Tuesday, June 30, 2009

British Army: BLAIR, BROWN TO BLAME OVER IRAQ

By Rupert Hamer 28/06/2009

A secret report by Army bosses to be presented to the Iraq war inquiry blames Tony Blair and Gordon Brown for the botched occupation of the country.

The dossier - prepared for ex-military chief General Sir Mike Jackson - criticises then Chancellor Mr Brown for withholding funds to rebuild Basra for FIVE months after our troops went in. And the 100-page document attacks Mr Blair for "uncritically" accepting flawed US plans for the March 2003 invasion, which led to tens of thousands of deaths, including those of 179 British troops.

The report - Stability Operations in Iraq - will not be officially made public because the inquiry's head, Sir John Chilcot, ruled all documents will remain secret.

But the contents have been leaked to the Sunday Mirror.

We can reveal that a lack of cash for the operation meant British troops sent to fight in Iraq: Used mobile phones to communicate in combat because radios did not work. Were forced to leave wounded soldiers on the battlefield for an average of two-and-half hours before getting them to a field hospital.

Needed more "spy in the sky" aircraft to track rebel fighters. Lacked machine guns, night- vision equipment and grenade launchers when protecting supply convoys.

Were in danger of breaching the Geneva Convention by having so few resources. The convention says occupiers must provide vital services such as humanitarian aid and water.

 

In a broadside at the then PM Mr Blair, the report says the battle for the hearts and minds of ordinary Iraqis was lost because of a lack of planning and the five-month delay in starting to rebuild their country.

It says: "The failures to plan... seriously hindered Coalition chances of stabilising post-Saddam Iraq. The lack of improvements to essential services and the standard of living together with disorder meant many locals who were 'sitting on the fence' were not persuaded to support the Coalition."

It was only after riots in Basra in August 2003 that Mr Brown agreed to release £500million for reconstruction work, the report says.

And it contradicts six years of Government spin which claimed ordinary Iraqis backed the "liberation", saying troops "found themselves fighting insurgents without clear support (from local people)".

Most Damning Conclusions: Flawed US plans were rubberstamped by Blair Brown blocked vital funding for five months

It took mass rioting in Basra to make him pay up. Chaos lost us the battle for Iraqi hearts & minds.

Never mind the fact that the invasion was illegal in the first place!

Technorati Tags: ,,,

Saturday, June 27, 2009

EPA May Have Suppressed Report Skeptical Of Global Warming

June 26, 2009  Posted by Declan McCullagh

The Environmental Protection Agency may have suppressed an internal report that was skeptical of claims about global warming, including whether carbon dioxide must be strictly regulated by the federal government, according to a series of newly disclosed e-mail messages.

Less than two weeks before the agency formally submitted its pro-regulation recommendation to the White House, an EPA center director quashed a 98-page report that warned against making hasty "decisions based on a scientific hypothesis that does not appear to explain most of the available data."

The EPA official, Al McGartland, said in an e-mail message to a staff researcher on March 17: "The administrator and the administration has decided to move forward... and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision."
The e-mail correspondence raises questions about political interference in what was supposed to be a independent review process inside a federal agency -- and echoes criticisms of the EPA under the Bush administration, which was accused of suppressing a pro-climate change document.


Alan Carlin, the primary author of the 98-page EPA report, told CBSNews.com in a telephone interview on Friday that his boss, McGartland, was being pressured himself. "It was his view that he either lost his job or he got me working on something else," Carlin said. "That was obviously coming from higher levels..."

Technorati Tags: ,,

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Bilderberg 2009 Intel Already Proving Accurate

Veteran Bilderberg researchers Jim Tucker and Daniel Estulin hit the mark once again as insider info becomes reality

James Corbett  The Corbett Report  24 July, 2009

Observers of the annual elitist confab known as Bilderberg have long known that plans discussed at the conference quickly become reality. In 2002, Bilderberg researcher Jim Tucker correctly predicted that the Iraq war would start in March 2003 (not late 2002, as many were predicting at the time). In 2006, Daniel Estulin correctly forecast the popping of the housing bubble and subsequent economic crash, a possibility that most talking heads in the corporate media were laughing at at the time. In 2008, Tucker forecast a dramatic drop in oil prices while most analysts were fretting about the possibility of $200 a barrel oil. Tucker and Estulin have proven so stunningly accurate in their predictions not because they have a crystal ball, but because they have sources inside the Bilderberg Group and other organizations where financial oligarchs and their political puppets make decisions about our geopolitical future.

2009 is not even half over, but it seems the forecasts made by both Estulin and Tucker based on their 2009 Bilderberg sources are already proving to be accurate. In a phone interview conducted as this year's conference was getting underway in Greece, Daniel Estulin warned The Corbett Report that the powers that be were preparing to run up the stock market one final time in order to draw the masses back into investing before crashing the market. Now, a worrying new report suggests that this is precisely the case as corporate executives start ditching their stocks at a rate not seen in years…

 

… The Bloomberg report suggests that the market—currently enjoying one of the greatest rallies in decades as stocks continue to rise from last year's post-crash nadir—is about to have the rug pulled out from under it, a fact that corporate executives in the know are taking to heart as they scramble to get rid of their worthless stocks before the general public realize what's going on. Add to this the stunning news that U.S. Embassies around the globe have been instructed to prepare for a bank holiday in September and growing opposition to the Obama Administration's stunning proposal to give the private Federal Reserve sweeping new dictatorial powers over the entire U.S. economy and there is little doubt that an economic collapse the likes of which Estulin discussed is becoming more likely by the day.

Should an economic collapse occur as predicted, social and political changes of world historical importance will be the inevitable result. Jim Tucker, who also recently joined The Corbett Report for a telephone interview, has predicted that the ongoing world financial crisis will be manipulated by Bilderberg to further their long-held goal of crafting a North American Union along the lines of the European Union. Indeed, we have already seen call for the centralization of financial regulatory power from Bilderbergers like German chancellor Andrea Merkel, who argue that national sovereignty over financial regulation is what caused the crisis in the first place. More chillingly, Estulin believes the worldwide economic depression which we are currently entering could ultimately result in the deaths of over 4 billion people, or roughly 2/3 of the planet's population. This is certainly one way to achieve elitist goals of vast population reduction, an item high on the agenda of another secretive meeting of billionaires (chaired by Bilderberger David Rockefeller) just weeks before this year's Bilderberg conference.

Jim Tucker also stressed that manipulation of the swine flu hysteria was high on this year's agenda, and that this crisis too would be used to consolidate power in international bodies such as the WHO. Preparations for ceding more and morepower to unaccountable international bureaucrats in the event of a flu pandemic have been carefully crafted for years, and now the butchering of national sovereignty is to begin in earnest…

 

… Again, recent events have made Tucker's Bilderberg intelligence that much more credible. Since Bilderberg, the WHO has declared the first pandemic of the 21st century, opening the door to the very WHO power grab that Tucker warned about. The first real test of those powers may be as early as this fall, when a much-hypedseasonal resurgence of the surprisingly weak H1N1 flu may be used as an excuse to implement mass vaccinations. Preparations for just such a plan have been made in country after country including Canada, the U.S. and France.

The prospect of the WHO using their own campaign of swine flu hysteria to justify mass vaccinations in countries around the globe is triply frightening. Firstly, the vaccinations could be made mandatory, thus breaking fundamental tenants of freedom from forced medication which is the very pillar of a free society. Secondly, the swine flu vaccine is being developed by the very company that earlier this year sent out doses of live bird flu to be mixed in with their flu vaccines, an "accident" so incredibly likely that doctors in the Czech Republic accused the company of actuallyattempting to provoke a pandemic. Thirdly, the idea of a mass vaccination campaign is worrying because, as one of the co-developers of Tamiflu recently surmised, the recent swine flu strain itself was likely created during the vaccine production process

 

… Although the verification of this Bilderberg intelligence is of course quite worrying, the fact that Tucker and Estulin's sources have proven accurate yet again provides some small solace. Firstly, it shows that the elitist plans can be exposed (and, if enough political will can be mustered, stopped) by legitimate researchers and alternative media. Secondly, it further discredits the corporate controlled media, which has only begun to shift from its previous canard that Bilderberg doesn't exist to its latest canard that Bilderberg exists but is not important. The longer the corporate media continues to hold to this line in the face of blatantly obvious facts, the further discredited they will become and the faster the public will abandon the fast-disappearing media apparatus of the corporate propaganda machine. Meanwhile, the alternative media will continue to grow exponentially and awareness of Bilderberg amongst the general public will continue to rise.

Related works from The Corbett Report:

Bilderberg 2009 (podcast episode)

Tucker: Bilderberg to Exploit Swine Flu Hysteria (article)

Bill Clinton admits to violating federal law (video)

Technorati Tags: ,,,

Corporate Media Providing False View Of Iranian Post Election Protests

Source: www.roguegovernment.com
By - Lee Rogers

The corporate controlled media are deliberately providing a false view of reality in their coverage on the post election protests in Iran.  For starters, the media entirely downplays the historical fact that the U.S. through covert CIA operations in the 1950s staged false flag terror attacks to overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran.  They have also ignored their own news reports detailing how the U.S. since 2005 have been running covert operations in Iran as part of an effort to destabilize the nation’s political and economic system. With all this in mind, it is almost certain that much of what we are seeing in Iran is the result of covert activity on the part of the U.S. and other western governments. In fact, considering that Barack Obama came out and said that there is no CIA activity involved with the post election protests, this alone gives credibility to the fact that there is. After all, when’s the last time the U.S. government told the truth about anything?


Below are news reports from the corporate controlled media detailing U.S. funding and encouraging of covert operations within Iran.

From the Washington Post:
The Bush administration told Congress last year of a secret plan to dramatically expand covert operations inside Iran as part of a long-running effort to destabilize the country's ruling regime, according to a report published yesterday.


The plan allowed up to $400 million in covert spending for activities ranging from spying on Iran's nuclear program to supporting rebel groups opposed to the country's ruling clerics, veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh reported in the New Yorker magazine.

From ABC News:
The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert "black" operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell the Blotter on ABCNews.com.


The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the subject, say President Bush has signed a "nonlethal presidential finding" that puts into motion a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iran's currency and international financial transactions.

From ABC News:
A Pakistani tribal militant group responsible for a series of deadly guerrilla raids inside Iran has been secretly encouraged and advised by American officials since 2005, U.S. and Pakistani intelligence sources tell ABC News.


The group, called Jundullah, is made up of members of the Baluchi tribe and operates out of the Baluchistan province in Pakistan, just across the border from Iran.


With the post election chaos in Iran, it is interesting to see how the corporate media’s own reports of U.S. funded covert activity in Iran have been completely forgotten. Over the past couple of weeks, western media outlets have consistently delivered incredibly biased reports, failing to provide people with the proper historical context of U.S.-Iranian relations.  Operation Ajax which was the CIA funding of false flag terror attacks in the 1950s to overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran has been ignored or downplayed by all the talking heads. The focus has been entirely on how evil the Iranian government is and how their electoral process is a fraud while providing little evidence conclusively proving either. It is funny to see how quick the media is to condemn the Iranian elections but refuse to condemn the widespread vote fraud that occurred in the 2000 and 2004 U.S. elections. The U.S. media has been virtually silent on the issues with electronic voting machines that are widely used in U.S. presidential elections. This is despite the fact that computer scientists and other experts have criticized these machines as having numerous security problems.


We are also being propagandized with the image of Neda a young Iranian woman who was shot to death during one of the protests. Sure, any death is a tragedy but let’s put this in the appropriate context. So far it appears as if there have been very few protesters who have actually died as a result of Iranian government action. Instead of reporting this, the western media has decided to personalize the story of one death and give the viewer a distorted view of what’s really going on. In addition, when one considers the U.S. covert activity within Iran one has to ask the question if Neda was killed by a U.S. operative so they could have a story to propagandize the world on how evil the Iranian government is. The entire story smells of a massive psychological warfare operation that has been amplified by the western media. In fact, we should question if the actual death itself is even real.  For all we know, it could be entirely made up.


Apparently one young woman dying in a protest is of more concern to the western media than Israeli and U.S. forces killing an untold number of innocent people all over the Middle East for most of the past decade. Joseph Stalin was right when he said this.
“One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.”


Undoubtedly the western media is propagandizing the people in the west to hate the Iranian government to justify future covert and possibly military operations in Iran. This is despite the fact that there really is no reason for the U.S. or other western nations to be involved in the internal affairs of Iran. Iran doesn’t even have a nuclear weapon, and even if they did, the Israelis have hundreds of nuclear weapons and an incredibly advanced military. Iran isn't a threat with or without a nuclear weapon which makes the entire argument of the neo-cons and other lunatics who want regime change in Iran all the more ridiculous and insane.


Regardless of all this, it seems clear that the post election protests and civil strife in Iran has been encouraged by covert activity from western intelligence agencies and media outlets. This is obviously part of an agenda to destabilize Iran's government so it can finally be merged into the New World Order.

Technorati Tags: ,,

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

CIA has Distributed 400 Million Dollars Inside Iran to Evoke a Revolution

June 18, 2009

Former Pakistani Army General Mirza Aslam Beig claims the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has distributed 400 million dollars inside Iran to evoke a revolution.

In a phone interview with the Pashto Radio on Monday, General Beig said that there is undisputed intelligence proving the US interference in Iran.

“The documents prove that the CIA spent 400 million dollars inside Iran to prop up a colorful-hollow revolution following the election,” he added.

Pakistan’s former army chief of joint staff went on to say that the US wanted to disturb the situation in Iran and bring to power a pro-US government.

Technorati Tags: ,,

US Official: The CIA bribed Iranian government officials, businessmen, and reporters, and paid Iranians to demonstrate in the streets

Sunday, 21 June 2009

Iran Faces Greater Risks Than It Knows
by Paul Craig Roberts

Stephen Kinzer’s book, All the Shah’s Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror, tells the story of the overthrow of Iran’s democratically-elected leader, Mohammed Mosaddeq, by the CIA and the British MI6 in 1953. The CIA bribed Iranian government officials, businessmen, and reporters, and paid Iranians to demonstrate in the streets.


The 1953 street demonstrations, together with the Cold War claim that the US had to grab Iran before the Soviets did, served as the US government’s justification for overthrowing Iranian democracy. What the Iranian people wanted was not important.

Today, the street demonstrations in Tehran show signs of orchestration. The protesters, primarily young people, especially young women opposed to the dress codes, carry signs written in English: "Where is My Vote?" The signs are intended for the western media—not for the Iranian government.

More evidence of orchestration is provided by the protesters’ chant, "death to the dictator, death to Ahmadinejad." Every Iranian knows that the president of Iran is a public figure with limited powers. His main role is to take the heat from the governing grand Ayatollah. No Iranian, and no informed Westerner, could possibly believe that Ahmadinejad is a dictator. Even Ahmadinejad’s superior, Khamenei, is not a dictator, as he is appointed by a government body that can remove him.


The demonstrations, like those in 1953, are intended to discredit the Iranian government and to establish for Western opinion that the government is a repressive regime that does not have the support of the Iranian people. This manipulation of opinion sets up Iran as another Iraq ruled by a dictator who must be overthrown by sanctions or an invasion.


On American TV, the protesters who are interviewed speak perfect English. They are either westernized secular Iranians who were allied with the Shah and fled to the West during the 1978 Iranian revolution or they are the young Westernized residents of Tehran.


Many of the demonstrators may be sincere in their protest, hoping to free themselves from Islamic moral codes. But if reports of the US government’s plans to destabilize Iran are correct, paid troublemakers are in their ranks.

Some observers, such as George Friedman, believe that the American destabilization plan will fail. However, many ayatollahs feel animosity toward Ahmadinejad, who assaults the ayatollahs for corruption. Many in the Iranian countryside believe that the ayatollahs have too much wealth and power. Amadinejad’s attack on corruption resonates with the Iranian countryside, but not with the ayatollahs.


Amadinejad’s campaign against corruption has brought Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri out against him. Montazeri is a rival to ruling Ayatollah Khamenei. Montazeri sees in the street protests an opportunity to challenge Khamenei for the leadership role.


So, once again, as so many times in history, the ambitions of one person might seal the fate of the Iranian state.

Khamenei knows that the elected president is an underling. If he has to sacrifice Ahmadinejad’s election in order to fend off Montazeri, he might recount the vote and elect Mousavi, thinking that will bring an end to the controversy.

Khamenei, solving his personal problem, would play into the hands of the American-Israeli assault on his country.


On the surface, the departure of Ahmadeinjad would cost Israel and the US the loss of their useful "anti-Semitic" boggy-man. But in fact it would play into the American-Israeli propaganda. The story would be that the remote, isolated, Iranian ruling Ayatollah was forced by the Iranian people to admit the falsity of the rigged election, calling into question rule by Ayatollahs who do not stand for election.

Mousavi and Ayatollah Montazeri are putting their besieged country at risk. Possibly they believe that ridding Iran of Ahmadeinjad’s extreme image would gain Iran breathing room.
If Mousavi and Montazeri succeed in their ambitions, one likely result would be a loss in Iran’s independence. The new rulers would have to continually defend Iran’s new moderate and reformist image by giving in to American demands. If the government admits to a rigged election, the legitimacy of the Iranian Revolution would be called into question, setting up Iran for more US interference in its internal affairs.


For the American neoconservatives, democratic countries are those countries that submit to America’s will, regardless of their form of government. "Democracy" is achieved by America ruling through puppet officials.


The American public might never know whether the Iranian election was legitimate or stolen. The US media serves as a propaganda device, not as a purveyor of truth. Election fraud is certainly a possibility--it happens even in America--and signs of fraud have appeared. Large numbers of votes were swiftly counted, which raises the question whether votes were counted or merely a result was announced.

The US media’s response to the election was equally rapid. Having invested heavily in demonizing Ahmadinejad, the media is unwilling to accept election results that vindicate Ahmadinejad and declared fraud in advance of evidence, despite the pre-election poll results published in the June 15 Washington Post, which found Ahmadinejad to be the projected winner.

There are many American interest groups that have a vested interest in the charge that the election was rigged. What is important to many Americans is not whether the election was fair, but whether the winner’s rhetoric is allied with their goals.
For example, those numerous Americans who believe that both presidential and congressional elections were stolen during the Karl Rove Republican years are tempted to use the Iranian election protests to shame Americans for accepting the stolen Bush elections.


Feminists take the side of the "reformer" Mousavi.

Neoconservatives damn the election for suppressing the "peace candidate" who might acquiescent to Israel’s demands to halt the development of Iranian nuclear energy.


Ideological and emotional agendas result in people distancing themselves from factual and analytical information, preferring instead information that fits with their material interests and emotional disposition.


The primacy of emotion over fact bids ill for the future. The extraordinary attention given to the Iranian election suggests that many American interests and emotions have a stake in the outcome.


Paul Craig Roberts [email him] was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan’s first term.  He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal.  He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He was awarded the Legion of Honor by French President Francois Mitterrand. He is the author of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider's Account of Policymaking in Washington; Alienation and the Soviet Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow’s Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the recent epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.

Technorati Tags: ,,,,

Sunday, June 21, 2009

Tony Blair pushed Gordon Brown to hold Iraq war inquiry in private

• Former PM feared facing 'show trial'
• Leak reveals plan to provoke invasion

The Observer, Sunday 21 June 2009

Tony Blair pushed Gordon Brown to hold Iraq war inquiry in private

• Former PM feared facing 'show trial'
• Leak reveals plan to provoke invasion

Tony Blair announces on 20 March 2003 that British servicemen and women are engaged from air, land and sea in the war against Iraq. Photograph: PA

Tony Blair urged Gordon Brown to hold the independent inquiry into the Iraq war in secret because he feared that he would be subjected to a "show trial" if it were opened to the public, the Observer can reveal. (And so he should!!)

The revelation that the former prime minister - who led Britain to war in March 2003 - had intervened will fuel the anger of MPs, peers, military leaders and former civil servants, who were appalled by Brown's decision last week to order the investigation to be conducted behind closed doors.

Blair, who resisted pressure for a full public inquiry while he was prime minister, appears to have taken a deliberate decision not to express his view in person to Brown because he feared it might leak out.

Instead, messages on the issue were relayed through others to Sir Gus O'Donnell, the cabinet secretary, who conveyed them to the prime minister in the days leading up to the announcement of the inquiry last week…

… Blair is believed to have been alarmed by the prospect of giving evidence in public and under oath about the use of intelligence and about his numerous private discussions with US President George Bush over plans for war. A spokesman for the former Labour leader would only say last night: "This was a decision for the current prime minister, not for Tony Blair."

The Observer reveals today that six weeks before the war, at a meeting in Washington, the two leaders were forced to contemplate alternative scenarios that might trigger a second UN resolution legitimising military action.

Bush told Blair that the US had drawn up a provocative plan "to fly U-2 reconnaissance aircraft, painted in UN colours, over Iraq with fighter cover". Bush said that if Saddam fired at the planes, he would put Iraq in breach of UN resolutions and legitimise military action…

Technorati Tags: ,,,

Friday, June 05, 2009

UK Politics

It seems ironic to feel sorry for Gordon Brown. But Tony Blair, the smooth-talker (like Obama now) carefully steered the UK into the rocks, then jumped ship just before it hit – leaving his patsy Gordon Brown, who had always fancied the job as PM, to inherit a ship sinking after hitting the rocks, and taking all the blame!!!

Technorati Tags: ,,