The Blair legacy
Blair killings
It took a moment, then I looked through to the Mosul hotel lounge, the entire staff from the owner/Manager to the kitchen boy, were huddled round the television, aware of nothing but Colin Powell's address to the U.N. making it clear that an attack on Iraq was imminent.
Powell cited Downing Street's shameful work of fiction:  'Iraq — its infrastructure of concealment, deception and intimidation' saying, "I would call my colleagues' attention to the fine paper that the United Kingdom distributed... which describes in exquisite detail Iraqi deception activities."
It was 5th February 2003.
I stood behind the group, un-noticed watching in astonishment at purported translated conversations between Iraqi scientists, discussing how to hide their WMDs — a conversation straight out of a Hollywood gangster movie, using expressions utterly alien to the Arab world.
Further, there were camps teaching people how to make ricin poisons, numerous munitions bunkers, ballistic missile sites, UAVs (unarmed aerial vehicles) biological weapons, chemical weapons, anthrax.
Iraq was a threat to life on earth:   "We must not shrink from what is ahead of us," Powell concluded.
The staff switched off the television, clearly stunned, then noticed me.
No greeting, just drawn, desperate faces and:   "Madam Felicity, are they really going to bomb us again?"
Child amputated arms, Iraq invasion, 2003

The illegal invasion of Iraq 2003, by the US military, the American government, its Congress, President, Vice-President, Rice, Rumsfeld, Democrat and Republican leaders, and its people.

Photo: internet/

Child amputated arms, Iraq invasion, 2003.
The illegal invasion of Iraq 2003, by the US military, the American government, its Congress, President, Vice-President, Rice, Rumsfeld, Democrat and Republican leaders, and its people.
Photo: internet/
“Let me just deal with the oil thing because... the oil conspiracy theory is honestly one of the most absurd when you analyse it.
The fact is that, if the oil that Iraq has were our concern, I mean we could probably cut a deal with Saddam tomorrow in relation to the oil.
It’s not the oil that is the issue, it is the weapons…”
Blair February 6 2003
Minutes of a meeting with BP, Shell and BG (formerly British Gas) on 31 October 2002 read:
“Baroness Symons agreed that it would be difficult to justify British companies losing out in Iraq in that way if the UK had itself been a conspicuous supporter of the US government throughout the crisis.”
The minister then promised to “report back to the companies before Christmas” on her lobbying efforts.
The Foreign Office invited BP in on 6 November 2002 to talk about opportunities in Iraq “post regime change”.
Minutes of a meeting with BP, Shell and BG on 31 October 2002.

Baroness Symons agreed that it would be difficult to justify British companies losing out in Iraq in that way if the UK had itself been a conspicuous supporter of the US government throughout the crisis.

The minister then promised to report back to the companies before Christmas on her lobbying efforts.

The Foreign Office invited BP in on 6 November 2002 to talk about opportunities for oil in Iraq post regime change.

Photo: internet
Illuminati — Blair
The US UK Government
The criminal sociopaths
The criteria for a criminal sociopath requires an ongoing disregard for the rights of others!
Oh Yes!     Blair and those who voted in Parliament for the killings are responsible.
Oh Yes!     Bush Cheney, the US Congress are responsible.
And those in the UK and US who have either turned a blind eye or encouraged these mass killings
But for a country that experienced Coventry to bomb a defenseless other beggars description!
There is a sign inside the destroyed Coventry Cathedral:
'Forgive Them'
I do not forgive them
Kewe —
The UK assisted the US in its criminality of mass death!
All under the instructions of Illuminati Blair
the criminal sociopath
U.S. War Crimes
On Haditha and Al-Qa’im
an Iraqi doctor sent me this —
“Listen...we witnessed crimes in the west area of the country of what the bastards did in Haditha and Al-Qa’im.
It was a crime, a really big crime we have witnessed and filmed in those places and recently also in Fallujah.
We need big help in the western area of the country.  Our doctors need urgent help there.
Please, this is an URGENT humanitarian request from the hospitals in the west of the country.
We have big proof on how the American troops destroyed one of our hospitals, how they burned the whole store of medication of the west area of Iraq and how they killed a patient in the they prevented us from helping the people in al-Qa’im.
This is an URGENT Humanitarian request.
The hospitals in the west of Iraq ask for urgent help...we are in a big humanitarian medical disaster...”
The cost of the decision to rid Iraq of its by-all-accounts despotic and murderous leader has been staggering, beginning in Iraq itself.
Last year, an average of 6.5 people died there each day in suicide attacks and vehicle bombs.
Since 2003 millions have been displaced.
By the end of last year, nearly 4,500 American soldiers had been killed and more than 32,000 wounded.
It is not better in 2012
Tutu relies on the Iraqi Body Count project for statistics of deaths of Iraq people but this itself is one more propaganda tool of the West.
Close to a million people have been killed in Iraq due to Bush and Blair and the political parties in both countries who voted for such killing.
All have blood dripping from their bodies and their hearts and everything they are and stand for.
Desmond Tutu calls for Blair and Bush
to be tried over Iraq
Destruction and Civilian Victims of the Anglo-American Aggression in Iraq
Instead of recognising that the world we lived in, with increasingly sophisticated communications, transportations and weapons systems necessitated sophisticated leadership that would bring the global family together, the then-leaders of the US and UK fabricated the grounds to behave like playground bullies and drive us further apart.
Over time I was increasingly shocked by the speed and ease with which many intelligent and seemingly competent members of the CFR [ Council on Foreign Relations ] appeared to eagerly justify policies and actions that supported growing corruption.
The regularity with which many CFR members would protect insiders from accountability regarding another appalling fraud surprised even me.
Many of them seemed delighted with the advantages of being an insider while being entirely indifferent to the extraordinary cost to all citizens of having our lives, health and resources drained to increase insider wealth in a manner that violated the most basic principles of fiduciary obligation and respect for the law.
In short, the CFR was operating in a win-lose economic paradigm that centralized economic and political power.
I was trying to find a way for us to shift to a win-win economic paradigm that was — by its nature — decentralizing.
Catherine Austin Fitts — Dillon Reid and Co. Inc.
And the Aristocracy of Stock Profits
Dead babies due to US and UK Bombing of Iraq 2003
Tony Blair DU War Criminal

Illuminati — Blair its criminal sociopath minion

The criteria for a criminal sociopath requires an ongoing disregard for the rights of others!

Oh Yes!     Blair is responsible.

 — Blair and his puppets the rest of the guilty war criminals in the Labour Party

And those in the country who have turned a blind eye getting fat and television induced senile, while so many others suffered from Britain's war economy!

For a country that experienced Coventry to bomb a defenseless other, beggars description

There is a sign inside the destroyed Coventry Cathedral:

'Forgive Them'

I do not forgive them.

“The soldiers are doing strange things in Fallujah”
“The soldiers are doing strange things in Fallujah,” said one of my contacts in Fallujah who just returned.
He was in his city checking on his home and just returned to Baghdad this evening.
Speaking on condition of anonymity he continued:
“In the center of the Julan Quarter they are removing entire homes which have been bombed, meanwhile most of the homes that were bombed are left as they were.
Why are they doing this?”
“The American warplanes came continuously through the night and bombed everywhere in Fallujah!
“It did not stop even for a moment!
“If the American forces did not find a target to bomb, they used sound bombs just to terrorize the people and children.
“The city stayed in fear; I cannot give a picture of how panicked everyone was.
“In the mornings I found Fallujah empty, as if nobody lives in it.
“Even poisonous gases have been used in Fallujah-they used everything-tanks, artillery, infantry, poison gas. Fallujah has been bombed to the ground. Nothing is left.”
In Amiriyat al-Fallujah, a small city just outside Fallujah where many doctors from Fallujah have been practicing since they were unable to do so at Fallujah General Hospital, similar stories are being told.
Last month one refugee who had just arrived at the hospital in the small city explained that he’d watched the military bring in water tanker trucks to power blast some of the streets in Fallujah.
“Why are they doing this,” explained Ahmed (name changed for his protection), “To beautify Fallujah?
“They are covering their tracks from the horrible weapons they used in my city.”
Also last November, another Fallujah refugee from the Julan area, Abu Sabah told me.
“They (US military) used these weird bombs that put up smoke like a mushroom cloud.
Then small pieces fell from the air with long tails of smoke behind them.”
He explained that pieces of these bombs exploded into large fires that burnt peoples skin even when water was dumped on their bodies, which is the effect of phosphorous weapons, as well as napalm.
“People suffered so much from these, both civilians and fighters alike,” he said.
My friend Suthir (name changed to protect identity) was a member of one of the Iraqi Red Crescent relief convoys that was allowed into Fallujah at the end of November.
“I’m sure the Americans committed bad things there, but who can discover and say this,” she said when speaking of what she saw of the devastated city.
“They didn’t allow us to go to the Julan area or any of the others where there was heavy fighting, and I’m sure that is where the horrible things took place.”
“The Americans didn’t let us in the places where everyone said there was napalm used,” she added, “Julan and those places where the heaviest fighting was, nobody is allowed to go there.”
On 30 November the US military prevented an aid convoy from reaching Fallujah.
This aid convoy was sent by the Iraqi Ministry of Health, but was told by soldiers at a checkpoint to return in “8 or 9 days,” reported AP.
Dr. Ibrahim al-Kubaisi who was with the relief team told reporters at that time, “There is a terrible crime going in Fallujah and they do not want anybody to know.”
With the military maintaining strict control over who enters Fallujah, the truth of what weapons were used remains difficult to find.
Meanwhile, people who lived in different districts of Fallujah continue to tell the same stories.
Posted by Dahr_Jamail at January 18, 2005 06:16 PM
Blair and the UK military were fully complicit in the war crimes committed by the Americans in Fallujah — even to the extent of assisting in the bombing!
Acrid smell of business as usual
— click here
Are some of us waking up!!!
Blair, speaking in New York accuses Iran of backing terrorism and is warning the world faces a situation akin to 'rising fascism in the 1920s'
Blair speaking in New York, has accused Iran of backing terrorism and is warning the world faces a situation akin to rising fascism in the 1920s

Blair at the 62nd annual Alfred E Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner in New York.

Lets make it the 1930's, Wormtongue, and call it correctly — rising fascism is exactly where you are!

(Wormtongue — a wizened figure of a man, with a pale face, heavy lidded eyes and a long pale tongue...

... the wise speak only of what they know, therefore be silent, and keep your forked tongue behind your teeth... )

Or perhaps we should say it's 1929?

Go on, let's just say we're somewhere in the late 1920's

And let's direct our view, not Eastwards, but Westwards

That's it!

Now you've got it

Posse gathering Blair!

For you too!
Lets make it the 1930's, Wormtongue, and call it correctly — rising fascism is exactly where you are!
(Wormtongue — a wizened figure of a man, with a pale face, heavy lidded eyes and a long pale tongue...
... the wise speak only of what they know, therefore be silent, and keep your forked tongue behind your teeth... )
Or perhaps we should say it's 1929?
Go on, let's just say we're somewhere in the late 1920's
And let's direct our view, not Eastwards, but Westwards
That's it!
Now you've got it
Posse gathering Blair!
For you too!
Unspeakable grief and horror
Know them by their fruit
words attributed to Jesus speaking in Aramaic
Monday, 2 June, 2003
In quotes: Blair and Iraq weapons
There are growing calls for an inquiry into the government's claims about Saddam Hussein's weapons programmes.
Ex-cabinet ministers Clare Short and Robin Cook have both argued evidence about Iraq's weapons was hyped up before the war.
So what claims did the prime minister make about Saddam's weapons?  Here are some of his key quotes.

10 April 2002
"Saddam Hussein's regime is despicable, he is developing weapons of mass destruction, and we cannot leave him doing so unchecked.
"He is a threat to his own people and to the region and, if allowed to develop these weapons, a threat to us also.
"Doing nothing is not an option ... Our way of proceeding should be and will be measured, calm and thought through."
House of Commons

24 September 2002
"(Saddam's) weapons of mass destruction programme is active, detailed and growing.  The policy of containment is not working.  The weapons of mass destruction programme is not shut down.  It is up and running....
"The intelligence picture (the intelligence services) paint is one accumulated over the past four years.  It is extensive, detailed and authoritative.
"It concludes that Iraq has chemical and biological weapons, that Saddam has continued to produce them, that he has existing and active military plans for the use of chemical and biological weapons, which could be activated within 45 minutes, including against his own Shia population; and that he is actively trying to acquire nuclear weapons capability....
"On chemical weapons, the dossier shows that Iraq continues to produce chemical agent for chemical weapons; has rebuilt previously destroyed production plants across Iraq; has bought dual-use chemical facilities; has retained the key personnel formerly engaged in the chemical weapons programme; and has a serious ongoing research programme into weapons production, all of it well funded..."
House of Commons

25 February 2003
"The intelligence is clear: (Saddam) continues to believe his WMD programme is essential both for internal repression and for external aggression.
"It is essential to his regional power.  Prior to the inspectors coming back in he was engaged in a systematic exercise in concealment of the weapons.
"The biological agents we believe Iraq can produce include anthrax, botulinum, toxin, aflatoxin and ricin.  All eventually result in excruciatingly painful death."
House of Commons

11 March 2003
"We have 300,000 troops down there now sitting on his doorstep.  You've got the UN inspectors in.  It's unlikely at this very moment in time as we speak that Saddam is going to do anything; that's true.
"But what happened before when he was first given the opportunity to disarm completely was in April 1991 and he was given 15 days then to come forward with an honest declaration of what he had...
"If we don't act now, then we will go back to what has happened before and then of course the whole thing begins again and he carries on developing these weapons and these are dangerous weapons, particularly if they fall into the hands of terrorists who we know want to use these weapons if they can get them."
MTV debate

25 February 2003
"We are asked now seriously to accept that in the last few years-contrary to all history, contrary to all intelligence-Saddam decided unilaterally to destroy those weapons.  I say that such a claim is palpably absurd."
House of Commons

March 29, 2003
The Madness of Tony Blair
Matthew Parris

Most of us have experienced the discomfort of watching a friend go off the rails.
At first his oddities are dismissed as eccentricities.
Boys outside house damaged by US
Many men, women and children wounded and killed
An absurd assertion, a lunatic conviction, a sudden enthusiasm or unreasonable fear, are explained as perhaps due to tiredness, or stress, or natural volatility.
We do not want to face the truth that our friend has cracked up.
Finally we can deny it no longer — and then it seems so obvious: the explanation, in retrospect, of so much we struggled to reconcile.
Sometimes the realisation comes fast and suddenly.
It did for me at university when my Arab fellow student Ahmed, who for months had been warning me of the conspiracies of which he suspected we might be victims, pulled me into his room to show me the death-ray he could see shining through his window.
It was somebody’s porch-light.
Likewise, the madness of King George III, which came in spells, was undeniable when it came.
At other times the realisation is a slow, sad dawning of the obvious.
Sometimes it is a friend about whom we worry.
Sometimes it is a prime minister.
I will accept the charge of discourtesy, but not of flippancy, when I ask whether Tony Blair may now have become, in a serious sense of that word, unhinged.
Genius and madness are often allied, and nowhere is this truer than in political leadership.
Great leaders need self-belief in unnatural measure.
Simple fraudsters are rumbled early, but great leaders share with great confidence tricksters a capacity to be more than persuaded, but inhabited, by their cause.
Almost inevitably, an inspirational leader spends important parts of his life certain of the uncertain, convinced of the undemonstrable.
So do the mentally ill.
It can be extremely difficult to distinguish between a person who is sticking bravely to a difficult cause whose truth is far from obvious, and a person who is going crazy.
It took us quite a while to explain David Icke’s beliefs in the only useful way in which they could be explained — and he was on the political fringe.
A national leader commands vastly more respect and will be given the benefit of many more doubts than Mr Icke ever was.
Colleagues, commentators and the wider public are usually late to face up to evidence that the boss has gone berserk, even though the evidence may have been around for quite some time.
There are good reasons for this.
To call somebody mad is bad manners even when fair comment.
Relatives comfort each other after US killing of their children
Many men, women and children wounded and killed
To tackle your opponent’s argument by questioning his sanity can look like a childish copping-out from sensible discussion.
How can the victim answer back?
But the charge is sometimes germane.
It may become the only thing worth considering.
Winston Churchill had lost the plot long before the proper public discussion this deserved got under way.
And I myself believe that one of my political heroes, Margaret Thatcher, began to lose her mental balance well before the end, and before those close to her allowed themselves to consider this explanation of her behaviour.
For me the suspicion first dawned when the then Prime Minister devised for the Lord Mayor’s banquet a dress with such an extravagant train that she needed someone to help her with it into the Mansion House.
This was when she was beginning to refer to herself as “we”, and treating friends who warned her of her fate as treacherous.
A telltale of incipient insanity is when the victim begins to take a Manichaean view of the universe.
There are good reasons why those at the top can go quietly bonkers before their inferiors wake up to the warning signs.
The first is obviously deference.
“The Madness of King Tony” might — I accept — seem an impertinent way of discussing our leader during a war when, whatever application it may have in Tony Blair’s case, it applies to Saddam Hussein in spades.
Beyond deference, however, those at the top of the pyramid who are anxious to impress us with truths which are not obvious have another powerful weapon at their disposal.
They can credibly claim to know more than we can be told.
To the man in the street, the most potent of Mr Blair’s arguments for invading Iraq is that he and George W. Bush are in possession of special intelligence which supports their stand but which cannot be divulged.
And no doubt that is true.
The question is about the amount of support such intelligence lends, not its existence.
Note from your own experience, as well as from the history books, how those with a claim which sounds incredible tend to support it by claiming a private source of information they are unable to share.
Joan of Arc heard voices.
Ahmed said he could feel the lethal qualities of the apparent porch-light and reminded me that his enemies would obviously decoy the ignorant by disguising death-rays in this way.
One or another version of God has been a time-honoured way for madcap leaders to give their actions an authority not apparent to the five senses of their audiences.
Cornered by reality, “private sources” are the last refuge of the deluded.
Is Mr Blair among them?   Let me outline some of my grounds for worry.
Any one of these grounds might be dismissed as negligible, or indicative of nothing more sinister than conviction; but cumulatively I find them worrying.
Medics try to revive victim of US attack
Many men, women and children wounded and killed
Mr Blair has stopped sounding like a career politician.
He has lost the professional polish of a man doing a job, and developed that fierce, quiet intensity which, from long experience of dealing with mad constituents, I know that the slightly cracked share with the genuinely convinced.
He has lost his feel for whom to confront, or when and where, and puts himself into situations (like the slow handclapping by anti-war women) which do not assist his case.
Historians may point to Mr Blair’s private — but publicised — audience with the Pope as an early sign of a dawning unrealism about the perceptions of others.
Did he this week stop for a moment to think what impression would be made on grieving parents by his wild-eyed suggestion (based on misinformation) that two British soldiers had been executed by the Iraqis in cold blood?
Blair’s long-standing tendency to compartmentalise logic (a habit all politicians share to some degree) is now being pushed to extremes.
The speeches the “old” Europeans are making — about giving Iraq more time, accepting gradual progress and not sticking to a literal interpretation of earlier demands — are exactly the speeches Mr Blair himself gives (persuasively) in defence of letting the IRA off the decommissioning hook.
This logic-chopping alarms.
The Prime Minister has lost his sense of how his indignation at Iraqi brutality jars, coming from someone attacking a country whose puny forces are grotesquely outgunned by ours.
His anger at the French (whose position has been consistent and identical to that which Blair held until a year ago) is inexplicable to those of us who are not doctors.
He displays a demented capacity to convince himself that it is the other guy who is cheating.
He has started saying things which are not only unsustainable, but palpably absurd.
The throwaway remark to Parliament that he would ignore Security Council vetoes which were “capricious” or “unreasonable” was more than ill-considered: coming from a trained lawyer it was stark, staring bonkers.
It was breathtaking.
For risibility I would bracket it with Ahmed’s death-ray.
The whole country should have been crying with laughter.
That the British media should have been mesmerised into reporting him in any other way still leaves me dumbfounded.
No sane lawyer could have said what Blair said.
He keeps retreating into a hopeless, desperate optimism: another sign of lunacy.
Hold mattess where young nephew Ali killed by US
Many men, women and children wounded and killed in US attack
He seems to have promised the Americans he could deliver Europe, and told the Europeans he could tame America.
There was scant ground for hope on the first score and none on the second.
The belief that irreconcilables can be reconciled by one’s personal contacts and powers of persuasion is a familiar delusion among people who are not quite right in the head.
While each futile promise is in the process of being demonstrated to be undeliverable, he goes into a sort of nose-tapping, “watch this space” denial.
When finally the promise is abandoned he turns insouciantly away — and makes a new promise.
This week he has been promising to sort out the Americans, and persuade them to let the United Nations supervise the post-conflict administration of Iraq.
He is probably telling the Americans he can sort out the Security Council.
He can do neither.
Meanwhile, he has forgotten that his previous position was that the coalition partners invaded as agents of the UN anyway, so it isn’t up to Washington to give permission.
Any bank manager used to dealing with bankrupts with a pathological shopping habit who have severed contact with arithmetic will recognise the optimism.
Have the rest of the Cabinet tumbled yet to the understanding that this may not be about Iraq at all, but about the Prime Minister?
My guess is that those closest to Mr Blair must be beginning to wonder privately.
It is time people pooled their doubts.
Copyright 2003     Times Newspapers Ltd
But you cannot kill this many people...
— as Bush and Blair
The British Labour Party
The Conservative Party
The U.S. Democratic Party
The Republican Party
The US, UK military forces
As all have killed and injured
You cannot kill and injure this many people without there being real evil involved
This is not just madness
This is more than madness
Kewe —
May 10, 2007
Bush's Zombie Shuffles Off Stage
Adieu, Blair, Adieu
Tony Blair's success was limited to winning three general elections in a row.
A second-rate actor, he turned out to be a crafty and avaricious politician, but without much substance; bereft of ideas he eagerly grasped and tried to improve upon the legacy of Margaret Thatcher.
But though in many ways Blair's programme has been a euphemistic, if bloodier, version of Thatcher's, the style of their departures is very different.
Thatcher's overthrow by her fellow-Conservatives was a matter of high drama: an announcement outside the Louvre's glass pyramid during the Paris Congress brokering the end of the Cold War; tears; a crowded House of Commons.
Against backdrop of car-bombs and mass carnage in Iraq
Blair makes his unwilling exit against a backdrop of car-bombs and mass carnage in Iraq, with hundreds of thousands left dead or maimed from his policies, and London a prime target for terrorist attack.
Thatcher's supporters described themselves afterwards as horror-struck by what they had done.
Even Blair's greatest sycophants in the British media: Martin Kettle and Michael White (The Guardian), Andrew Rawnsley (Observer), Philip Stephens (FT) confess to a sense of relief as he finally quits.
Boy wounded US raid on families, Baghdad, May 2007
Who bothers with the monkey
A true creature of the Washington Consensus, Blair was always loyal to the various occupants of the White House.
In Europe, he preferred Aznar to Zapatero, Merckel to Schroeder, was seriously impressed by to Berlusconi and, most recently, made no secret of his desire that Sarkozy was his candidate in France.
He understood that privatisation/deregulation at home were part of the same mechanism as the wars abroad.
If this judgement seems unduly harsh let me quote Sir Rodric Braithwaite, a former senior adviser to Blair, writing in the Financial Times on 2, August, 2006:
"A spectre is stalking British television, a frayed and waxy zombie straight from Madame Tussaud's.
This one, unusually, seems to live and breathe.
Perhaps it comes from the Central Intelligence Agency's box of technical tricks, programmed to spout the language of the White House in an artificial English accent...
Mr Blair has done more damage to British interests in the Middle East than Anthony Eden, who led the UK to disaster in Suez 50 years ago.
In the past 100 years — to take the highlights — we have bombed and occupied Egypt and Iraq, put down an Arab uprising in Palestine and overthrown governments in Iran, Iraq and the Gulf.
So we do them with the Americans
We can no longer do these things on our own, so we do them with the Americans.
Mr Blair's total identification with the White House has destroyed his influence in Washington, Europe and the Middle East itself: who bothers with the monkey if he can go straight to the organ-grinder?..."
US airstrike kills 3
Three people injured
More cultured critics sometimes compare him to the Cavaliere Cipolia, the vile hypnotist of fascist Italy
This, too, is mild compared to what is said about Blair in the British Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence.
Senior diplomats have told me on more than one occasion that it would not upset them too much if Blair were to be tried as a war criminal.
More cultured critics sometimes compare him to the Cavaliere Cipolia, the vile hypnotist of fascist Italy, so brilliantly portrayed in Thomas Mann's 1929 novel 'Mario and the Magician'.
Blair is certainly not Mussolini, but like the Duce he enjoyed to simultaneously lead and humiliate his supporters.
What much of this reveals is anger and impotence.
There is no mechanism to get rid of a sitting Prime Minister unless his or her party loses confidence.
The Conservative leadership decided that Thatcher simply had to go because of her negative attitude to Europe.
US airstrike on families
In Parliament, the Conservatives simply followed Blair.
Labour tends to be more sentimental towards its leaders and in this case they owed so much to Blair that nobody close to him wants to be cast in the role of Brutus.
In the end he decided to go himself.
The disaster in Iraq had made him a much hated politician and slowly support began to ebb.
One reason for the slowness was that the country is without a serious opposition.
In Parliament, the Conservatives simply followed Blair.
The Liberal-Democrats were ineffective.
Blair had summed up Britain's attitude to Europe at Nice in 2000:
"It is possible, in our judgement, to fight Britain's corner, get the best out of Europe for Britain and exercise real authority and influence in Europe.
That is as it should be.
Britain is a world power."
Anti-war, anti-Trident, defence of public services is confined to the nationalist parties in Scotland and Wales
This grotesque, self-serving fantasy that 'Britain is a world power' is to justify that it will always be EU/UK.
The real union is with Washington.
France and Germany are seen as rivals for Washington's affections, not potential allies in an independent EU.
The French decision to re-integrate themselves into NATO and pose as the most vigorous US ally was a serious structural shift which weakened Europe.
Britain responded by encouraging a fragmented political order in Europe through expansion and insisted on a permanent US presence on the continent.
Blair's half-anointed, half-hated successor, Gordon Brown, is far more intelligent (he reads books) but politically no different.
There might be a change of tone, but little else.
It is a grim prospect with or without Blair and an alternative politics.
Anti-war, anti-Trident, defence of public services is confined to the nationalist parties in Scotland and Wales.
Its absence nationally fuels the anger felt by substantial sections of the population, reflected in voting (or not) against those in power.
Connections that lead directly to the heart of the Downing Street Letters:
Blair's lies to the UK parliament and UK people.
Lies central to the US claim that Saddam Hussein was seeking weapons of mass destruction.
Lies that missiles could get to London in 4 minutes.
Lies serving as a basis for the Iraq invasion less than two months later.
April 10th, 2007
EXCLUSIVE…Two Explosive Books Tell the Inside Story of the Forged Iraq-Niger Docs That Helped Build the Case for War — Click Here
In his January 2003 State of the Union address, President Bush declared the infamous sixteen words: “The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.”
The claim was central to the administration’s claims that Saddam Hussein was seeking weapons of mass destruction and served as a basis for launching the Iraq invasion less than two months later.
Bush’s declaration was based on an intelligence document that provided evidence about Iraq’s purchase of uranium from the African country of Niger.
But there was one problem: the document was a fake.
In a Democracy Now! broadcast exclusive, we speak with the authors of two explosive new books.
Carlo Bonini is the Italian reporter who broke the Niger story.
His new book is called “Collusion: International Espionage and the War on Terror.”
Peter Eisner is a veteran foreign correspondent and is currently an editor at the Washington Post.
His new book is “The Italian Letter: How the Bush Administration Used a Fake Letter to Build the Case for War in Iraq.”
“Inside Downing Street Tony Blair had gathered some of his senior ministers and advisers for a pivotal meeting in the build-up to the Iraq war.
It was 9am on July 23, 2002, eight months before the invasion began and long before the public was told war was inevitable.”
            Britain's Queen Elizabeth walks with U.S. President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair during the ceremonial welcome on the first day of Bush's state visit to the UK at London's Buckingham Palace, November 19, 2003.

Photo: REUTERS/POOL/Kirsty Wigglesworth, 11/20/03
Blair is wildly exaggerating the threat posed by terrorism
Craving a monstrous enemy, the prime minister has vastly overstated this supposed threat to world security
Simon Jenkins
Wednesday November 22, 2006
The Guardian
What is it about a desert that drives men mad?
On Monday morning the prime minister stood on the Afghan sand and said: "Here in this extraordinary piece of desert is where the fate of world security in the early 21st century is going to be decided."
Tony Blair was talking to soldiers he had sent to fight the toughest guerrillas on earth for control of southern Afghanistan.
He told them: "Your defeat [of the Taliban] is not just on behalf of the people of Afghanistan but the people of Britain ... We have got to stay for as long as it takes."
Destruction and Civilian Victims of the Anglo-American Aggression in Iraq
Lost touch with reality
The prime minister's brain has clearly lost touch with reality.
Even under the Raj there was no conceivable way Britain could conquer and hold the arc of territory to which Blair was referring.
It stretches from the Persian Gulf through Iranian Baluchistan and Afghanistan to Pakistan.
No central government has come near to controlling this region, and its aversion to outside intervention is ageless and ruthless, currently fuelled by the world's voracious appetite for oil and opium.
But it poses no threat to world security.
The sole basis for Blair's statement is Mullah Omar's hospitality to the fanatic, Osama bin Laden, at the end of the 1990s.
As we now know, this was never popular (an Arab among Pashtuns); after 9/11, when the Taliban had collaborated with the west over opium, either Bin Laden would eventually have had to leave or the Tajiks would have taken revenge for his killing of their leader, Sheikh Massoud.
Destruction and Civilian Victims of the Anglo-American Aggression in Iraq
Even the Pakistanis were on his tail.
Either way, Talib Afghanistan was no more a "threat" after 9/11 than were the American flying schools at which the 9/11 perpetrators trained.
So what is Blair getting at?
He once confessed to his hero, Roy Jenkins, that he regretted not having studied history at Oxford.
He never spoke a truer word.
War clearly not being won
The concept of world security as holistic and vulnerable to incidents such as 9/11 is nonsensical.
Politics is not a variant of the Gaia thesis, in which each component of an ecosystem depends on and responds to every other.
There is no butterfly effect in international relations.
For want of a victory in Helmand, the Middle East is not lost, nor for want of victory in the Middle East is western civilisation lost.
This is as well, since Blair's resumed war in Afghanistan is clearly not being won.
We know from the former army chief Lord Guthrie that Blair, despite promising to "give the army anything it takes", has refused the extra troops and armour needed by the pathetically small expeditionary force of 7,000 in Helmand.
He has already had to switch tactics from winning hearts and minds to American-style "search and destroy", blowing up villages with 1,000lb bombs (as we saw on TV last week).
British commanders are describing "successes" in terms of enemy kills.
Army killings only presage revenge attacks
They should recall that Victorian officers in the Punjab were told that such boasts would be treated as a sign of failure, not success.
Such killings infuriated the population and presaged revenge attacks.
    informazione dall'iraq occupato
information from occupied iraq
أخبار منالعراق المحتلة
Malcom Lagauche
War criminal Blair speaking before other war criminals including two thirds of the British Labour Party in the UK parliament.

Blair admitted lying about the number of bodies in mass graves


Blair admitted to lying about the number of bodies in mass graves
The number of deaths attributed to Saddam Hussein by the West is incomprehensible.
If you add them all up, it seems he killed more people than the number who inhabit Iraq.
He had to work overtime and must have had advanced weaponry of which no one is aware.
Numbers and techniques abound: 180,000 during the Anfal campaign (Despite the numbers, not one body has been found.
Maybe Saddam had a secret vaporizing ray); 5,000 in Halabja (About 300 bodies were found and there is much doubt as to the origin of the gas used against the Kurds); 400,000 in the south of Iraq.
Let’s talk about the 400,000.
400,000 bodies — whole country mass graveyard
In November 2003, word came out that more than 400,000 bodies had been discovered in mass graves in the south of Iraq.
"The whole country is a mass graveyard" was the slogan of the day.
Finally, proof of Saddam being the Butcher of Baghdad was there for the whole world to see.
Case closed.
Let’s go forward a few months from the discovery of the almost half million bodies in the south of Iraq.
On July 18, 2004, the headline of the day for the British paper The Independent read, "British Prime Minister Admits Graves Claim Untrue."
How could that be?
George Bush and Tony Blair don’t lie.
If we can’t trust them, who can we trust?
Certainly not Saddam, even though he told the truth about WMD.
That must have been a fluke.
According to the article:
Downing Street has admitted to The Observer that repeated claims by Tony Blair that "about 400,000 bodies had been found in Iraqi mass graves" is untrue, and only about 5,000 corpses have so far been uncovered.
The claims by Blair in November and December of last year (2003) were given widespread credence, quoted by MPs and widely published, including in the introduction to a U.S. government pamphlet on Iraq’s mass graves.
In that publication, Iraq’s Legacy of Terror: Mass Graves, produced by USAID, the U.S. government aid distribution agency, Blair is quoted from 20 November last year: We’ve already discovered, just so far, the remains of 400,000 people in mass graves."
Here’s what the USAID website stated:
If these numbers prove accurate, they represent a crime against humanity surpassed only by the Rwandan genocide of 1994, Pol Pot’s Cambodian killing fields in the 1970s, and the Nazi Holocaust of World War II.
Two million Iraqis who died due to U.S.-imposed embargo
I assume that USAID did not hear about the two million Iraqis who died at the hands of the U.S.-imposed embargo from 1990-2003.
After all, they’re Iraqis: they don’t count.
The same article delved into the regression of other elevated figures attributed to Saddam Hussein and the Ba’ath regime in the north of the country.
For instance, it mentioned that Human Rights Watch admitted it had to drastically decrease figures of deaths.
Not one person went to corroborate figures
The irony here is that not one person went to the north of Iraq to corroborate the figures.
Human Rights Watch and other groups just took the figures given to them as accurate.
Hania Mufti, who performed research that produced the original inflated figures in the north stated:
"Our estimates were based on estimates.
The eventual figure was based in part on circumstantial information gathered over the years."
Imagine even the most lowly offense being tried in a U.S. court system and the prosecutor said that his case was based on estimates of estimates.
The case would be dismissed and the judge would reprimand the prosecution for even making a case.
However, this is not so with Iraq.
Just say "Saddam did it" and affix a preposterous scenario and figures and it is taken for truth.
Blood of millions lie on hands of those who demonize
The blood of millions of Iraqis lies on the hands of these despicable groups and people who have tried to outdo themselves in demonizing Saddam Hussein, the Ba’ath Party, and the Iraqi public in general.
The list is long: Human Rights Watch; Amnesty International; all the foreign-domiciled Iraqi stooges who came back to Iraq after April 2003; with the exception of a few individuals, the entire U.S. government (Democrat and Republican alike); Tony Blair; the U.S. mainstream media; and many, many, many more.
They all are involved in the mass murder of millions of Iraqis.
The date of July 18, 2004 should be heralded as much as other dates in world history.
It was the date on which the truth about Iraqi mass graves was published.
However, not one word appeared in the U.S. press.
Blair quickly came up with other ploys
And, within a day or two, Blair quickly changed directions and came up with other ploys to downplay the announcement that he had lied on a massive scale.
If we take a look at the existing 5,000 bodies, most, if not all, are males of military age.
It is probable that many were killed by U.S. bombs in Desert Storm.
If you look at a map, you will see that the south of Iraq was heavily bombed in January and February 1991.
Add to that the possibility of some bodies being from the Iraqi army that fought the 1991 Shi’ite attempt at overthrowing the Iraqi government and we see that the number of innocent civilians killed by Saddam has quickly decreased from 400,000 to many less than 5,000, if any.
Fairy tales under the guise of history
The statement "history is written by the victors" is only partially true in the case of Iraq.
Here, fairy tales of the most outrageous kind have been written under the guise of history.
Remember July 18, 2004.
UK New Fascism
84-year-old Canadian man with Alzheimer’s disease died in handcuffs in UK custody after being held for almost two weeks by UK border police
UK police threaten Guardian editor with terrorism charges over Snowden leaks
Chancellor George Osborne spent £10.2m modernising Whitehall HQ
Essex County Council have demanded harsh new restrictions on the Press ability to report the case
     Prisons for profit      
      Bill to ban protests       
      State-backed RBS to hand out £500m in bonuses     
The Blair legacy — Part II
Downing Street Memo-51 thrust into my hand by someone who asked me to meet him in a quiet watering hole in London for what I imagined would just be a friendly drink
Tracked US UK bombing of Iraq 2001-2003
MINISTERS were warned in July 2002 that Britain was committed to taking part in an American-led invasion of Iraq and they had no choice but to find a way of making it 'legal'
Saddam seen as no threat — suppressed document lays bare lies
Picture Blair paints of Iraq seldom touches reality at any point
Has the British army learned nothing?
Unspeakable grief and horror
                        ...and the circus of deception continues...
— 2018
— 2017
— 2016
— 2015
— 2014
— 2013
— 2012
— 2011
— 2010
— 2009
— 2008
— 2007
— 2006
— 2005
— 2004
— 2003
Circus of Torture   2003 — now
He says, "You are quite mad, Kewe"
And of course I am.
Why, I don't believe any of it — not the bloody body, not the bloody mind, not even the bloody Universe, or is it bloody multiverse.
"It's all illusion," I say.   "Don't you know, my lad, my lassie.   The game!   The game, me girl, me boy!   Takes on interest, don't you know.   T'is me sport, till doest find a better!"
Pssssst — but all this stuff is happening down here
Let's change it!
To say hello:     hello[the at marker]
For Kewe's spiritual and metaphysical pages — click here
The Blair legacy — Part II
Downing Street Memo-51 thrust into my hand by someone who asked me to meet him in a quiet watering hole in London for what I imagined would just be a friendly drink
Tracked US UK bombing of Iraq 2001-2003
MINISTERS were warned in July 2002 that Britain was committed to taking part in an American-led invasion of Iraq and they had no choice but to find a way of making it 'legal'
Saddam seen as no threat — suppressed document lays bare lies
Picture Blair paints of Iraq seldom touches reality at any point
Has the British army learned nothing?
Mother her two babies killed by US
More than Fifteen million
US dollars given by US taxpayers to Israel each day for their military use
4 billion US dollars per year
Nanci Pelosi — U.S. House Democratic leader — Congresswoman California, 8th District
Speaking at the AIPAC agenda   May 26, 2005
There are those who contend that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is all about Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.   This is absolute nonsense.
In truth, the history of the conflict is not over occupation, and never has been:  it is over the fundamental right of Israel to exist.
The greatest threat to Israel's right to exist, with the prospect of devastating violence, now comes from Iran.
For too long, leaders of both political parties in the United States have not done nearly enough to confront the Russians and the Chinese, who have supplied Iran as it has plowed ahead with its nuclear and missile technology....
In the words of Isaiah, we will make ourselves to Israel 'as hiding places from the winds and shelters from the tempests; as rivers of water in dry places; as shadows of a great rock in a weary land.'
       Afghanistan — Western Terror States: Canada, US, UK, France, Germany, Italy       
       Photos of Afghanistan people being killed and injured by NATO     

For archives, these articles are being stored on website.
The purpose is to advance understandings of environmental, political,
human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues.