Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Iraq war. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iraq war. Show all posts

Monday, 6 May 2019

Fallujah Forgotten

David Swanson

I don’t know if most people in the United States ever knew what Fallujah meant. It’s hard to believe the U.S. military would still exist if they did. But certainly it has been largely forgotten — a problem that could be remedied if everyone picks up a copy of The Sacking of Fallujah: A People’s History, by Ross Caputi (a U.S. veteran of one of the sieges of Fallujah), Richard Hill, and Donna Mulhearn.

Fallujah was the “city of mosques,” made up of some 300,000 to 435,000 people. It had a tradition of resisting foreign — including British — invasions. It suffered, as did all of Iraq, from the brutal sanctions imposed by the United States in the years leading up to the 2003 attack. During that attack, Fallujah saw crowded markets bombed. Upon the collapse of the Iraqi government in Baghdad, Fallujah established its own government, avoiding the looting and chaos seen elsewhere. In April, 2003, the U.S. 82nd Airborne Division moved into Fallujah and met no resistance.

Immediately the occupation began to produce the sort of problems seen by every occupation everywhere ever. People complained of Humvees speeding on the streets, of being humiliated at checkpoints, of women being treated inappropriately, of soldier urinating in the streets, and of soldiers standing on rooftops with binoculars in violation of residents’ privacy. Within days, the people of Fallujah wanted to be liberated from their “liberators.” So, the people tried nonviolent demonstrations. And the U.S. military fired on the protesters. But eventually, the occupiers agreed to be stationed outside the city, limit their patrols, and allow Fallujah a degree of self-governance beyond what the rest of Iraq was permitted. The result was a success: Fallujah was kept safer than the rest of Iraq by keeping the occupiers out of it.

That example, of course, needed to be crushed. The United States was claiming a moral obligation to liberate the hell out of Iraq to “maintain security” and “assist in transition to democracy.” Viceroy Paul Bremer decided to “clean out Fallujah.” In came the “coalition” troops, with their usual inability (mocked quite effectively in the Netflix Brad Pitt movie War Machine) to distinguish the people they were bestowing liberty and justice upon from the people they were killing. U.S. officials described the people they wanted to kill as “cancer,” and went about killing them with raids and firefights that killed a great many of the non-cancer people. How many people the United States was actually giving cancer to was unknown at the time.

Read more


Sunday, 14 April 2019

RAY McGOVERN: Unaccountable Media Faced with Dilemma in Next Phase of Deep State-gate

Ray McGovern
Consortium News

Now that the media has been exposed for wrongly siding with the intelligence agencies, how will it handle Devin Nunes’s criminal referrals in Deep State-gate?, asks Ray McGovern.

Readers of The Washington Post on Monday were treated to more of the same from editorial page chief Fred Hiatt. Hiatt, who won his spurs by promoting misleading “intelligence” about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and suffered no consequences, is at it again.

This time he is trying to adjust to the fading prospect of a Deus ex Mueller to lessen Hiatt’s disgrace for being among the most shameless in promoting the Trump-Russia collusion narrative. 

He is not giving up. When you are confident you will not lose your job so long as you adhere to the agenda of the growing Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media-Academia-Think-Tank complex (MICIMATT if you will), you need not worry about being a vanguard for the corporate media. It is almost as though Hiatt is a tenured professor in an endowed chair honoring Judith Miller, the New York Times reporter who perhaps did most to bring us Iraqi WMD.

In his Monday column Hiatt warned: “Trump was elected with the assistance of Russian spies and trolls, which he openly sought and celebrated. But he did not (or so we are told) secretly conspire with them.” In effect, Hiatt is saying, soto voce: “Fie on former (now-de-canonized) Saint Robert of Mueller; we at the Post and our colleagues at The New York Times, CNN et al. know better, just because we’ve been saying so for more than two years.”

Wednesday, 27 March 2019

We Have Spent $32 Million Per Hour on War Since 2001






    

 

      
 
 



    

Tuesday, 31 October 2017

Body of tragic Iraq weapons inspector Dr David Kelly mysteriously EXHUMED 14 years after 'sexed up' dossier controversy

The Mirror UK


The body of Iraq weapons inspector Dr David Kelly has been mysteriously exhumed, it emerged last night.

Dr Kelly was found dead in 2003, days after being grilled by a Parliamentary committee about his contact with journalists.

He was buried in a churchyard near his home in Oxfordshire.

But a few months ago, his remains were exhumed at the request of his family, Thames Valley Police said.

According to the Hutton inquiry, Dr Kelly took his own life by overdosing on painkillers and cutting his wrist with a knife.

However, doubts about the suicide verdict have persisted ever since.

Dr Kelly was caught up in the scandal surrounding the Blair government's notorious 'sexed up' dossier which claimed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction capable of being launched within 45 minutes.

In 2003, the 59-year-old scientist admitted to BBC journalist Andrew Gilligan he had been concerned by those claims in an off-the-record conversation.

Gilligan's reporting of the story led to Dr Kelly being identified - with some claiming Blair's government leaked his name intentionally.

Dr Kelly came under extreme pressure during questioning before a Select Committee.

In July 2003, he was reported missing after telling his wife he was going for a walk.

His body was found in woodland near his home in Oxfordshire the next morning.

Many still believe his death should be investigated with a full inquest.

According to the Sun on Sunday, Dr Kelly's remains may have been moved because of 'unwelcome attention' from campaigners at the gravesite.


See also:  

Doctors claim cover-up over death of weapons expert Dr. David Kelly

Cover-up claims as David Kelly post mortem set to stay under wraps for 70 years

Cleaning up after their crimes: More evidence that Dr David Kelly was murdered by The Secret Team

Friday, 14 July 2017

Iraq: Will Tony Blair Finally Stand Trial for His Part in the “Supreme International Crime”?

Felicity Arbuthnot

“I think most people who have dealt with me, think I’m a pretty straight sort of guy, and I am.” (Tony Blair, BBC “On the Record”, 16th November 1997.) 


On 30th November last year, Michael Gove, currently UK Environment Minister, pretty well unloved by swathes of the population whatever Ministry he heads, declared, at the post Chilcot Inquiry debate in Parliament regarding Tony Blair’s role in dragging the UK in to a monumental tragedy for which history will not forgive:

“History, I think will judge him less harshly than some in this House do.”

Deciding whether or not to illegally invade Iraq was a “finely balanced act”, fantasized Gove.

It was not. It was a pack of lies, many of which came from the Blair regime, as confirmed by Colin Powell’s delusionary address to the UN on 5th February 2003, in subsequently unearthed correspondence and of course, the Chilcot Inquiry. 


On 15th September 2004, the then UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, in an interview with the BBC World Service, asked if the invasion was illegal, stated:

“Yes, if you wish.” He continued without caveat: “I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN Charter. From our point of view and from the Charter point of view it was illegal.” 

Blair, his Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw and his Attorney General Lord Goldsmith did not face a Nuremberg type trial – and surreally, Blair, after his 2007 resignation was appointed Middle East Peace Envoy. Straw and Goldsmith went back to business as usual.

Tuesday, 12 July 2016

The Truth Perspective: A Very Heavy Agenda: The rise, fall and resurrection of the neocons, with Robbie Martin

"Post-9/11, the War on Terror had outlived its usefulness. The minds behind the think tanks that drive America's interventionist foreign policy decided that the U.S. needed a new enemy, so they chose an old one -- Russia."

Thought they were gone and increasingly irrelevant after the disastrous Iraq war? Think again. The neocons are back, and they're directing American foreign policy with as much psychopathic zeal as ever. PNAC may be gone, but it has simply been rebranded as the 'bipartisan' Foreign Policy Initiative, and its agenda is one and the same: to ensure U.S. hegemony and global domination, no matter how many people they have to kill.

All this and more is covered extensively in filmmaker Robbie Martin's new documentary, A Very Heavy Agenda.


Read more and listen to the podcast.

Saturday, 9 July 2016

UK foreign secretary: US decision on Iraqi army led to rise of Isis

Comment: The only thing they don't mention - yet again - is that this was purposeful and NOT and due to intelligence failures or lack of geopolitical foresight, though basic incompetence and corruption was certainly part of regime change and it always is. The essential point to remember was that this had been planned for years as part of Neo-Conservative doctrine. 


---------------------------

The Guardian 

 

The UK has stepped up its criticism of the American conduct of the Iraq war, with the foreign secretary saying the single most disastrous mistake was the mass removal of supporters of the Ba’ath party from the Iraqi army, which he claimed had led directly to the formation of Islamic State. 

 

“Many of the problems we see in Iraq today stem from that disastrous decision to dismantle the Iraqi army and embark on a programme of debaathification,” Philip Hammond, the foreign secretary, told the foreign affairs select committee. 

 

“That was the big mistake of post-conflict planning. If we had gone a different way afterwards we might have been able to see a different outcome.” 

 

He added: “It is clear a significant number of former Ba’athist officers have formed the professional core of Daesh [Isis] in Syria and Iraq and have given that organisation the military capability it has shown in conducting its operations.” 

 

He said the current regime of Haider al-Abadi, the Iraqi prime minister, had “a clear policy to reverse and to end the debaathification programmes and reintegrate Ba’athists into civic life but he is unable to get through the political system because it has become a touchstone of the Sunni-Shia divide in Iraq”. 

 

Ann Clwyd, a Labour MP on the committee and a strong supporter of the Kurds in Iraq, revealed that in 2003 she had personally gone to lobby Paul Bremer, the US head of the Coalition Provisional Authority, the body overseeing the administration of Iraq, about the Iraqi army issue. She said she had complained that senior Iraqi professional soldiers, some with family backgrounds in the UK, were being pushed aside even though some of them were “willing to help in the changed circumstances”. 

 

Read More

 

Wednesday, 6 July 2016

In Damning Report, Chilcot Inquiry Slams Blair Over Legal Basis For Iraq War

Comment: The Chilcot inquiry still remains a whitewash since it delivers a verdict that it was merely incompetence and a "failure of intelligence". It was no such thing. This was a long term planned project and should be seen as such. By underscoring the "failure of intelligence" nonsense the inquiry reinforces the official narrative.

 

------------------------------------ 

Zero Hedge 

 

The Chilcot Inquiry, a British public inquiry into the nation's role in the Iraq war, was published moments ago. The massive report covers almost a decade of UK government policy decisions between 2001 and 2009 and took seven years to complete.  It covers the background to the decision to go to war, whether troops were properly prepared, how the conflict was conducted and what planning there was for its aftermath, a period in which there was intense sectarian violence.

 

One of the key focus areas of the report is the rationale that Tony Blair gave to the public in taking the UK to war, and whether or not the war was necessary. Upon its release, the report concluded that military action "was not a last resort", and that Britain chose to join the invasion of Iraq in 2003 before peaceful options for disarmament had been exhausted.


 

 
The report's main focus is on what commitments then-Prime Minister Tony Blair gave to then-US President George W Bush ahead of the invasion, and whether or not Blair misled the British public over the threat posed by weapons of mass destruction (WMD), which ultimately turned out to be non-existent. Critically, the report determined that the threat posed by WMDs in Iraq was presented with a certainty that was not justified, and the government failed to achieve its stated objectives of the war.

As summarized by BBC, the main points of the report are:

  • The UK chose to join the invasion of Iraq before the peaceful options for disarmament had been exhausted. Military action at that time was not a last resort.
  • The judgements about the severity of threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction - known as WMD - were presented with a certainty that was not justified.
  • Intelligence had "not established beyond doubt" that Saddam Hussein had continued to produce chemical and biological weapons.
  • Policy on Iraq was made on the basis of flawed intelligence assessments. It was not challenged, and should have been.
  • The circumstances in which it was decided that there was a legal basis for UK military action were "far from satisfactory".
  • There was "little time" to properly prepare three military brigades for deployment in Iraq. The risks were neither "properly identified nor fully exposed" to ministers, resulting in "equipment shortfalls".
  • Despite explicit warnings, the consequences of the invasion were underestimated. The planning and preparations for Iraq after Saddam Hussein were "wholly inadequate".
  • The Government failed to achieve the stated objectives it had set itself in Iraq. More than 200 British citizens died as a result of the conflict. Iraqi people suffered greatly. By July 2009, at least 150,000
  • Iraqis had died, probably many more. More than 1m were displaced.
  • The report sets out lessons to be learned: It found former prime minister Tony Blair overestimated his ability to influence US decisions on Iraq; and the UK's relationship with the US does not require unconditional support.
  • It said ministerial discussion which encourages frank and informed debate and challenge is important. As is ensuring civilian and military arms of government are properly equipped.
  • In future, all aspects of any intervention need to be calculated, debated and challenged with rigour. Decisions need to be fully implemented.
Read more

See also:  Invasion of Iraq, The Secret Downing Street Memo: “Intelligence and Facts were being Fixed”

“Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime’s record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.”

Thursday, 26 May 2016

‘Unforgivable’: Majority of Brits can’t absolve Tony Blair of his Iraq war sins

Comment: Tony Blair deserves everything that's hopefully coming to him. He's built his Bliar Empire quite literally from the blood of thousands of maimed and murdered families. His crimes are as huge as his repellent delusions of grandeur and commensurate denials of culpability. Be afraid Tony. The elite will throw you to the dogs as quick as you can say WMD. And that time may well be coming soon. 

------------------------------- 
RT
Former Prime Minister Tony Blair can never be forgiven for taking the UK into the Iraq war, a majority of Brits said in an opinion poll.

Pollster YouGov carried out the survey ahead of the publication of the long-delayed Chilcot Inquiry report, which examines the legality of Britain’s 2003 Iraq invasion.

It found only eight percent believe Blair did nothing wrong, while 53 percent said they could never forgive him.

Some 15 percent of respondents said it was time to forgive Blair for his misjudgment.
Perhaps the most damning finding was that just 25 percent of Labour Party supporters are in favor of forgiving their former leader.

Read more

Wednesday, 25 May 2016

Is the UK’s Iraq Inquiry Set to “savage” Tony Blair?

Felicity Arbuthnot
Dissident Voice

Part 1 of a 2 Part Series

In spite of all the scepticism regarding the long delayed UK Iraq Inquiry into the illegal invasion of Iraq, with predictions (including by myself) that it would be a “whitewash” of the enormity of the lies which led to the near destruction of Iraq, to the presence of ISIS and to probably over a million deaths, The Sunday Times (May 22nd, 2016) is predicting an “absolutely brutal” verdict on those involved. The paper claims that former Prime Minister Tony Blair, his then Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, Sir Richard Dearlove, former Head of British Secret Intelligence (MI6) are among those who face “serious damage to their reputations.”

Not before time, many will surely be thinking.

The Inquiry, which sat from November 24th, 2009 until February 2nd, 2011, is finally to be published on July 6th, approaching five and a half years since its conclusion. Speculation is that publication of the findings are being further delayed until after the June 23rd British referendum on whether to remain in the European Union. Tony Blair is campaigning on his pal Prime Minister David Cameron’s “remain in” ticket. Confirmation of his murderous misleadings before the referendum would further discredit all he had to say and seriously damage, if not detonate, the “in” campaign.

Read more

 

Wednesday, 27 January 2016

“If it was a fact, it wouldn’t be called Intelligence.” Donald Rumsfeld on Iraq war


RT

Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld came to promote his solitaire app, but when Stephen Colbert craftily brought up the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Rumsfeld's remarks left 'The Late Show' host and many others saying "Wow."

Launching his 'Churchill Solitaire' game, the 83-year-old Rumsfeld has been on a media tour where tough questions are not a prerequisite. Talking about the Iraq War, even as it looms like a cloud, can be a challenge when 2016 is saturated with politics and a fun application built to benefit charity is closer at hand. But Colbert made transitioning to the taboo topic look easy.

Colbert asked if Islamic State, or terrorist groups like it, holding western Iraq and eastern Syria was considered "a worst-case scenario, or a beyond-worse-case scenario" in 2002 and 2003 during the run-up to declaring war.

The "disorder in the entire region ... generally, people had not anticipated," Rumsfeld answered. 



That's when Colbert added that the top two presidential frontrunners from each party all say the Iraq War was a mistake. But with that, Colbert also said he wouldn't ask Rumsfeld the style of question some supporters of the war have answered in the last couple years. Though it has now become cookie-cutter, the "if you knew then what you know now, would you still have supported the war" angle of questioning was described as "unfair" by Colbert.
"You only knew then what you knew then, [and] you only know now what you know now," Colbert told Rumsfeld. "Our now is tomorrow's then."

Next, Colbert alluded to a famous answer Rumsfeld gave during a 2002 Department of Defense press conference in relation to the connection between weapons of mass destruction and Iraq. The quote is as follows: 


Read more and see videos
 

Monday, 26 October 2015

Tony Bliar "Apologies" for Iraq War

Comment: Suuure Tony. This pathological narcissist is just trying to cover himself prior to the conclusions from the Chilcott Report. Tony knows the heat is increasing, not least due to George Galloway's crowd-funded documentary The Killings of Tony Blair years due out sometime next year. 

----------------------------------

The Independent

Tony Blair has made apologies about aspects of the Iraq War for the first time and has said there are ‘elements of truth’ in the theory that the invasion helped feed the rise of Isis.

In a TV interview with CNN, the former Prime Minister said he was sorry that the intelligence behind the decision to attack Saddam Hussein’s regime in 2003 was wrong, and admitted there had been mistakes in the planning of the operation.

He had been asked how he felt about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq as he took questions from American political broadcaster Fareed Zakaria in an interview due to be broadcast by CNN Europe on Sunday.

It is as part of a longer documentary, Long Road To Hell: America In Iraq, set to be screened on Tuesday. With the cameras rolling, Mr Zakaria asked Mr Blair: “Given that Saddam had no WMDs, was the war a mistake?”

He replied: “I apologise for the fact that the intelligence we received was wrong. I also apologise, by the way, for some of the mistakes in planning, and certainly, our mistake in our understanding of what would happen once you removed the regime. But I find it hard to apologise for removing Saddam.”

Read more

Sunday, 19 July 2015

Sir John Chilcot and members of his Iraq inquiry panel have shared more than £1.5m in fees since 2009

The Independent 

Mounting anger over the sums of money paid to Sir John Chilcot and his committee have prompted calls for the Government to stop any further payments, amid demands by politicians for publication of the Iraq inquiry’s report without further delay. 

An analysis by this newspaper of all accounts released by the inquiry reveal that Sir John, his fellow committee members, and their advisers, have shared more than £1.5m in fees since the inquiry began in 2009.

This averages out at £231,308 each. And last year alone £892,400 was spent on the wages of the 11 civil servants and three support staff who comprise the inquiry’s secretariat.
The inquiry has not sat in four years – the last evidence session was in February 2011– yet it has cost the taxpayer £5.5m in that time. In total, more than £10m has been spent, and there is still no timescale for the publication of the final report – which Sir John initially aimed to complete by the end of 2010. 

Read more 

Friday, 20 March 2015

The CIA Just Declassified the Document That Supposedly Justified the Iraq Invasion By Jason Leopold

VICE 

 

The agency responded to Greenwald this past January and provided him with a new version of the NIE, which he shared with VICE News, that restores the majority of the prewar Iraq intelligence that has eluded historians, journalists, and war critics for more than a decade. (Some previously redacted portions of the NIE had previously been disclosed in congressional reports.) 

 

Thirteen years ago, the intelligence community concluded in a 93-page classified document used to justify the invasion of Iraq that it lacked "specific information" on "many key aspects" of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs. 

 

But that's not what top Bush administration officials said during their campaign to sell the war to the American public. Those officials, citing the same classified document, asserted with no uncertainty that Iraq was actively pursuing nuclear weapons, concealing a vast chemical and biological weapons arsenal, and posing an immediate and grave threat to US national security. 

 

Congress eventually concluded that the Bush administration had "overstated" its dire warnings about the Iraqi threat, and that the administration's claims about Iraq's WMD program were "not supported by the underlying intelligence reporting." But that underlying intelligence reporting — contained in the so-called National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that was used to justify the invasion — has remained shrouded in mystery until now. 

 

The CIA released a copy of the NIE in 2004 in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, but redacted virtually all of it, citing a threat to national security. Then last year, John Greenwald, who operates The Black Vault, a clearinghouse for declassified government documents, asked the CIA to take another look at the October 2002 NIE to determine whether any additional portions of it could be declassified. 

 

Tuesday, 3 February 2015

7 big lies ‘American Sniper’ is telling America about Iraq and Chris Kyle

Against the Machine like Rage

The film American Sniper, based on the story of the late Navy Seal Chris Kyle, is a box office hit, setting records for an R-rated film released in January. Yet the film, the autobiography of the same name, and the reputation of Chris Kyle are all built on a set of half-truths, myths and outright lies that Hollywood didn’t see fit to clear up.

Here are seven lies about Chris Kyle and the story that director Clint Eastwood is telling:

1. The Film Suggests the Iraq War Was In Response To 9/11: One way to get audiences to unambiguously support Kyle’s actions in the film is to believe he’s there to avenge the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The movie cuts from Kyle watching footage of the attacks to him serving in Iraq, implying there is some link between the two.

3. The Film Portrays Chris Kyle as Tormented By His Actions: Multiple scenes in the movie portray Kyle as haunted by his service. One of the film’s earliest reviews praised it for showing the “emotional torment of so many military men and women.” But that torment is completely absent from the book the film is based on. In the book, Kyle refers to everyone he fought as “savage, despicable” evil. He writes, “I only wish I had killed more.” He also writes, “I loved what I did. I still do. If circumstances were different – if my family didn’t need me – I’d be back in a heartbeat. I’m not lying or exaggerating to say it was fun. I had the time of my life being a SEAL.” On an appearance on Conan O’Brien’s show he laughs about accidentally shooting an Iraqi insurgent. 
He once told a military investigator that he doesn’t “shoot people with Korans. I’d like to, but I don’t.”

4. The Real Chris Kyle Made Up A Story About Killing Dozens of People In Post-Katrina New Orleans: Kyle claimed that he killed 30 people in the chaos of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, a story Louisiana writer Jarvis DeBerry calls “preposterous.”  It shows the sort of mentality post-war Kyle had, but the claim doesn’t appear in the film.

5. The Real Chris Kyle Fabricated A Story About Killing Two Men Who Tried To Carjack Him In Texas: Kyle told numerous people a story about killing two alleged carjackers in Texas. Reporters tried repeatedly to verify this claim, but no evidence of it exists.

6. Chris Kyle Was Successfully Sued For Lying About the Former Governor of Minnesota: Kyle alleged that former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura defamed Navy SEALs and got into a fight with him at a local bar. Ventura successfully sued Kyle for the passage in his book, and a jury awarded him $1.845 million.

7. Chris Kyle’s Family Claimed He Donated His Book Proceeds To Veterans’ Charity, But He Kept Most Of The Profits: The National Review debunks the claim that all proceeds of his book went to veterans’ charities. Around 2 percent – $52,000 – went to the charities while the Kyles pocketed $3 million.

Although the movie is an initial box office hit, there is a growing backlash against its simplistic portrayal of the war and misleading take on Kyle’s character. This backlash has reportedly spread among members of the Academy of Motion Picture of Arts and Sciences, which could threaten the film’s shot at racking up Oscars.

Tuesday, 20 May 2014

Grand Opening of New 9/11 Memorial Museum In NYC Attempts to Cement "Official Story" Lies

Bernie Suarez 
Activist Post

The grand opening of the globalist 9/11 Memorial Museum is scheduled for Wednesday May 21, 2014 at ground zero in New York City. Despite the post-9/11 world that we live in; one in which we've witness a massive awakening of humanity. A time period when many average Americans have experienced massive changes in their lives due to the broken economy. At a time when America's wealth has dwindled or should we say, transferred to the pocketbooks of unaccountable globalist gangsters. At a time when perpetual war is the norm despite the fact that we know that the Iraq war was based on a WMD lie, and we know factually that the World Trade Center towers were destroyed by controlled demolition.


And since we know factually that Bin Laden didn't own his own controlled demolition company we can mathematically and factually state that Bin Laden did not cause the damage that occurred at the World Trade Center lending full credence to the statement: '9/11 was an inside job'.


Despite all of this, New York City is committed to history revisionism of the first class. Spearheaded with globalist money and speakers like former mayor Michael Bloomberg, the "museum" is touting itself as an "educational" experience where visitors can come to be educated on "What happened on 9/11". A quick glance at their website's FAQ page brings us to that section. It reads:

"9/11" is shorthand for four coordinated terrorist attacks carried out by al-Qaeda, an Islamist extremist group, that occurred on the morning of September 11, 2001. The attacks killed 2,977 people.
On the morning of September 11, 2001, 19 terrorists from al-Qaeda, hijacked four commercial airplanes, deliberately crashing two of the planes into the upper floors of the North and South towers of the World Trade Center complex and a third plane into the Pentagon in Arlington, Va. The Twin Towers ultimately collapsed because of the damage sustained from the impacts and the resulting fires. After learning about the other attacks, passengers on the fourth hijacked plane, Flight 93, fought back, and the plane was crashed into an empty field in western Pennsylvania about 20 minutes by air from Washington, DC.
The attacks killed nearly 3,000 people from 93 nations. 2,753 people were killed in New York, 184 people were killed at the Pentagon and 40 people were killed on Flight 93.

Most people with an honest integrity and passionate urge to know the truth about 9/11 by now have probably woken up to the lies of the global empire which president Dwight Eisenhower referred to as the 'military industrial complex'.  Polls have reflected that a large percentage of humanity simply doesn't believe the official story.


Read more

Wednesday, 30 April 2014

Iraq: A Different Kind of Legacy

Uruknet

The Iraq War is now 11 years old and still tearing up the country, but no longer with the assistance of U.S. troops. Between 500,000 and 700,000 people died from 2003–2011. The monthly civilian toll now is as high as it’s been since 2008....And that’s not all. We now know, thanks to the courageous efforts of several researchers, that environmental toxins have likely poisoned the country – another consequence of the war instigated by the United States. 

The munitions the United States used in Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom are the apparent culprits, and, like the grim Agent Orange legacy in Vietnam, controversy and denial animate much of the discussion. Two agents are at issue. One is depleted uranium, which is used to harden bullets and mortar shells to enable them to more easily penetrate targets...A 2010 peer-reviewed study by molecular biologists found high rates of birth defects among Iraqis in Fallujah – "the highest rate of genetic damage in any population ever studied," according to the lead author...

Read more

Saturday, 16 November 2013

Tony Blair: never in the field of human history has one man earned so much from deaths of so many



Stop the War Coalition
Matt Carr
 
Just as we learned that the US and UK governments were conspiring to stop us learning the truth of the Bush-Blair Iraq conspiracy, Tony Blair picked up £150,000 for an hour-long speech in Dubai 

In the last fortnight a number of media commentators accused Russell Brand of naivete and political ignorance for his criticisms of the democratic system and the limitations of the right to vote.

This week however, the British public were presented with further evidence of how hollowed-out the democratic process has become, when the Chilcot Inquiry revealed that it was being denied access to 25 notes sent by Tony Blair to George Bush, and 130 documents relating to conversations between the two architects of the Iraq War, in addition to dozens of records of cabinet meetings.

There is no more serious decision that a government can take than a declaration of war, and there is no more serious test of a democracy than the ability to hold its leaders to account over why and how such decisions are taken, especially when a war is declared on false pretenses and results in a tragic and bloody disaster of the magnitude of the Iraq War.

The Chilcot Inquiry was established by Gordon Brown with the fairly mild remit to establish ‘lessons’ from the Iraq war, rather than ‘apportion blame.’ Much to its own surprise no doubt, it has shown more teeth than anyone expected, to the point when its investigations threaten the reputations – and the cash flow – of those responsible.

Today these noble statesmen have moved on. Bush now paints pictures of dogs and puppies, and makes donations to an organization that seeks to convert Jews into Christians. When he talks about Iraq at all it’s only to say that like Edith Piaf and Dick Cheney, he doesn’t regret anything.

Nor does his partner-in-crime, the Right Honorable Tony Blair, Peace Envoy and all-round money-making machine, who just gets richer and richer, and continues to urge on new wars with the same combination of bug-eyed fanaticism, pig ignorance and deference that once produced such sterling results in Iraq.

This week he picked up £150,000 for an hour-long speech in Dubai, whose subject, apparently, was something called ‘global affairs’. To paraphrase Churchill, never in the field of human history has one man earned so much from the deaths of so many.

And people are still dying in the broken country and interminable battlefield that Iraq has become. Yesterday, 67 Shi’ite pilgrims were killed and 152 more wounded in sectarian attacks on the Ashura celebrations in Karbala.

This year, more than 6,000 people have died in Iraq – exactly ten years after it was ‘liberated’ and its society effectively destroyed by the madcap free market experiment, the incredibly botched occupation, the lies and manipulations, the death squads, the suicide bombers and all the other disastrous consequences of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

That matters, and should matter most of all in the countries that made it happen. Yet now we find that the inquiry established to ‘learn lessons’ from the war will not be able to know what the two men most responsible for this bloody debacle were saying to each other, or what Blair was saying – or not saying – to his cabinet.

If a democratic society cannot establish mechanisms to hold its elected officials to account over a war that amounts to one of the greatest foreign policy disasters in British history – a war that according to the Nuremberg process amounts to a war of aggression and the ‘supreme crime’ then it is not serious.
If such a society allows those responsible to cloak themselves in secrecy on spurious grounds of reasons of state that are designed to protect them from scrutiny – then such a democracy is essentially a simulacrum, an elite-managed spectacle, a Darren Brown magic trick that provides the illusion, but not the substance of public participation in the political process.

It means that democracy is a kind of theatre, in which the public is allowed to play a limited role, like the audience in Who Wants to Be a Millionaire or Strictly Come Dancing, and press a buzzer for this party or that party, but it cannot be privy to the backrooms where politicians and civil servants take decisions without consultation and without explanation.

That is why it matters that the US State Department and Whitehall are conniving to keep Bush and Blair’s machinations under wraps. One of the key individuals who is blocking the Chilcot Inquiry’s access to key documents is Sir Jeremy Heywood, the UK’s most senior civil servant, formerly private secretary to Tony Blair during the lead-up to the Iraq War.

To expect such a man to behave otherwise is a bit like expecting MacBeth to hold a public inquiry into the murder of King Duncan.

But Heywood should not be allowed to get away with it, and nor should the Coalition, which is also complicit in this cover-up. All of them clearly hope that Chilcot will just go ahead without these documents and produce some polite and-all-very British pseudo-criticism that Blair can agree to and no one will pay any attention to.

Then everyone will agree that lessons have been ‘learned’, when we won’t have learned anything at all. We shouldn’t let this happen. Because it isn’t just about them and it isn’t just about Iraq. It’s also about us.

Because if a government can get away with this, it can get away with anything.



Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...