 Below is an article from the BBC entitled; 'Chilcot Report; What Blair Said To Bush In Memos' (6 July 2016). The only thing I'd ask people to remember whilst reading is both Blair & Bush are consummate act-ors, i.e. they, or their present or previous incumbents do not run the show, as anyone should be able to tell from their tediously, choreographed antics down the years. The real planners behind the war machine are seldom if ever seen, anything 'leaked' to the press is a deliberate act of propaganda designed to distract attention from more pressing issues as it were. The press are just as much instruments of the war machine as the soldiers on the frontline & in many ways just as important. Thus, the purpose of bringing it to your attention is to disavow some at least, the burden of being taken in by what the politician says, sometimes they tell the truth & sometimes they do not, the lesson for us all is to get wise to the double-speak, because it's used on us all the time. For example, Democracy is the 1st step of 3 towards Communism, the 2nd is Socialism….below Blair states; 'So our fundamental goal is to spread our values of freedom, democracy….' (he continues) '…..tolerance & the rule of law'. By tolerance he means the traditional Arabic practices of intolerance towards homosexuality, equality for women etc will be outlawed in the comingWorld Order (his term), his freedom reference actually means the eventual freedom from the Abrahamic religions (i.e. the God of the Bible) & so on. Here's a list of what things are supposed to mean if it's any help; https://votesmart.org/education/vocabulary#.XQai-C2ZO7Y In any event, this is political theatre with a vengeance. Not one ounce of sweat of ours on the issue ever mattered a gnats bollock to these butchers if you remember, nor does any amount of protest marching count for anything either, seeing as they're always organised by themselves, they are in the UK at any rate, as no one else would get the permission in our totalitarian society.
 (Note; when the BBC says 'the Twin Towers' attack, killed nearly 3,000 people.' that figure does not include the subsequent deaths of 1000's more; - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/10/911-attack-ground-zero-manhattan-cancer) - - - - - - 'The memos sent between 2001 and 2007 were released alongside Sir John Chilcot's report of his inquiry into the Iraq War. Mr Bush's replies were not included in the report. 'Better to act now' Tony Blair to George Bush, 12 September 2001 In one of the oldest notes to be released, sent the day after the attack on New York's Twin Towers, Mr Blair offered his support to bring to justice the hijackers and looked ahead to the "next stage after this evil". Mr Blair said some would "baulk" at the measures necessary to control "biological, chemical and other weapons of mass destruction", but added: "We are better to act now and explain and justify our actions than let the day be put off until some further, perhaps even worse catastrophe occurs." (What, like a mass awakening stopping the New World Order in its tracks?) 'We need to deal with Saddam' Tony Blair to George Bush, 11 October 2001 "There is a real willingness in the Middle East to get Saddam out but a total opposition to mixing this up with the current operation [bombing Afghanistan]... I have no doubt that we need to deal with Saddam. But if we hit Iraq now, we would lose the Arab world, Russia, probably half the EU and my fear is the impact of all of that on Pakistan. However, I am sure we can devise a strategy for Saddam deliverable at a later date." Mr Blair went on to say phase one had to be military action in Afghanistan where the perpetrators of 9/11 were hiding, then phase two would be the campaign against terrorism "in all its forms". This memo reveals that Mr Blair and Mr Bush were openly discussing toppling Saddam Hussein as early as 2001, and just a month after the Twin Towers' attack, which killed nearly 3,000 people.  'Given regime change a good name' Tony Blair to George Bush, 4 December 2001 Mr Blair suggested a strategy for regime change that builds over time was needed "until we get to the point where military action could be taken if necessary without losing international support". "If toppling Saddam is a prime objective, it is far easier to do it with Syria or Iran in favour or acquiescing rather than hitting all three at once, I favour giving these two a chance at a different relationship… And referencing involvement in Afghanistan, Mr Blair said if that gave new hope to people "in particular we shall have given regime change a good name which will help us in our argument over Iraq". 'With you whatever' Tony Blair to George Bush, 28 July 2002  "I will be with you, whatever... Getting rid of Saddam is the right thing to do. He is a potential threat. He could be contained. But containment as we found with Al Qaida is always risky. His departure would free up the region. And his regime is probably, with the possible exception of North Korea, the most brutal and inhumane in the world. The first question is: In removing him, do you want/need a coalition? The US could do it alone, with UK support. The danger is, as ever with these things, unintended consequences. Suppose it got militarily tricky. Suppose Iraq suffered unexpected civilian casualties. Suppose the Arab street finally erupted. Suppose Saddam felt sufficiently politically strong, if militarily weak in conventional terms, to let off WMD [weapons of mass destruction]. suppose that, without any coalition, the Iraqis feel ambivalent about being invaded and real Iraqis, not Saddam's special guard, decide to offer resistance. If we win quickly, everyone will be our friend. If we don't and they haven't been bound in beforehand, recriminations will start fast." This extract comes from the start of a six-page note, marked Secret Personal, to the US president, which was seen only by Number 10 officials before being sent, the report stated. Neither then Foreign Secretary Jack Straw nor Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon were shown a copy in advance, and only Mr Straw got to see it afterwards. Sir John said it was marked "personal" but it represented an extensive statement of the UK government's position eight months before the invasion, and both secretaries-of-state should have been given the chance to comment on it before it was sent. 'Our best ally might be Russia' Tony Blair to George Bush, 28 July 2002  "In my opinion, neither the Germans or the French, and most probably not the Italians or Spanish either, would support us without specific UN authority. And - and here is my real point - public opinion is public opinion. And opinion in the US is quite simply on a different planet from opinion here, in Europe or in the Arab world. "In Britain, right now I couldn't be sure of support from Parliament, Party, public or even some of the Cabinet. And this is Britain. In Europe generally, people just don't have the same sense of urgency post 9/11 as people in the US… At the moment oddly, our best ally might be Russia." Mr Blair told Mr Bush that if he wanted a wider military coalition he would have to get UN backing, make progress on Middle East peace and engineer a "shift" in public opinion. He acknowledged that there would be "reluctance" in the US about taking the issue to the UN Security Council, but insisted it was the best way to provide them with a legitimate case for military action. 'Need to make the case' Tony Blair to George Bush, 28 July 2002  In a paragraph entitled The Evidence, Blair writes: "Again, I have been told the US thinks this unnecessary. But we still need to make the case. If we recapitulate all the WMD evidence, add his attempts to secure nuclear capability, and as seems possible, add on Al Qaida link, it will be hugely persuasive over here. Plus, of course, the abhorrent nature of the regime." Mr Blair emphasises the importance of presenting the evidence about Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's supposed weapons of mass destruction as well as trying to establish a link with al-Qaeda in the aftermath of 9/11 the previous year - although none was ever found. Within two months of sending this note, Mr Blair told President Bush at a summit at Camp David, his country retreat, if it came to war, the UK would take a significant military role. This was despite no decision having been taken on which military package might be offered to the US for planning purposes. 'Not when, but how' Tony Blair to George Bush, 28 July 2002 "I would be happy to try to put all this together... But it needs a huge commitment in time and energy. So it's only really worth doing if we are all on the same page. On timing, we could start up after the (summer) break. A strike date could be Jan/Feb next year (2003). But the crucial issue is not when, but how."  In a handwritten note, Mr Blair compliments the president on a "brilliant speech" to the United Nations General Assembly in September 2002 which "puts us on exactly the right strategy". 'Risk Saddam messing us about' Tony Blair to George Bush, 24 January 2003 "What's the problem? If we delay, we risk Saddam messing us about, sucking us back into a game of hide and seek with the [UN] inspectors where, unless they find 'the smoking gun', the thing drags on forever until we give up or get distracted." Mr Blair goes on to say that if former UN chief inspector Hans Blix finds "the smoking gun", "(and we are working very hard to get it for him), that is it and immediately the UN should discuss action". Casualties, oil wells and Israel Tony Blair to George Bush, 30 January 2003 In a memo entitled Countdown, sent two months before the Iraq invasion, Mr Blair asks: "Have we sound plans for the following: 1. Saddam use of WMD against US and/or his own people; 2. Saddam attack on Israel; 3. Saddam destruction of oil wells; 4. Keeping apart rival groups and tribes." A fifth point is added, in Mr Blair's handwriting: "Avoiding civilian casualties". The memo then considers questions to be asked of the aftermath.  'Last mile for peace' Tony Blair to George Bush, 19 February 2003  Outlining a course of action and a timeframe for putting down a second UN resolution, Mr Blair gives six reasons, the last one being: "It allows us to show the world we are going to war, not because we want to, but because we have to. "Above all, it shows the US reaching out, understanding concerns, but still firmly willing to act. It sets the UN a fundamental test. It gives the Europeans something to rally round. When we do act, it will show we went the last mile for peace." 'Ridding Iraq of Saddam is real prize' Tony Blair to George Bush, 26 March 2003  Mr Blair wrote to Mr Bush six days after US missiles hit the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, signalling the start of the US-led campaign to topple Saddam Hussein, in a memo called The Fundamental Goal. "This is the moment when you can define international politics for the next generation: the true post-cold war world order. Our ambition is big: to construct a global agenda around which we can unite the world; rather than dividing it into rival centres of power. So our fundamental goal is to spread our values of freedom, democracy, tolerance and the rule of law, but we need a broad based agenda capable of unifying the world, to get it. That's why, though Iraq's WMD is the immediate justification for action, ridding Iraq of Saddam is the real prize." 'If it falls apart, everything falls apart in the region' Tony Blair to George Bush, 2 June 2003 Less than three months after the war began, Mr Blair referred to the difficulties of rebuilding Iraq in a note to Mr Bush. "The task is absolutely awesome and I'm not at all sure we're geared for it. This is worse than re-building a country from scratch. "We start from a really backward position. In time, it can be sorted. But time counts against us… "My sense is: we're going to get there but not quickly enough. And if it falls apart, everything falls apart in the region." 'This time next year it better be going right, not wrong' Tony Blair to George Bush, 5 October 2003 Mr Blair said losses in Iraq and a failure to find "enough on WMD" were leading the public to doubt the action and suggested there was a need to "get our confidence in our story back. Iraq is better without Saddam". "And by this time next year, it better be going right, not wrong. For us and for the world!" - - - - - - - - After Afghanistan & Iraq we went into Libya & Syria & back into Iraq, if we ever left. After leaving the Middle East in utter ruins during his tenure as prime Minister, Tony Blair was promptly given the role of peace envoy…….to the Middle East on behalf of the UN in 2007, suffice to say, things have only gotten much worse in the Arab world since then. Yasser Arafat & Saddam Hussein did not last out Blair's Premiership & Colonel Gaddafi & Osama Bin laden were executed during Blair's role as peace envoy as was Benazir Bhutto. These famous five Islamist leaders were by far the most prominent figures in Middle East politics, but it's highly unlikely any of these people, all trained by Britain & the US had anything to do with the planning of the events on Sept 11th 2001 in New York, if they did, no genuine evidence has ever been produced to suggest any connection. Bin Laden never received a trial so we'll never hear his side if the story, Tony Blair however, had 'proof' it was Osama almost immediately; 'OSAMA bin Laden & his terrorist network carried out the attacks on New York & Washington, & have the "will & resources" to mount further such outrages, according to a previously confidential dossier published by the [British] Government yesterday.The dossier said bin Laden had warned shortly before September 11 that he was preparing a "major attack" on America, & his associates were warned to return to Afghanistan by Sept 10. Immediately before the attacks associates of bin Laden were naming the date for action as "on or around September 11". The document added: "There is evidence of a very specific nature relating to the guilt of bin Laden that is too sensitive to release." - The Telegraph (05 Oct 2001). In contrast, a headline from The Guardian (14th Oct 2001) reads; 'Taliban demand evidence of Bin Laden's guilt……[the story continues] President George Bush rejected as "non-negotiable" an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden if the United States ended the bombing in Afghanistan. "There's no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he's guilty" [However the British add] 'Mr [John] Prescott, speaking while on a diplomatic mission in Moscow, argued that the latest statement from al-Qaida strongly suggested Bin Laden's culpability for last month's attacks on New York & Washington. "What I have heard about the message given ... is basically confirming, I think, the guilt of Bin Laden.." After consideration of the foregoing, now the question must be asked; ….What did any of it have to do with Britain? The popular view is that the US dominates modern Britain & it intimidates it's politicians into coming along with their war agenda. This is not the case, if anything it's the reverse, as Carroll Quigley pointed out in The Anglo American Establishment (1956). People like Tony Blair only pretend to be kowtowing to the dictates of the Americans, whereas in reality, the centre of the plan for a World Order as Blair put it is actually London, England, which is where people such as George Galloway come into their own. Demagogue G G is given more airtime than any other political agitator in Britain, despite his feckless history, he'll lead the UK public on by insisting Iraq, Afghanistan etc were, 'Blair's Wars', or nowadays; 'It's the Tories', anything that'll legitimise British democracy & it's institutions & that the electorate can have a say in this scam. The people who run the show are Internationalists, & would do away with nationalism altogether.  Recently G G said on his Twitter account on the 13th Mar 2019; 'Gone but never to be forgotten. Rt Hon Tony Benn. Socialist internationalist leader & teacher, Labour MP, best Prime Minister we never had. Lifelong opponent of the European Union, anti-War leader, a prince amongst men. RIP' (Brexit is about the destruction of nation states) The Rt Honourable Tony Benn (R.I.P.) once said; 'the UK is only superficially governed by MPs & the voters who elect them. Parliamentary democracy is, in truth, little more than a means of securing a periodical change in the management team, which is then allowed to preside over a system that remains in essence intact. If the British people were ever to ask themselves what power they truly enjoyed under our political system they would be amazed to discover how little it is' - http://www.carrollquigley.net/pdf/The_Anglo-American_Establishment.pdf Tony, who popularised the term globalisation here in the UK, as he left Office in 2007, thought it the right moment to announce he'd converted to Catholicism (there has never been a Catholic Prime Minister in the UK). (Here's a thought, if they're willing to slaughter millions of children on such a regular basis in full view of everyone & not show one pang of conscious about it…..imagine what they do to children behind the veil as it were?) Both Blair & Bush are on record as having stated when in Office, 'God' had a hand in determining policy, especially foreign; 'Prime Minister Tony Blair has told how he prayed to God when deciding whether or not to send UK troops to Iraq. Mr Blair answered "yes" when asked on ITV1 chat show Parkinson - to be screened on Saturday - if he had sought holy intervention on the issue.' - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4772142.stm ''I am driven with a mission from God'. God would tell me, 'George go & fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. & I did. & then God would tell me,'George, go end the tyranny in Iraq' & I did' - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/oct/07/iraq.usa Yes, but which God? Bush stated on Sept 19th 2001; 'this crusade, this war on terrorism, is going to take a while.' The Crusades of the Middle Ages were a religious enterprise, however, it wasn't pious Christians conducting operations, it was bloodthirsty Pagans masquerading AS Christians, nor are Zionists Jews; 'On December 11, 1917, a mere two days after the above letter was written [Balfour Declaration], British General Edmund Allenby entered Jerusalem triumphantly through the Jaffa gate, & the city became an occupied territory. On this historic occasion, Allenby reportedly declared that "the wars of the crusades are now complete" (Hatem Baziem - a Muslim). The Reign of Terror in the French Revolution was conducted primarily against Catholics. In the Red Terror of the Russian Revolution & in the reign of Stalin, millions of Christians & Jews were sought out & executed & otherwise persecuted. Now the Pagan Crusade has Islam as it's primary target, as it has had for a long, long time. Britain partitioned Ireland in 1922 bringing Catholics & Protestants into conflict for decades. India was similarly partitioned in 1947 by the British leading to untold strife between Hindu & Muslim, & Palestine was deliberately cut asunder & approximately half of the land given to the Zionists a year after the British Mandate had run it's course, ensuring perpetual conflict in the Holy Land so long as there's Muslims around, & Jews to blame for it. The Abrahamic religions are are the primary target; 'The Tony Blair Faith Foundation was an interfaith charitable foundation established in May 2008 by former British prime minister Tony Blair. Since December 2016 its work has been continued by the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change. The Foundation was launched in May 2008 in New York at the headquarters of the media group Time Warner. In his speech, Blair outlined the Foundation's aim that "idealism becomes the new realism", & that one of its goals was to "counter extremism in all six leading religions'. (Wikipedia) Like most UK international Quangos, it has an American branch, this one based round the corner from the old Church of Satan in San Francisco; 'URI [United Religions Initiative] is a global grassroots interfaith network that cultivates peace & justice by engaging people to bridge religious & cultural differences & work together for the good of their communities & the world.' https://www.facebook.com/pg/unitedreligionsinitiative/about/?ref=page_internal Incidentally, Tony's cliche/meme (every political campaign must have one nowadays) for his manifesto for the destruction of religions is; 'Making globalisation work for the many, not the few' (https://institute.global) The cliche of the Labour (Socialist) Party of Great Britain's manifesto is; 'Let’s build a Britain that works for the many, not the few.' - https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/jeremy-foreword/ So if you vote for Communist Jeremy Corbyn in the coming elections, you can expect an all-out assault on free-thought, not that it isn't here already of course. One of Tony's principle programmes (which Bono preaches at his gigs) is; 'CO-EXISTENCE We work to promote co-existence & counter extremism by tackling the ideology behind extremist violence, not just the violence itself…..We define extremism as the imposition of a belief, ideology or value-system on others by indoctrination, force or by seeking to control government, to the exclusion of all other views. We class any worldview as extreme if it actively opposes human rights, rule of law, religious pluralism, or equality.' (ibid) Not much going for Islam or Judaism in there then eh? 'Power is in tearing human minds to pieces & putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.' - George Orwell 1984.
'Although the color ‘orange’ is not prohibited by name, a shade of modern-day ‘orange’ that has specifically been discouraged as a color of clothing for the believers is ‘saffron’. The Messenger of Allah (saws) disapproved the believers to wear ‘saffron’ colored clothing as they are usually worn or associated with the religion & clothing of the disbelievers. Even today the Hindu priests & priestesses or the Buddhist monks wear a shade of this ‘saffron’ colored attire, & clothing of this color is generally associated with the clothing & religious color of the disbelievers. It would be best if the believers would abstain from wearing ‘saffron’ colored clothing…... Your brother & well wisher in Islam, Burhan' - http://islamhelpline.net/answer/3181/is-orange-clothing-banned
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
|
|
