Monday, 28 May 2012


In 1993, the Stephen Spielberg film, Schindler's List, won the Oscar for Best Picture.

The film was based loosely on the true story of Oscar Schindler, who managed to prevent a good many Jews from being sent to the concentration camps by the Nazis in the 1940s. After watching the film, Tony Blair said:
"There are not many books or films that change our perception of the world but that did it for me."
It's nice to know a major political figure can be so swayed by a work of fiction, albeit based on a true story, that he will allow that fiction to affect his judgement in the monumental way that Tony Blair did, isn't it?

In February 1993, UNICEF commissioned a report which was later shelved.

In this report, Dr. Eric Hoskins, a Harvard University health specialist, said this:
"Three years of sanctions have created circumstances in Iraq where the majority of the civilian population are now living in poverty. The greatest threat to the health and well-being of the Iraqi people remains the difficult economic conditions created by internationally mandated sanctions and by the infrastructural damage wrought in the 1991 military conflict… One fundamental contradiction remains: that politically motivated sanctions (which by definition are imposed to create hardship) can not be implemented in a manner which spares the vulnerable."
In April 1993, the year before John Smith died and Tony Blair became leader of the Labour Party, Blair was the flavour of the month at the Bilderberger conference in Athens.

His presence was reported by William Rees-Mogg in the 4 March 1996, edition of The Times, in an article entitled Wall Street, Treason and Pat Buchanan. Rees-Mogg had attended the same Bilderberg meeting. In March 1998, Christopher Gill, MP, asked Blair this question:
"Which members of his Government have attended meetings of the Bilderberg Group".
He replied:
Blair lied. He was there.

On 24 May 1995, The Times diary informed us thus:
"With concern about sleaze in mind, Tony Blair has belatedly listed in the updated Register of Members' Interests a visit he made in 1993 to the Bilderberg Conference in Athens as Shadow Home Secretary."
On 20 May 1999, the following written question, was posed by the Tory MP, John Bercow:
"To ask the Prime Minister… what official (i) transport and (ii) funds have been used to facilitate attendance at Bilderberg meetings of members of his Government; which members have attended meetings; what reports they have made on the meetings; and what subsequent communication they have had with others attending on subjects discussed at the meetings."
To which Tony Blair provided he following written answer:
"As far as I am aware, only one member of this Government, the Defence Secretary, has attended a meeting of the Bilderberg Group."
At this point, he was telling a double lie, as he had secretly attended the 1998 Bilderberger meeting in Scotland. Interestingly, in 1991, the year before Bill Clinton became President of the USA, he, too, attended his one and only Bilderberger meeting.

Edward Heath attended several Bilderberger meetings and Denis Healey was a founder member and British convenor of the group.

Indeed Healey has been to more Bilderberg meetings than any other British politician. On page 195 of his 1990 autobiography, The Time of My Life, Healey admits, 'the most valuable (meetings) to me while I was in opposition were the Bilderberg Conferences.'

On 10 March 2001, The Guardian featured an edited extract from Them: Adventures With Extremists, by Jon Ronson.

Here is an extract from the article:
"Bilderberg members continued to ignore my enquiries through the end of 1999 and into 2000… And then, one Tuesday morning, the phone rang. It was the instantly recognisable voice of a Bilderberg founder member, for 30 years one of their inner circle… a secret ruler of the world himself… It was Denis Healey… The notion of a Bilderberg person hasn’t changed since the earliest days, back in 1954, when the group was created by Denis Healey, Joseph Retinger, David Rockefeller and Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands…

This is how Denis Healey described a Bilderberg person to me:

‘To say we were striving for a one-world government is exaggerated, but not wholly unfair… we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing. Bilderberg is a way of bringing together politicians, industrialists, financiers and journalists…

We make a point of getting along younger politicians who are obviously rising, to bring them together with financiers and industrialists who offer them wise words. It increases the chance of having a sensible global policy’.

‘Does going help your career?’ I asked.

‘Oh yes’, he said. Then he added, ‘Your new understanding of the world will certainly help your career’.

‘Which sounds like a conspiracy’, I said.

‘Crap!’ said Denis Healey. ‘Idiocy! Crap! I’ve never heard such crap! That isn’t a conspiracy! That is the world. It is the way things are done. And quite rightly so… But I will tell you this. If extremists and leaders of militant groups believe that Bilderberg is out to do them down, then they’re right. We are. We are against Islamic fundamentalism, for instance… It's against democracy".

‘Isn’t Bilderberg’s secrecy against democracy, too?’ I asked.

‘We aren’t secret’, he snapped. ‘We’re private'…

I noticed a collection of photo albums on his mantelpiece. Denis Healey has always been a keen amateur photographer, so I asked him if he’d ever taken any pictures inside Bilderberg.

‘Oh yes’, he said. ‘Lots and lots of photographs’.

I eyed the albums… ‘Could I have a look at them?’ I asked him…

‘No’, he said. ‘Fuck off’."
In an interview with David Ross, the journalist and historian, William Blum, is on record as saying:
"The US did not lose the war in Vietnam, it succeeded in achieving its purpose; to make sure that Vietnam would be a basket case. As they made sure Iraq would be a basket case and, in 1999, they made sure that Yugoslavia would be a basket case. We turn any possible good example into a basket case… that is the crux of our foreign policy".
This is the unstated policy of the New World Order. Consider Denis Healey’s statement:
"If extremists and leaders of militant groups believe that Bilderberg is out to do them down, then they’re right. We are. We are against Islamic fundamentalism."
Then have a think about what the April 2001, issue of Identity Magazine has to say in reply:
"Compare a strict Islamic state like Saudi Arabia to Britain. No drugs, no glorification of homosexuality, no alcohol abuse, no sky-high crime rate, no huge male suicide rate, no enormous divorce rate and no abortions. Just what have we got to be so proud of? It’s Britain that’s visibly falling to bits, not Saudi Arabia. To the Bilderberger mentality ‘extremists’, ‘leaders of militant groups’ and ‘Islamic fundamentalists’ are dangerous, simply because they have ideals and don’t bow down before the almighty dollar.

‘Democracy’ as it presently exists in Britain is a no-choice democracy because it is dominated by two main parties which are subservient to the U.S. establishment and big business.

But this perverted arrangement is sacred to the Bilderbergers because the party system and voters are relatively easy to manipulate in the direction of, and we have Healey’s confession for this, a one-world government!"
In January 1994, at the all expenses paid invitation of the government of Israel, Tony Blair secretly visited that country.

Two weeks after his return to England, the Israeli Embassy official, Gideon Meir, introduced him to Michael Levy. Thereafter, Michael Levy, the boss of Magnet Records, became Tony Blair's private fundraiser and the New Labour project had begun.

Levy would, after Blair entered number 10, become his 'special envoy' to the Middle-East, and his unofficial Foreign Secretary in that region.

In 1999, In Tony Blair's business friendly Britain, the multi-millionaire Levy managed to pay only £5,000 in tax. In other words, he paid about the same as your average PAYE dustman.

On the 18 of August 1997, The Guardian reported thus:
"To disaffected former members of staff at Magnet Records, home of hits for Alvin Stardust and Chris Rea, their boss Michael Levy was a tyrant who revelled in his power. His tricks included chasing people around the office and throwing ashtrays… Levy's talents are indisputable as a tough negotiator, shrewd entrepreneur and charity fund-raiser. As chairman he brought in a phenomenal £60m for Jewish Care. Levy also happens to be a close friend of Prime Minister Tony Blair, who has much to be grateful to Levy for.

Levy's money-raising talents helped Blair finance his private office, leading to claims he was establishing a party within the party. For his services to the party and for charity, Blair has swiftly rewarded him with a seat in the House of Lords…

He gained access to Blair's inner sanctum through his friendship with the late Labour leader John Smith, a frequent visitor to Levy's house in Totteridge, north London... Levy was entrusted as the main fundraiser for The Labour Leader's Office Fund… It was a task Levy applied himself to with his usual vigour, raising an estimated £2m from the likes of Alex Bernstein, former head of Granada Television, David Goldman, former chairman of Sage software group, and other prominent businessmen…

A homebody, his centre of gravity is his wife Gilda and their two children. Most of his deal-making takes place over the heimisch cuisine of Gilda. Tony Blair has been a regular diner at Gilda's table, as have captains of industry…

In 1972 his friend Maurice Oberstein, head of the then CBS Records, helped him form Magnet Records."
On 16 February 1994, Tim Llewellyn, the former BBC Middle East correspondent, said this at a meeting of the Council for the Advancement of Arab-British Understanding:

"The claim by the Western governments that food and drugs flow freely into Iraq is not true. I have seen telexes and documents that showed clearly that the British and the American government interfered with the flow of crucial drugs into Iraq. That is unquestionable. [The sanctions] would not be lifted even if Iraq satisfies the UN Security Council on every single sanction report…

The Americans are making it clear that the sanctions are not going to be lifted under any circumstances… The West’s decision is… to keep squeezing the country. I do not see any possibility that oil will flow in Iraq between now and the end of 1994, and probably after that."
On 12 April 1994, a bill was debated in Parliament. It was titled: The Criminal Justice And Public Order Bill. In part, the bill said this:

"On conviction of any offence of violence the court shall… if satisfied that the offence was committed on racial grounds, impose an additional penalty which may exceed the maximum penalty otherwise prescribed for such offence… Part III of the Public Order Act 1986 shall be amended as follows… A person is guilty of the offence of racial harassment if on racial grounds he…uses words or behaviour or displays any writing, sign or other visual representation which is offensive on racial grounds within the hearing or sight of any person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby...

A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years in addition to… the sentence applicable for conviction of the offences of common assault."
During this debate, David Sumberg, MP for Bury South, said this:

"I suppose that I have a unique qualification to speak… not simply because I am Jewish, but because I represent in my constituency many members of the Jewish community… Something must be done to combat and reduce the rising tide of racism in our society, which principally affects the black and Asian communities, but which affects the Jewish community as well…

The Government have tabled new clause 125, which I warmly welcome. It will make the publication of racist literature an arrestable offence…

We must tackle the evil… It is unacceptable for there to be a rise in membership of the hard right in Britain, which has always been a tolerant, just and humane society, a society that has welcomed immigrants to its shores for many years".
During the same debate, Gerald Kaufman, Member of Parliament for Manchester, Gorton, said this:
"The question is whether the law should have greater rigour. That is what the new clause is about. It is about whether the law should say, ‘If you attack someone, that is odious, but if you attack someone because they are black or an Asian or Chinese or a Jew, that is even more odious than your attack on them per se’. That is my argument... Our new clause says, this is why it is such a good new clause, that the racial element carries with it an additional punishment, to say to people, ‘You have committed a crime, and the law of the land as it existed before this Act said that that crime was punishable by such-and-such a sentence, but because you committed that crime, which had a racial concomitant, you shall be punished even more, to teach you and to send a message to the ethnic minority communities that, as they are specially vulnerable, they shall have special protection’…

I moved a new clause to the Public Order Bill in Standing Committee G on April 10 1986, which would have created an offence of racial harassment. However, the talks did not result in our finding a satisfactory way to deal with the matter, which has remained a festering sore during the eight years since… which was why I moved the new clause, as the official representative of Her Majesty’s Opposition in the Standing Committee…

The House of Commons should send a message to the members of ethnic minority communities, of whom I regard myself as one, that Parliament considers crimes with a racial element as even more intolerable than other crimes… If you attack someone, that is odious, but if you attack someone because they are black or an Asian or Chinese or a Jew, that is even more odious…

The merit of our new clause is that if there is additional evidence of a racial element, the judge could expand the sentence… Parliament needs to send a signal to members of the ethnic minorities in this country that Parliament has a special concern for them".
In other words, as George Orwell might have said, if he'd been a creep like Kaufman:

"People are equal, but some people, especially ethnic minorities, are more equal than others".
Barbara Roche, who was the MP for Hornsey and Wood Green and Jewish also, said this during the same debate:

"Our new clause says… that the racial element carries with it an additional punishment, to say to people, ‘You have committed a crime, and the law of the land as it existed before this Act said that that crime was punishable by such-and-such a sentence, but because you committed that crime, which had a racial concomitant, you shall be punished even more’."
Sir Ivan Lawrence, MP for Burton, also a Jew but, unlike the previous three speakers, a Conservative MP at the time, had this to say in the same debate:

"The Home Affairs Select Committee believes that racism, in all its forms, is an evil and destructive force in our multiracial society… Most of us believe that we may be able to deter racist attacks by the threat of greater punishment… We believe that… that an assault motivated by racism is more socially divisive and corrosive of the very fabric of our tolerant society and, for that reason, is itself more serious.

The majority of members of the Home Affairs Committee believe that the matter is so serious, and will become increasingly more so, that the present state of the law is simply not enough. We therefore suggest that new clause 127 should create five new offences of racially motivated assault…

The Commission for Racial Equality and other organisations are in favour of the measure… Is there a need for a new offence of racial harassment to deal with the drip, drip, drip effect of constant harassment? The Board of Deputies of British Jews, the Commission for Racial Equality, the anti-racist alliance and a number of others all say yes. There were strong criticisms of the working of the present legislation, particularly from the Board of Deputies of British Jews, which said that the existing legislation had not proved effective in countering the tide of antisemitic and other racist literature… Racial motivation is flagged up in the report of any incident in which the police officer, victim or any third party believes there to have been a racial element".
Most people who read this essay will be unaware of the central role played by the Jewish community in the creation of the race laws of this country. In fact, you wouldn’t be too far wrong if you said that every time the British Board of Jewish Deputies has approached parliament with a request for an addition to the voluminous body of law already on the statute books, the request was granted.

The bill that Gerald Kaufman tried to foist on the British people was defeated. However, many of those who, during Tony Blair's time as Premier, rose to the top of New Labour's parliamentary pole voted for it. These include: Blair himself, Gordon Brown, John Prescott, Peter Mandelson, David Blunkett, Stephen Byers, Alan Milburn, Geoff Hoon, Peter Hain, Harriet Harman, John Reid, Tessa Jowell, Robin Cook, Clare Short, Alstair Darling, Chris Smith, Nick Brown, Ian McCartney, Frank Dobson, Margaret Beckett, Ron Davies, Paul Boateng, Estelle Morris, Mo Mowlam, George Robertson, Gavin Strang, Ann Taylor, Paul Murphy, Andrew Smith, Barbara Roche and Keith Vaz. All of the above would, subsequently, rise to Cabinet rank in Tony Blair's government with the exception of Roche and Vaz.

The fact that, at one point, Blair established Keith Vaz as Europe Minister is interesting. You see, Vaz is of African-Asian origin. Not exactly the kind of man most of us would have chosen to represent the will of the vast majority of those whose ancestors are buried in Europe.

Blair would make Barbara Roche Immigration Minister when he came to power. In this position, she was the first ever parliamentarian to tell us that we NEEDED a whole lot more (150,000) LEGAL immigrants entering the country every year in order to help us out.

It's pretty easy to see why Roche would have little sympathy for those who wanted to keep Britain British. Her grandparents were a fascinating mixture of Polish, Russian, Spanish and Portuguese. All of whom were Jewish.

On 24 June 2003, The Independent reported thus:

"Tony Blair should promote the benefits of legal immigration to Britain, and ‘not back off’ from plans to create a super equalities commission, Barbara Roche, the former equalities minister, has urged. Ms Roche… said the Government could reconnect with Labour voters upset by the war on Iraq by championing a radical agenda on behalf of ethnic minorities, gays and lesbians, the disabled, older people and women. The party could create ‘clear water’ between it and the Opposition by speaking up for legal migrants and introducing legislation to end discrimination.

Ms Roche… also said ministers should not be frightened of tackling discrimination and should create a single equalities body to protect and promote the rights of ethnic groups, homosexuals, religious groups, the disabled and older people.

Ms Roche said she was proud to be the first Immigration Minister to talk of the merits of inward migration, a political gamble that nevertheless led to an extension of work permits for skilled migrants.

As Equalities Minister, she steered through Whitehall new regulations outlawing homophobic and religious discrimination by employers and drew up plans for civil partnerships for homosexuals…

She also produced a little noticed but far-reaching report on how to get people from ethnic minorities into the jobs and careers they deserved…

As Immigration Minister she urged the relaxation of controls on foreign workers in favour of ‘managed migration’ to meet skills shortages…

The child of a Polish-Russian Ashkenazi father and a Sephardic Spanish-Portuguese mother, Roche has reason for her feelings on immigration. ‘My being Jewish informs me totally, informs my politics. I understand the otherness of ethnic groups’."
I don’t know about that Babs, you don’t seem to understand the 'otherness' of the British 'ethnic group' at all. Did you think we were kidding when we said: 'No more immigrants, please' in 1948, when the Windrush arrived?

Did you think we were kidding in 1958 when the Notting Hill riots occurred? Did you think we were kidding in 1964 when Peter Griffiths beat pro-immigration MP, Patrick Gordon-Walker, the man Wilson wanted as his Foreign Secretary, in Smethwick?

And Babs, do you think we were kidding in 1976 when Enoch Powell was named BBC Radio’s Man of the Year? Do you think we were kidding in July 2003, when The BBC conducted the most wide ranging opinion poll ever, (discounting general elections) to determine what the British people thought about immigration policy.

You The Judge asked the viewers to phone a given number giving their opinion on whether four separate asylum seekers should be allowed to stay in Britain. Every one of the four tales told was a harrowing one. Nevertheless the results were conclusive. Overall, 64 per cent of those who voted wanted immigration into this country brought to a halt, no matter what the circumstances of the applicant. This despite the fact that the four cases put to them were as emotionally loaded as could be, despite fifty years of ubiquitous 'anti-fascist', happy-clappy, 'they enrich our society,' media and parliamentary propaganda, despite the politically correct and the professional bleeding hearts forever lecturing us on how we must feel, act and think and despite the fact that about eight percent of those who voted in You The Judge could have been first, second or third-generation immigrants themselves. And thus somewhat more inclined to have voted as you would have done.

More than 90,000 votes were cast during the show. By any standards, this was a major survey of British opinion. We’re not kidding, Babs. We’re not making it up. Not only do we want mass immigration stopped, we want those who have been taking us for a ride sent back! But you know that already, don’t you?

In November of the same year, David Blunkett, the Home Secretary, said that he thought 200,000 legal immigrants should be encouraged to enter Britain annually. He also said that he saw no reason why Britain could not tolerate this level of immigration indefinitely and added:

"There is no obvious upper limit to immigration".
On 13 November 2003, Blunkett rubbed it in when he said in a BBC interview:

"It is a crowded island, we’ve always been a crowded, vigorous island… A net increase of 200,000 people a year is permanently sustainable."
Barbara Roche and David Blunkett are pictured below:

In the Summer of 1994, the media tycoon, Rupert Murdoch, invited the newly crowned leader of the Labour Party to an all-expenses-paid corporate gathering in Australia.

Whilst there, Blair said this:

"I remember a telling intervention of a speaker at the Republican Convention of 1984 in the U.S. asking rhetorically, ‘When was the last time you heard a Democrat say no?' It was too close to the truth for comfort."
It is interesting that a political leader should answer the summons of a newspaper proprietor who had done as much as anyone to keep his party out of government for over fifteen years.

What I find more interesting, however, is that he should be quoting an American Republican quip to the Murdoch group, critical of Democratic values. When the leader of a party of the British 'left' approvingly quotes US Republicans, something weird is going on.


No comments:

Post a Comment