This is Matthew Gould, second from right, British Ambassador to Israel, who was pictured speaking at a meeting of the Leeds Zionist Federation that was also the opening of the Leeds Hasbarah Centre. The Leeds Zionist Federation is part of the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland, motto “Speaking Up for Israel.” A collection was made at the meeting to send packages to members of the Israeli Defence Force.
On 29 May 2011 The Jerusalem Post reported: “British Ambassador Matthew Gould declared his commitment to Israel and the principles of Zionism on Thursday”.
Remember this background, it is unusual behaviour for a diplomat, and it is important.
The six meetings between British Ambassador to Israel Matthew Gould and Minister of Defence Liam Fox and Adam Werritty together – only two of which were revealed by Cabinet Secretary Gus O’Donnell in his “investigation” into Werritty’s unauthorised role in the Ministry of Defence – raise vital concerns about a secret agenda for war at the core of government, comparable to Blair’s determination to drive through a war on Iraq..
This is a detective story. It begins a few weeks ago, when the Fox-Werritty scandal was first breaking in the media. I had a contact from an old friend from my Foreign Office days. This friend had access to the Gus O’Donnell investigation. He had given a message for me to a trusted third party.
Whistleblowing in the surveillance state is a difficult activity. I left through a neighbour’s garden, not carrying a mobile phone, puffed and panted by bicycle to an unmonitored but busy stretch of road, hitched a lift much of the way, then ordered a minicab on a payphone from a country pub to my final destination, a farm far from CCTV. There the intermediary gave me the message: what really was worrying senior civil servants in the Cabinet Office was that the Fox-Werritty link related to plans involving Mossad and the British Ambassador to Israel, Matthew Gould.
Since I became a notorious whistleblower, several of my ex-friends and contacts have used me to get out information they wanted to leak, via my blog. A good recent example was a senior friend at the UN who tipped me off in advance on the deal by which the US agreed to the Saudi attack on pro-democracy demonstrators in Bahrain, in return for Arab League support for the NATO attack on Libya. But this was rather different, not least in the apparent implication that our Ambassador to Israel, Matthew Gould, was engaged in something with Werritty which went beyond official FCO policy.
I was particularly concerned by this because I knew slightly and liked Matthew Gould, from the time he wrote speeches for Robin Cook. I hoped there was nothing much in it. But then Gould’s name started to come up as professional journalists dug into the story, and reported Werritty’s funding by pro-Israeli lobby groups.
I decided that the best approach was for me to write to Matthew Gould. I did so, asking him when he had first met Werritty, how many times he had met him, and how many communications of every kind there had been between them. I received the reply that these questions would be answered in Gus O’Donnell’s report.
But Gus O’Donnell’s report in fact answered none of these questions. It only mentioned two meetings at which Fox, Gould and Werritty were all three present. It did not mention Gould-Werritty bilateral meetings and contacts at all. To an ex-Ambassador like me, there was also something very fishy about the two trilateral meetings O’Donnell did mention and his characterisation of them.
This led me to dig further, and I was shocked to find that O’Donnell was, at the most charitable interpretation, economical with the truth. In fact there were at least six Fox-Werritty-Gould meetings, not the two given by O’Donnell. Why did GOD lie? I now had no doubt that my informant had pointed me towards something very real and very important indeed.
Matthew Gould was the only British Ambassador who Fox and Werrity met together. They met him six times. Why?
The first meeting to which O’Donnell admits, took place in September 2010. O’Donnell says this was
“a general discussion of international defence and security matters to enable Mr Gould better to understand MOD’s perspective.”
O’Donnell says Werritty should not have been present. An FCO spokesman told me on 21 October that
“Mr Gould’s meeting with the Defence Secretary was arranged by his office as part of his pre-posting briefing calls.”
All Ambassadors make pre-posting briefing calls around Whitehall before taking up their job, as you would expect. But even for our most senior Ambassadors, outside the Foreign Office those calls are not at Secretary of State level. Senior officials are quite capable of explaining policy to outgoing Ambassadors; Secretaries of State have many other things to do.
For this meeting to happen at all was not routine, and Werritty’s presence made it still more strange. Why was this meeting happening? I dug further, and learnt from a senior MOD source that there were two more very strange things about this meeting, neither noted by O’Donnell. There was no private secretary or MOD official present to take note of action points, and the meeting took place not in Fox’s office, but in the MOD dining room.
O’Donnell may have been able to fox the media, but to a former Ambassador this whole meeting stunk. I bombarded the FCO with more questions, and discovered an amazing fact left out by O’Donnell. The FCO spokesman replied to me on 21 October 2011 that:
“Mr Werritty was also present at an earlier meeting Mr Gould had with Dr Fox in the latter’s capacity as shadow Defence Secretary.”
So Gould, Fox and Werritty had got together before Gould was Ambassador, while Fox was still in opposition and while Werritty was – what, exactly? This opened far more questions than it answered. I put them to the FCO. When, where and why had this meeting happened? We only knew it was before May 2010, when Fox took office. What was discussed? There are very strict protocols for senior officials briefing opposition front bench spokesman. Had they been followed?
The FCO refused point blank to answer any further questions. I turned to an independent-minded MP, Jeremy Corbyn, who put down a parliamentary question to William Hague. The reply quite deliberately ignored almost all of Corbyn’s question, but it did throw up an extraordinary bit of information – yet another meeting between Fox, Werritty and Gould, which had not been previously admitted.
Hague replied to Corbyn that:
“Our ambassador to Israel was also invited by the former Defence Secretary to a private social engagement in summer 2010 at which Adam Werritty was present.”
Getting to the truth was like drawing teeth, but the picture was building. O’Donnell had completely mischaracterised the “Briefing meeting” between Fox, Werritty and O’Donnell by hiding the fact that the three had met up at least twice before – once for a meeting when Fox was in opposition, and once for “a social engagement.” The FCO did not answer Corbyn’s question as to who else was present at this “social engagement”.
This was also key because Gould’s other meetings with Fox and Werritty were being characterised – albeit falsely – as simply routine, something Gould had to do in the course of his ambassadorial duties. But this attendance at “a private social engagement” was a voluntary act by Gould, indubitable proof that, at the least, the three were happy in each other’s company, but given that all three were very active in zionist causes, it was a definite indication of something more than that.
That furtive meeting between Fox, Werritty and Gould in the MOD dining room, deliberately held away from Fox’s office where it should have taken place, and away from the MOD officials who should have been there, now looks less like briefing and more like plotting.
My existing doubts about the second and only other meeting to which O’Donnell does admit make plain why that question is very important.
O’Donnell had said that Gould, Fox and Werritty had met on 6 February 2011:
“in Tel Aviv. This was a general discussion of international affairs over a private dinner with senior Israelis. The UK Ambassador was present.”
There was something very wrong here. Any ex-Ambassador knows that any dinner with senior figures from your host country, at which the British Ambassador to that country and a British Secretary of State are both present, and at which international affairs are discussed, can never be “private”. You are always representing the UK government in that circumstance. The only explanation I could think of for O’Donnell’s astonishing description of this as a “private” dinner was that the discussion was far from being official UK policy.
I therefore asked the FCO who was at this dinner, what was discussed, and who was paying for it? I viewed the last as my trump card – if either Gould or Fox was receiving hospitality, they are obliged to declare it. To my astonishment the FCO refused to say who was present or who paid. Corbyn’s parliamentary question also covered the issue of who was at this dinner, to which he received no reply.
Plainly something was very wrong. I therefore again asked how often Gould had met or communicated with Werritty without Fox being present. Again the FCO refused to reply. But one piece of information that had been found by other journalists was that, prior to the Tel Aviv dinner, Fox, Gould and Werritty had together attended the Herzilya conference in Israel. The programme of this is freely available. It is an unabashedly staunch zionist annual conference on “Israel’s security”, which makes no pretence at a balanced approach to Palestinian questions and attracts a strong US neo-conservative following. Fox, Gould and Werritty sat together at this event.
Yet again, the liar O’Donnell does not mention it.
I then learnt of yet another, a sixth meeting between Fox, Gould and Werritty. This time my infomrant was another old friend, a jewish diplomat for another country, based at an Embassy in London. They had met Gould, Fox and Werritty together at the “We believe in Israel” conference in London in May 2011. Here is a photo of Gould and Fox together at that conference.
I had no doubt about the direction this information was leading, but I now needed to go back to my original source. Sometimes the best way to hide something is to put it right under the noses of those looking for it, and on Wednesday I picked up the information in a tent at the Occupy London camp outside St Paul’s cathedral.
This is the story I was given.
Matthew Gould was Deputy Head of Mission at the British Embassy in Iran, a country which Werritty frequently visited, and where Werritty claimed to have British government support for plots against Ahmadinejad. Gould worked at the British Embassy in Washington; the Fox-Werritty Atlantic Bridge fake charity was active in building links between British and American neo-conservatives and particularly ultra-zionists. Gould’s responsibilities at the Embassy included co-ordination on US policy towards Iran. The first meeting of all three, which the FCO refuses to date, probably stems from this period.
According to my source, there is a long history of contact between Gould and Werritty. The FCO refuse to give any information on Gould-Werritty meetings or communications except those meetings where Fox was present – and those have only been admitted gradually, one by one. We may not have them all even yet.
My source says that co-ordinating with Israel and the US on diplomatic preparation for an attack on Iran was the subject of all these meetings. That absolutely fits with the jobs Gould held at the relevant times. The FCO refuses to say what was discussed. My source says that, most crucially, Iran was discussed at the Tel Aviv dinner, and the others present represented Mossad. The FCO again refuses to say who was present or what was discussed.
On Wednesday 2 November it was revealed in the press that under Fox the MOD had prepared secret and detailed contingency plans for British participation in an attack on Iran.
There are very important questions here. Was Gould really discussing neo-con plans for attacking Iran with Werritty and eventually with Fox before the Conservatives were even in government? Why did O’Donnell’s report so carefully mislead on the Fox-Gould-Werritty axis? How far was the FCO aware of MOD preparations for attacking Iran? Is there a neo-con cell of senior ministers and officials, co-ordinating with Israel and the United States, and keeping their designs hidden from the Conservative’s coalition partners?
The government could clear up these matters if it answered some of the questions it refuses to answer, even when asked formally by a member of parliament. The media have largely moved on from the Fox-Werritty affair, but have barely skimmed the surface of the key questions it raises. They relate to secrecy, democratic accountabilty and preparations to launch a war, preparations which bypass the safeguards of good government. The refusal to give straight answers to simple questions by a member of perliament strikes at the very root of our democracy.
Is this not precisely the situation we were in with Blair and Iraq? Have no lessons been learnt?
There is a further question which arises. Ever since the creation of the state of Israel, the UK had a policy of not appointing a jewish Briton as Ambassador, for fear of conflict of interest. As a similar policy of not appointing a catholic Ambassador to the Vatican. New Labour overturned both longstanding policies as discriminatory. Matthew Gould is therefore the first jewish British Ambassador to Israel.
Matthew Gould does not see his race or religion as irrelevant. He has chosen to give numerous interviews to both British and Israeli media on the subject of being a jewish ambassador, and has been at pains to be photographed by the Israeli media participating in jewish religious festivals. Israeli newspaper Haaretz described him as “Not just an ambassador who is jewish, but a jewish ambassador”. That rather peculiar phrase appears directly to indicate that the potential conflict of interest for a British ambassador in Israel has indeed arisen.
It is thus most unfortunate that it is Gould who is the only British Ambassador to have met Fox and Werritty together, who met them six times, and who now stands suspected of long term participation with them in a scheme to forward war with Iran, in cooperation with Israel. This makes it even more imperative that the FCO answers now the numerous outstanding questions about the Gould/Werritty relationship and the purpose of all those meetings with Fox.
There is no doubt that the O’Donnell report’s deceitful non-reporting of so many Fox-Gould-Werritty meetings, the FCO’s blunt refusal to list Gould-Werritty, meetings and contacts without Fox, and the refusal to say who else was present at any of these occasions, amounts to irrefutable evidence that something very important is being hidden right at the heart of government. I have no doubt that my informant is telling the truth, and the secret is the plan to attack Iran. It fits all the above facts. What else does?
Please feel free to re-use and republish this article anywhere, commercially or otherwise. It has been blocked by the mainstream media. I write regularly for the mainstream media and this is the first article of mine I have ever been unable to publish. People have risked a huge amount by leaking me information in an effort to stop the government machinery from ramping up a war with Iran. There are many good people in government who do not want to see another Iraq. Please do all you can to publish and redistribute this information.
UPDATE A commenter has already pointed me to this bit of invaluable evidence:
“My government absolutely agrees with your conception of the Iranian threat and the importance of your determination to battle it.” Dealing with the Iranian threat will be a large part of my work here.” Gould said.
From Israel National News. It also says that he will be trying to promote a positive atmosphere between Israel and the Palestinian National Authority, but the shallowest or the deepest search shows the same picture; an entirely biased indeed fanatical zionist who must give no confidence at all to the Palestinian Authority. He must be recalled.
“Folks, it’s just gone up on anti-semitism.net”
.
Which confirms what I said the other day, which was that Guardian and the rest wouldn’t touch your article because it falls within the definition of the new anti-Semitism, i.e., it criticizes Israel. Except, it doesn’t really. It criticizes the British Government or its agents for serving Israel not Britain. So maybe this is the new “new anti-Semitism”, i.e., anything that is in anyway detrimental to the interest of Israel, e.g., exposing treason in the UK that benefits Israel is now to be understood as anti-Semitism.
.
The thing is, as I pointed out the other day, such a definition means that being an anti-Semite is something for people to be proud of. Is that good for Jews?
Komodo,
I will take heed of your advice. However can someone identify the ne’er-do-wells in the photograph posted please?
,
Is it Binley who is furthest to right? Who are they others? (apart from Gould)
Jonathan :
“1. Economic meltdown form finacial terrosists
2. War with Israel-Iran.
3. Europe being taken over by Banksters.
#Zionism”
– It seems you are insinuating that the one aspect underpinning all these phenomena is somehow Zionism (unless I’m misunderstanding you). A little absurd.
To be sure, Zionism especially in its reformed Jabotinsky “Iron Wall” form, as it is today, is not a very healthy philosophy, but rest assured, the economic meltdowns have wholly different causes…
Clark and Peter Bryce :
Thanks for info on cell phones.
It’s fairly obvious why the MSM won’t touch this with a barge-pole. Messing with The Met and NI is one thing – and this took time, and many lawyers – but messing with Securitat is quite another. Aside from the fact that the security services have people employed as journalists, even the honest ones know that careers would be on the line.
.
But of course, two other real villains of the piece are: Gus O’Donnell, and, I’d argue, David Cameron. Gus for the politically inspired white-wash – and David Cameron for the political inspiration. And this is another, more subtle I think, reason why Craig’s piece isn’t being carried: it asks very serious questions of the PM himself. The PM will make the decision whether to send troops to Iran – indeed, he already has, it seems. Was he entirely ignorant of his Defence secretary’s relationship to a neocon cabal lobbying on behalf of Israel in order to invade Iran? This dubious PM seems to be the most connected man in the history of politics, so I doubt it.
.
Even leaving the PM out of it, Ambassador Gould has indeed to be recalled. Being friendly to Israel is not the same as being a Friend Of Israel, and he’s stepped over the line, by a distance. Very interesting stuff on the plotting to invade Iran. Alas, we’re going to hear much more about Iran soon – and not enough about Gould.
http://thedisclosureproject-steelmagnolia.blogspot.com/2011/10/fox-werritty-tied-up-and-knotted-but-by.html
The SLOG…onto something ?
One things for sure, someone ,somehow has to stop the Olympics. For any reason to attack Iran there will have to be massive loss of life and what better opportunity than the Olympics ! Cameron is a madman.
Prison Plant and John Pilcher need to have this article.
http://www.newstatesman.com/international-politics/2009/10/iran-nuclear-pilger-obama
I did of course mean John Pilger am going to search for Prison Planet on twitter.
Link now up on Wikileaks key precursor Cryptome:
.
http://cryptome.org/
Your article in globalresearch.ca
http://theoccupationofpalestine.blogspot.com/2011/09/iran-how-would-us-led-iran-war-begin.html
Now the really scary part explained in great detail, war with Iran..
Now I can see this important piece of investigative journalism is starting to go global I can go and sleep peacefully. May you all do the same, but spare a thought for those who cannot go to sleep peacefully, because of western intervention, as I will do.
Hope this will now become a story that the media can’t miss.
Just checked and Mike Rivero (Whatreallyhappened.com) and Jeff Rense (Rense.com) are both posting. I E mailed both but so did many other folk. Dosn’t seem to be anything on Drudge as yet.
Surely any attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities would provoke retaliation in the Gulf that would cut shipping routes and disrupt the flow of oil and gas? Why don’t they (US/Israel) just talk to Iran and give up this schoolyard bully baseball bat approach?
.
I give up. I’m going to bed.
.
Oh by the way, this is interesting
“58% of UK public say they have lost trust in papers” (but they trust TV and radio more)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/nov/14/phone-hacking-public-trust
Speculative, melodramatic and unnecessarily rude. I don’t wonder you are finding it difficult to get published.
And do try not to constantly remind your readers that you used to be an ambassador.
Nuid,
Yes. The other 42% must be pretty thick.
My two penny piece for what it is worth:-
1. The Jews had a rough ride in the Holocaust, but this does not excuse the displacing of some 700,000 Palestinians at the time of the Nabka ( great catastrophe).
2. One of the huge ironies of the 20th Century, is the Zionists, as “chosen people” turning round immediate post World War 11 to inflict sustained suffering on another people.
3. The recent absence of effective defence systems and military means with long range missiles and WMDs made Libya relative easy pickings for the powers that be – so – if one were Iran, would a lesson not have been learned therefrom? Arm yourself to the teeth and prepare to fight fire with fire if attacked – how else does a country survive when faced with aggression?
4. Israel has nukes and no international accountability.
5. Where is the humanity, the legality, the sanity – when beyond the 1967 boundaries Israel continues to build illegal settlement and with an Apartheid wall create Bantustans while denying the Palestinians their rights?
6. I recall what the Palestinian intellectual, Edward Said said about a one state solution – the demographics of Israel and the realties on the ground must dictate that to maintain an ethnically defined state then some 20% or more of the population of Israel must be disenfranchised. How can this be democratic and why isn’t it seen to be racism? Fuck Zionism, as far as I care, for no one in my eyes is any fucking chosen people, and I do believe in mutual respect and equality for all homo sapiens.
7. Yes – the perfect number to end on – 7 – for if Israel attacks Iran then at this juncture at 7 is where many can make ready to look to heaven – for I believe that it would be easy for such a war rapidly to escalate and envelope the whole of the Middle East, if not kick start World in World War 111.
Blogger
“And do try not to constantly remind your readers that you used to be an ambassador.”
Haven’t mentioned it on this blog for many months, except here in the context of discussing what an Ambassador would normally do, where being one is rather relevant, don’t you think?
3 Nov: Daily Star Lebanon: Sam Bahour: The Quartet merely serves as a facade of peace mediation
In an interview with Haaretz more than a year after he resigned from his 11-month ordeal as Quartet special envoy, James Wolfensohn said it best: “I feel that if anything, I was stupid for not reading the small print. I was never given the mandate to negotiate the peace.” Haaretz noted in reporting the interview that, “The mandate he received, he says – which is identical to the one Tony Blair has now been given – was solely to try to improve the economic situation in the territories and to improve the Palestinians’ situation in general, whereas he naively thought that this included intervention to advance peace.”…
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/Opinion/Commentary/2011/Nov-03/152952-the-quartet-merely-serves-as-a-facade-of-peace-mediation.ashx#axzz1djB1UfzC
5 Oct: Financial Times: Palestinian leaders lose faith in Blair
By Vita Bekker in Jerusalem
Top officials in the Palestine Liberation Organisation, the umbrella group that includes most Palestinian factions, charge that Mr Blair – who represents the so-called Mideast Quartet that includes the US, UN, European Union and Russia – prefers to look out for Israel’s interests rather than acting as an honest broker…
(PYTHONESQUE FT)The tensions between Palestinian leaders and Mr Blair are the latest obstacle to international efforts to reignite peace talks that have stalled for more than a year.
The Palestinians’ growing hostility is also a sign that they are unlikely to accept a new Quartet proposal, largely driven by Mr Blair, calling for negotiations to be renewed within weeks and concluded by the end of 2012…
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7b4cede2-ef63-11e0-bc88-00144feab49a.html#axzz1djCE6KiZ
and let’s not forget Blair’s most unfit “special envoy to the Middle East, Lord “Cashpoint” Levy:
Michael Levy
Levy first met Tony Blair at a dinner party in 1994, hosted by Israeli diplomat Gideon Meir,[3] the two having a common friend in Eldred Tabachnik, a senior barrister (now a QC and a former president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews) at 11 King’s Bench Walk, the chambers founded by Derry Irvine where Blair had trained in the early 1980s…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Levy,_Baron_Levy
Now being run by Daily Kos, US site with average weekday traffic of hundreds of thousands of visits:
.
http://bit.ly/vVlYtT
Hullo Craig,
I think there is a smoking gun here. This sort of thing is actually going on, 24/7 however.
Myriads of such meetings. like the Loch Ness Monster, You just caught the rare moment when the beast briefly surfaced. I have no doubts about your account.It is the ones we do NOT know about that worries me. Werrity is obviously a political bagman, and a go-between, but not, in my opinion, high level. it is obvious then, that a secret channel has now been set up that bypasses the regular channels, for this odious plotting. The UK Chief of Defence staff was in Tel Aviv recently. Why?. Israeli aircraft are practising strike tactics at a nato airbase in Sardinia.Also many other like things. I think this is all a grand “Maskarova” as the Soviets used to call it, but now it has acquired a dangerous life of its own. I have my own sources. The more rational people in Israel are terrified. They now think a war of some kind is inevitable. I think we are heading towards war by mistake, promoted utterly outside democratic channels.
What amazes me is the public reaction to the news that the UK Government is now planning an illegal war against Iran, violating the Nuremberg laws. The reaction is a deafening silence. I think we shall see war before the Spring, if not sooner.
Regards
Graham Ennis
As Craig says – “It has been blocked by the mainstream media.” The plain fact is that any article that offends powerful interest groups will be blocked by the mainstream media if the interest groups are powerful enough. Take, for example, the experience of top journalist Philip Knightly who couldn’t get an article on Denis Lehane’s horrible story of persecution by MI5 / CIA published in the UK press because it would seriously offend powerful interests, or indeed my own story.
#
You may recall that on November 4, under your caption “Assange and Sweden”, I provided some examples of how I had been intimidated and harassed just for complaining about Canadian Intelligence (CSIS) to Canada’s Intelligence Oversight body the SIRC. Effectively demonstrating (as others have also complained) that Canada’s intelligence oversight body simply rubber stamps Canadian Intelligence, and that that is just what Prime Minister Harper’s government wants it to do. Well 10 days later another SIRC scandal has reared up. As this article’s headline says:
#
CSIS Watchdog Misbehaves, Government Shrugs:
http://prism-magazine.com/2011/11/csis-watchdog-misbehaves-government-shrugs/
#
This article written by Prof. Reg Whitaker goes on to make the point – “the media showed very little interest in the sudden resignation of a man appointed to head the watchdog over CSIS less than a year ago – and no interest at all in what impact this might have on national security accountability” So once again the media fearful of the intelligence industry sticks its head in the sand. In my view the biggest threat to democracy and freedom today is the fact that the press is clearly being censored by elites.
#
If we want our children to grow up in a democracy the mainstream media is going to have to rediscover its past professionalism and have the courage to start reporting stories irregardless of whether powerful interests approve or not.
The MEK is key to all this. I personally know of strong support amongst Tories for the former/borderline terrorist cult. They even have this Syriana-esque “British Parliamentary Committee for Iran Freedom”, which is not actually a parliamentary committee:
http://iran-freedom.org/
Hi Craig, it would be good to talk! Ian
Great work, Craig. A remarkable joining of the dots, and winkling out of these secretive, subversive officials at the heart of the UK government. It is shameful that a paper like The Guardian won’t touch it, although I have noticed that they have drawn in their horns when it comes to criticism of Israel – I can only imagine some intolerable pressure behind the scenes, which is the usual MO of the Israel lobby. Certainly they have the others sewn up – The Telegraph prints whatever they choose to leak to them, and the BBC has been cowed by similar relentless harassment and attacks on them.
It lays bare the astonishing ease with which very determined, very well connected individuals can work behind the scenes to promote policies which are bigoted, illegal and promote the interests of a foreign government. Democracy is easily subverted, people are manipulated and before they realised are conned into a war which may drag on for years costing huge amounts and many deaths. Cameron is too spineless and unprincipled to do anything about it, even if he thought it was vaguely wrong. It demonstrates the principle that it only takes a small group of zealots to hijack foreign policy – as Tom Friedman casually admitted he reckoned that ‘it took only 25 people in Washington to relentlessly promote war, without whom the war wouldn’t have happened’.
http://mondoweiss.net/2011/11/golden-oldies-tom-friedman-telling-an-arab-society-to-suck-on-this.html
That is the point: UK and US policy is shockingly and easily hijacked by the Israel lobby for its own ends. Well done for exposing a part of its unsavoury and seditious campaign to drag us into another appalling war for no purpose other than Zionism.
“The other 42% must be pretty thick.”
.
Question is, who’s the thickest? The 42 who trust the papers or the 58 who “trust TV and radio more.”
.
But then in the absence of a truly free press (e.g., each owner restricted to a single outlet, or orifice one might say in the case of the Murdoch family) what can people do. Either ignore public policy issues altogether and boycott elections, or try to figure out what’s going on by following the news from dishonest sources.
.
Either way, we appear to be in a post-democratic era, assuming there ever was a democratic era.
It’s up on my debate forum – but I am concerned to see the article is also being picked up by the extremist bloggers of the British far right –
Courtenay
2. One of the huge ironies of the 20th Century, is the Zionists, as “chosen people” turning round immediate post World War 11 to inflict sustained suffering on another people.
.
As soon as the French were liberated from German occupation, they jumped on ships and went off to Vietnam, which had just declared independence after kicking out the Japanese (who had taken over from the French) in order to re-colonise the place.
Bravo, Craig. I found this article through Rense.com.
Well written and provoundly inspiring to the tiny tiny minority here in Australia who care about truth, justice, peace and humanity.
Will try to get the article out to others in Australia. Mind you we are also lockstep with Israel, UK and US. No critism of Israel is allowed whatsoever. Our pathetic left has been infiltrated and believe in Humanitarian Wars. Most people here don’t care about the Murder and torture of Gadaffi, the rascism of the NTC etc, and they certainly (I estimate +90% don’t care about DU particles circulating around the globe thanks to the French English and Yanks) couldn’t care less about killing the whole Persian culture for the benefit of Rothschilds Zionists.
“Have no lessons been learnt?” Sure they have: you can betray the government, the country, any reasonable set of morals, lie, cheat, etc. and go unpunished and make a financial killing thereafter.