British Iraq Inquiry: An ‘old fashioned anti-Semitism’

Protesters outside the inquiry dressed (left to right) as Tony Blair, George W. Bush and Gordon Brown. AP Photo/Lefteris Pitarakis

“Criticism of Israel is old fashioned anti-Semitism,” Stephen Harper, prime minister of Canada.

“A greater transparency about involving legal advice would have prevented the issue being left entirely to the Attorney General,” ,” – Elizabeth Wilmshurst, the only top British civil official who resigned in protest to London’s support for Dubya Bush’s war on Iraq in 2003.

What is wrong with Brits these days, eh! Though their elites played a major role (Balfour Declaration) in getting rid of millions of Jews from the West to a far-away Muslim Arab land in the Middle East – now some of them in the legal business are hunting for the mass-murderers, but ‘respectable” Israeli politicians and military leaders for being involved in the genocide of Iraqis, Palestinians and Lebanese.

A ’secret’ Iraq Inquiry on the role of Tony Blair’s government in Washington’s attack on Iraq based on Mossad/CIA fasle evidence of Iraqi WMDs – was announced by the British pro-Israel prime minister Gordon Brown on June 15, 2009. Later, however, under criticism by parliamentarians , the British government agreed to make the inquiry public. Gordon Brown himself chose a panel of five to conduct the inquiry under the chairmanship of Sir John Chilcot. Therefore, the inquiry is sometimes called “Chilcot Inquiry”. The other four members are; Sir Lawrence Freedman, Sir Martin Gilbert, Sir Roderic Lyne and Baroness Prashar. Both Lawrence Freedman and Martin Gilbert are welknown pro-Israel Zionist Jews. In raelity, like Barack Obama administeration, Gordon Brown’ government is also dominated by members of Friends of Israel, a British Zionist lobby group – which hold major power in both the Conservative Party and the Labour Party.

In his testimony to the Iraq Inquiry, former British prime minister showed no remorse for collaborating with Bush which resulted in the murder of over million of Iraqi Muslims and Christians civilians for the security of Israel. Now the same Israeli poodle says that Islamic Iran is a bigger threat than (Iraq) in 2003. Contrary to Tony Blair’s hatred towards the Muslims, the former British foreign secretary, Jack Straw, exposed Tony Blair’s lies in front of the inquiry on January 21, 2010 by saying: “I would not have written cosy letters to the US President promising that Britain would be there when America went to war (against Saddam Hussein).” Jack Straw is also against military action against Islamic Iran on Iraq-WMD style Israeli Hasbara evidence.

Oliver Miles, former Ambassador to Libya, writing in the Independent on November 22, 2009 – raised the doubts that the presence of two pro-Israeli members on the 5-member Iraq Inquiry would most probably hide the pro-Israel Jewish Lobby’s role in Britain’s joining the invasion of Iraq. The Jewish-owned TIME magazine called Oliver Miles’ comment as “disgraceful”. On January 28, 2010 – BBC was quoted Martin Gilbert, whom it described as a “proud practicing Jew and Zionist” saying he feels “deep unease” at Oliver Miles comments.

Professor William A. Cook (University of La Verne, southern California) in his book Zionist control of Britain\’s government: 1940-2009 traces the history of how Britain became a Zionist Occupied Government (ZOG). Reviewing the book Gilad Atzmon (Israel-born UK Jewish citizen)made the comment: “After so many years of setting the tone, bribing UK politicians and controlling the BBC they (Zionists) are used to being untouchable”.

It’s obvious that Iraq Inquiry would be as much of an official cover-up of Israeli involvement as was the case in the US’s 9-11 Commission. Both involved Zionist Jews as members. For example, 9-11 Commission member, Philip Zelikow, who told an audience at the University of Virginia on September 10, 2002:

“Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I’ll tell you what I think the real threat (is) and actually has been since 1990—it’s the threat against Israel. And this is the threat that dare not speak its name, because the Europeans don’t care deeply about that threat, I will tell you frankly. And the American government doesn’t want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell.” ~ Rehmat’s World

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Peacekeeping or War-making?

Murray Dobbin | Watching the response of the Canadian government to the catastrophe in Haiti I am sure I am not the only person to see this as a powerful counterpoint to our grotesque participation in the occupation of Afghanistan. How do Canadians feel, for example, when they hear of an RCMP officer killed as a peacekeeper versus a soldier killed in Afghanistan? Sadness for both, of course – both were doing jobs they were told to do. But the death of the soldier in Afghanistan is much more complicated. For me, the death is doubly tragic because that soldier is there illegally, the killing he is engaged in (both civilians and the Taliban) is done for no purpose the government can explain, and the mission itself is almost universally recognized as ill-conceived and doomed to fail – no matter how its goals are defined. Nothing good will come from all those lives lost, mangled or ruined by serious injury.

While the RCMP’s role in Haiti can never be seen to be completely pure and altruistic, given Canada’s shameful role in ousting Haiti’s president, by most accounts Haiti had become less violent. And the Haitian people generally welcomed the development, such as it was, and the peace. At least our mission there, tainted as it was, allows for honourable deaths of soldiers and police if and when such occur.

In Afghanistan, ultimately, no such honour is possible. We send our soldiers, most of them young, to a place that does not want them, where they know that progress is either temporary or non-existent, where they are propping up a terminally corrupt Afghan government and are complicit in the geo-political objectives of the US in securing oil and gas supplies. A death here is tragic because it is we, as Canadians, who are sending soldiers to die for nothing. Worse, to die for an ignoble cause. Read more of this post

%d bloggers like this: