Yes, Vladimir Putin should be TIME's person of the year

The headline of Jonathan Freedland's piece in the Guardian is about the only accurate thing in the article. Truly, the Guardian has found its niche in a post-truth world in which omission, distortion and misrepresentation of the truth pads the pages of even the broadsheets. But of course the post-truth meme has a corollary; an informed readership that is post-credulous. We simply don't believe them any more. And with good reason. 

Yes, everyone admits, Boris was quite right, absolutely spot-on about Saudi Arabia, but as a member of the establishment he is required to lie to the public. His fault was not to lie for his government. And if the establishment grudgingly admits that it's lying about KSA, it won't take much to squeeze the admission that they lied over Yugoslavia, Iraq (whoops - got that one already), Afghanistan, Ukraine, Libya and Syria. Only patsies such as Jonathan and Con over at the Telegraph still trot out the feeble old establishment ordure. But the post-credulous don't buy it. 

I was enjoying drinks with some undergrads from Vienna a couple of weeks ago. Without any diminution of their proper patriotism (for Germany and Denmark as well as for Austria) they all expressed their admiration for Putin. He's everything they want our own leaders to be - smart, ruthless, patriotic, daring, skilled and cynical. And yes. For all his successes evident in 2016, he deserves TIME's appellation more than Trump. Russia has just the GDP of Italy yet still strides the world stage like a colossus. And outsmarts and outfoxes all of Europe's dull, failing, ineffective unelected officials with all their dreary policy blunders. 

What a perfect time for that leprous old fossil, himself the very Father of Fake News, bloody Blair to appear with the intention of founding a new public disinformation service, pumping out prime fake news better than the rest. And he may even have an establishment fair wind; a well informed comment over at CAW reveals that

Raedwald, I strongly suspect it is the National Security Council not the "the numpties at the FCO" that is responsible for the UK line on Syria, and I suspect the NSC is strongly under the influence of the Cabinet Office / Joint Intelligence Committee / PM. For example the new-ish £1+ billion Conflict, Stability and Security Fund (CSSF) seems to be driving UK spending in Syria now, and that has been under NSC control since 2015, using money largely transferred away from DfID. (eg spending on the White Helmets is now cumulatively £32+ million, part of "capacity building for civil society"). Also £5.3+m for "media activists" - bloggers, tweeters and facebookers? More alarming £1.4 million UK CSSF money spent on the "Syrian rebel coalition's lobbying bill in Washington DC and the UN" - pretty weird stuff.

So who better than Blair to head up the government's own fake news channels? New Blair - New Disinformation?