to an attack on iran, all the plans seem to point to an airborne nuclear demolition. If fairford etc are used, I'm not sure how much control we have over them in any case.