Thursday, 1 June 2006


On 18 March 2003, British Members of Parliament voted to go to war with
Iraq and set in train a chain of events that would see a catastrophe befall the Iraqi people and, yet again, call upon young, British men to die on behalf the ambition and greed of the corrupt and dishonest politician.

The resolution that 412 MPs voted for said, in part:

"That this House recognises that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and long range missiles… pose a threat to international peace and security… the decision of Her Majesty's Government that the United Kingdom should use all means necessary to ensure the disarmament of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction… The United Kingdom should… endorse an appropriate post-conflict administration for Iraq."
One MP gave the game away during the debate that day. He actually told Parliament and the British people the real reason why the war was about to be fought. Hugh Bayley, New Labour MP for the City of York, said this:
"Members of this House cannot ignore the fact that security for the state of Israel will be impossible as long as Saddam in Iraq is providing funding and support to the families of suicide bombers."
This is just about the closest any public figure has ever come to telling us the real reason why Tony Blair took us to war with Iraq.

As many as a million people may have died in this second Gulf War because Israel and the Neoconservaties of Washington and New York, most of whom are themselves Jewish, wished to punish an Iraqi regime that funded the rebuilding of Palestinian homes bulldozed by the Israeli Defence Force, as a consequence of a family member having carried out a suicide bombing.

Oil would be a glorious bonus, but it was never the casus belli. The Jewish political and media establishment wanted Israel’s enemy destroyed. George Bush senior called off the dogs too early during Gulf War I and the job was left unfinished.

The Jewish Neoconservatives, Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis Libby and Richard Perle began their long march back to war almost as soon as this first Gulf War ended.

The clamour for Iraq’s destruction grew in intensity when the world's foremost media Zionist, Rupert Murdoch, set up the Washington rag The Weekly News in 1995 and gave the Neoconservatives a regular platform for their hawkish opinions.

When 9/11 came along, coincident with the most intellectually challenged President in US history, they had all the excuse they needed. It didn’t hurt to have a greasy, New World Order careerist in place in Downing Street, eager to please and ready to sit up and beg on command either.

On 18 March 2003, the day of the great debate, I sent a couple of e-mails to Glenda Jackson and George Galloway, two of the most anti-war MPs, which contained information that I thought might undermine the shiny-eyed zealot and those that were spoiling for a fight. I also tried to pass this stuff on to Tam Dalyell, the Father of the House, to my mind the most honourable man in parliament but, unfortunately, he had no e-mail facility.

I got a surprise that night. The phone rang. It was Tam Dalyell. As a consequence of our little chat, I promised to post a written copy of the information that I had at my disposal to his home address. I asked Mr. Dalyell a simple question before I hung up and he gave me a simple answer. My question was:

"How many Kurds, do you believe were killed at Halabja"?
He replied:

"About 400".
Whenever Halabja has been mentioned by the British and American warmongers, they have always categorically pronounced that the number of people killed was 5,000. I knew this to be a lie and Mr. Dalyell confirmed it for me during our brief conversation.

I sent him a much larger document than the one I had sent to Glenda Jackson and George Galloway. In total, I provided Mr. Dalyell with 80 foolscap pages of damning information. This was forwarded to him about ten days after he phoned me.

However, I never heard from him again and the information that I sent to Galloway and Jackson was not used in that final debate on Iraq. I e-mailed the same information to a good many journalists, specifically, to those whose newspapers seemed to be making an effort to bring the war in Iraq to an end.

None ever replied.

Interestingly, however, a few months later, Tam Dalyell suggested that several members of Chairman Blair’s entourage were a part of a 'Jewish Cabal,' intent on stoking up the fires of war. He first made these opinions known in the US magazine, Vanity Fair.

He echoed his accusations on Radio 4's World at One programme, saying that the government of the US was 'being unduly influenced by a cabal of Jewish advisers… There is far too much Jewish influence in the United States.' He went on to describe some of the 'neoconservatives' who comprise the enormously influential advisory body, JINSA:

"The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs -I was thinking of Wolfowitz, Deputy Defence Minister Perle, Bolton, Assistant Secretary of State, Feith, Adelman, Abrams and Fleischer. Those people drive this policy… I am worried about my country being led up the garden path on a Likudnik (Ariel) Sharon agenda... Straw, Mandelson & Co. are leading a tremendous drive to sort out the Middle East".
Dalyell also said that he had 'picked out one person about whom I am extremely concerned, and I have to be blunt about it. That is Lord Levy… I believe his influence has been very important on the Prime Minister and has led to what I see as this awful war and the sack of Baghdad.'

Actually, though the fathers of both Mandelson and Straw were Jewish, their mothers were not, and so, technically speaking, they are not Jewish. However, the way they act and the company they keep adequately demonstrates where their sympathies truly lie.

So, I guess it is possible that Tam Dalyell didn’t just chuck my 80-page 'dossier' into the bin when he discovered its 'anti-Semitic' thrust.

In all, 4,804 coalition troops lost their lives in Iraq and more than 40,000 were injured. 348 Journalists, 1,487 civilian contractors and 448 'academics' also died. I'm not sure of the number of deaths from suicide; Gulf War Syndrome and illnesses related to time spent in Iraq but I'm sure a great many have perished since their return.

170 British military personnel were killed in Iraq and many British civilians are also now dead who would have been alive had we not invaded. Chairman Blair and all of the bristling butchers who slavered for war in the House of Commons on 18 March 2003, are wholly responsible for this.

What follows is an edition of the HALABJA document that I emailed to George Galloway and Glenda Jackson on 18 March 2003.

I’m no fan of Saddam, he was certainly a brutal tyrant but, if Blair and Bush wanted rid of him, they should have told the whole truth, not just the little bits of it that suited their game plan. Blair, Straw, Hoon et al. instructed us ad nauseam as regards the 'moral case for war.' One of the main constituents of this case was presented as the 'gassing of his own people.' The massacre of the Kurdish villagers at Halabja was the incident most often cited.

Well, in March, 1988, Halabja was a hotly contested war zone and the fact of the matter is that gas was used against the opposing forces BY BOTH SIDES in the Iranian/Iraqi conflict.

A week after the gassing of the Halabja Kurds in March 1988, Charles Redman, a US State Department spokesman said:

"There are indications that Iran may also have used chemical artillery shells in this fighting. We call on Iran and Iraq to desist immediately from the use of any chemical weapons."
A US Defence Intelligence Agency Report released in March 1988, put it this way:

"Most of the casualties in Halabja were reportedly caused by cyanogen chloride. This agent has never been used by Iraq, but Iran has shown interest in it. Mustard gas casualties in the town were probably caused by Iraqi weapons, because Iran has never been noted using that agent."
The 17 April 1988 edition of The New York Times reported thus:

"Iran expects to reap a propaganda harvest by showing that Iraq is gassing those of its own citizens deemed sympathisers in the seven-year-old war... According to the Iranians, a single Iraqi chemical attack on the Iranian-occupied village of Halabja last month killed 5,000 people and injured 5,000 others."
Then, in 1990, US Army War College experts, Professor Stephen Pelletiere, Colonel Douglas Johnson and Leif Rosenberger produced the report: Iraqi power and US security in the Middle East, which stated:

"In March 1988, the Kurds at Halabjah were bombarded with chemical weapons, producing a great many deaths. Photographs of the Kurdish victims were widely disseminated in the international media. Iraq was blamed for the Halabjah attack, even though it was subsequently brought out that Iran too had used chemicals in this operation, and it seemed likely that it was the Iranian bombardment that had actually killed the Kurds…

Blood agents were allegedly responsible for the most infamous use of chemicals in the war, the killing of Kurds at Halabjah. Since the Iraqis have no history of using these two agents and the Iranians do, we conclude that the Iranians perpetrated this attack".
In October 2002, Kevin Dowling castigated TB Liar’s 'dodgy dossier' thus at the Globe-Intel website:
"Tony Blair is a liar, the man who headed the CIA's Iraq desk during the Gulf War said last night… Pelletiere said that crucial claims made in the British Government's Dossier on Iraq, and repeated by Tony Blair in his statement to the Commons, were patently false.

‘Saddam has used chemical weapons, not only against an enemy state, but against his own people,’ the Dossier states. ‘Saddam has used chemical weapons both against Iran and his own people,’ the Dossier repeats a page or two further on.

‘In 1988 Saddam also used mustard and nerve agents against Iraqi Kurds at Halabja in northern Iraq. Estimates vary but according to Human Rights Watch up to 5,000 people were killed.’

Not so, said Pelletiere. ‘Most of the civilians killed at Halabja, and it's very unlikely that as many as 5,000 died, were killed by Iranian poison gas,’ he said…

In 1990, Pelletiere, Professor Leif Rosenberger and Lieutenant Colonel Dr Douglas Johnson of the Strategic Studies Institute of the US Army War College wrote: Lessons Learned: The Iran-Iraq War.

Their study drew on the first-hand knowledge of US Defence attach├ęs, CIA and Defence Intelligence Agency analysis, field reports and ‘signals intelligence’ - phone and radio messages sent by the warring armies and picked up by the National Security Agency.

Pelletiere says this about the study: ‘This later became the handbook, the bible, that was issued to all US military units for strategic and tactical guidance during Operation Desert Storm. It's been open-source material for 20 years, so there's no way the British military, the Joint Intelligence Committee, or Tony Blair's staffers can plead ignorance of its contents and conclusions’."
On 9 October 2002, Professor Pelletiere did not mince his words, saying:
"Bush and Blair want a war in Iraq and they are both prepared to lie if necessary, in order to get one…

Blair's so-called dossier is supposed to be based on 'intelligence'… It insults our intelligence by recycling old, discredited propaganda and presenting it as fact…

When lies appear in an official Government report to a sovereign Parliament, well then you have to ask yourself just what is going on…

Most of the civilians killed at Halabja, and it's very unlikely that as many as 5,000 died, were killed by Iranian poison gas… The Iranians made a photo-opportunity out of a catastrophe simply by blaming the deaths on Saddam, and then the media happily gobbled their propaganda up. The first stories claimed that there were between 80,000 and 100,000 dead, which was obviously phony…

The great majority of the victims seen by reporters and other observers who attended the scene were blue in their extremities. That means that they were killed by a blood agent, probably either cyanogen chloride or hydrogen cyanide. Iraq never used and lacked any capacity to produce these chemicals. But the Iranians did deploy them. Therefore the Iranians killed the Kurds".
Pelletiere is not the only bloke somewhere near the top of tree who was prepared to tell the world that Tony Blair was a liar. The following quotation from Raju G. C. Thomas, Professor of International Affairs at Marquette University, Milwaukee, who has lectured at Harvard, U.C.L.A, the M.I.T and the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, may be found here:

"The Halabjah incident is one of the reasons being proposed now by Prime Minister Blair and President Bush for a full-scale military assault on Iraq…

Blair's dossier includes a photograph which I know for a fact was produced by the Iranian propaganda machine…

Bush and Blair want a 'regime change' simply because if sanctions were to be lifted then Saddam's regime would favour Russian and French oil companies rather than US or British multinationals…

This dispute has little to do with any war on terrorism. And it is quite wrong that we should base public policy on propaganda and lies…

Meanwhile, estimates of the number of innocents who have died in Iraq from relentless American-dictated UN sanctions range between a million and 1.7 million, including more than half a million children."
Tony Blair and the top guns at the Foreign Office and Defence Department, Jack Straw, Geoff Hoon, Robin Cook, Baroness Symons, George Robertson, Peter Hain and Mike O’Brien, will have been aware of the fact that Iranian weaponry might well have been responsible for most of the deaths at Halabja and they deliberately suppressed this information preferring to 'spin' a dishonest case for war. They all quoted the '5,000 deaths' statistic as gospel on many occasions and many more MPs repeated this figure without ever bothering to investigate the alternative possibilities.

Now, tell me something, did any British politician, including the Liberal Democrats, ever tell you what you just read here? Why did Blair, Straw, Hoon, Alistair Campbell and the rest suppress this information?

On 7 June 2002, 10 months before Gulf War II began, The Telegraph reported thus:

"Tam Dalyell, the veteran Labour MP, last night said Tony Blair was a worse leader than Margaret Thatcher and consigned him to last place when he ranked the eight Prime Ministers he had known in his parliamentary career… Even Michael Foot was rated a more effective leader by Mr Dalyell, despite presiding over Labour's disastrous election defeat in 1983.
Mr Dalyell condemned Mr Blair's ‘presidential’ style… The MP for Linlithgow said Mr Wilson, Mr Callaghan, John Smith, Hugh Gaitskell, Mr Foot and Neil Kinnock were all better leaders".
Then, on 27 March 2003, The Guardian featured an interview with Dalyell, in which he said:
"My constituency Labour party has just voted to recommend that Tony Blair reconsider his position as party leader… I agree with this motion. I also believe that… he should be branded as a war criminal and sent to The Hague."
Finally, on 18 January 2004, The Sunday Telegraph ran this Colin Brown article:
"Mr Dalyell confided to me that he had changed his opinion of Mr Blair. ‘He is not the worst,’ said Mr Dalyell last week. ‘He is by far the worst.’

Mr Dalyell, 71, announced last week that he would retire at the next election after more than 40 years at Westminster. Mr Blair, perhaps thankful that his adversary was quitting, led the tributes to him. ‘Fiercely independent, Tam's persistence in pursuing causes close to his heart is legendary,’ Mr Blair told the House.

The kind remarks by the Prime Minister cut little ice with the member for Linlithgow who, as the longest-serving MP, is also Father of the House…

‘Tony should go,’ he declared. ‘And he should take his friend Lord Falconer with him’."
In 1987, an Early Day Motion protesting against arms exports to Iraq was introduced into Parliament and, in 1988, two EDMs were tabled which condemned the attack upon Halabja and the use of Chemical Weapons in Kurdistan.

Tony Blair, Jack Straw, John Prescott and Gordon Brown signed none of these EDMs.

In 1997, Tony Blair said:

"Mine is the first generation able to contemplate the possibility that we may live our entire lives without going to war or sending our children to war."
However, the following year, five years before Gulf War II began, he was saying this:
"We are looking at ways now, together with the Americans, of the possibility of removing Saddam Hussein altogether."
On 16 February 2003, the day after 2 million British people marched in protest against the looming war in Iraq, Tony Blair said something which doesn't quite chime with his recent statements regarding the respect he feels who disagree with him.

"I read the anti-war sites and listen to the protesters and I realise that they haven't a clue, or worse, they just don't give a damn."
I really don’t know how anyone who was against the war could have voted for him again in May 2005.

No comments:

Post a Comment