Right, but David Icke is correct in reporting the content of the original website he's referring to, apart from the "never before" which Kev has rightly criticised. Icke should have linked the original site too for fairness, and he failed in this.
Issues shouldn't be confused: if a madman reports about some direct action made by an activist (which is a third party, for the record) that doesn't mean the action is, in itself, mad.
Aaaactually - the probabilities are that if that specific madman reports a direct action made by an activist the action isn't really happening. Unless there are aliens from the planet Draco involved or perhaps it is all yet another ploy of the Illuminati. In fact I won't be surprised if he later on denounces it as exactly that.
Okay, the link I posted above to Make War History didn't happen. I gladly welcome you as a moral supporter of the Flat Earth Society's campaign for the non-existence of things.
The Flat Earth Society (one of many of them, I think) launched a web campaign many years ago, asking people to put signs over objects: on a chair, the sign would say "This chair doesn't exist". So I suppose it's every object you declare non-existent.
So, as a member of the Society, do we get to pick callsigns or at least get a neat handshake?
There are atleast 6 objects in my house that carry the "WARNING! This Object Does Not Exist" label - mostly to keep them from getting broken. It works.
If you reveal the link between Chris Coverdale (Make War History) and David Icke I'll read the drivel you posted completely. If it exists, of course, whatever it may be, the link or the drivel
Sorry as I can be but the drivel is the work of the drivelmaster himself unless he just snapped out of existence as well. I'll have to send an agent to check on him later on.
EDIT:
Ah, now I see where this went wrong. D'oh. I'm not saying that makewarshistory (which I also confused with makewarhistory - the conscientious objector related movement which was made known during an amnesty international gathering here) and that the Chris Coverdale thing isn't happening - I'm just saying: if something pops up from David Icke's sources it most likely isn't from this world. Poking fun at his ludicrous theories is all.
So the current idea is if you disagree with someone then what they report isn't real ?
Lets all shoot the messenger then.
Wether or not you totally agree with David Icke is a personal choice, I certainly don't but I do agree with some of what he says.
The point of the post though was to highlight the fact that Blair is finally under investigation for war crimes, and it would be great if the US could follow the example and do something about Bush & Co.
Remember that over 1 million Iraqis have been murdered by these people, nearly 4000 US service people have died, I have no idea how many UK service people have died. The whole area has been covered in plutonium ( DU weapons ) so who knows what the final total will be.
And the whole war was based on lies.
And that is the reality.
As a human being I strongly feel that no-one has the right to behave in this manner, totally ignore International law and basic standards of human behaviour and not be answerable.
Remember, this is the man who wants to be the Leader of the EU.
That's not what I said and I don't say I disagree with David Icke because quite simply there is nothing to disagree or agree about: the man believes that the earth is ruled by shape-shifting reptilian aliens whereas the closest thing to mutual accepted reality is that it's partly ruled by people who believe in a person being born by a virgin mother.
The ones who haven't yet been investigated are the people who deserve to be investigated for war crimes. Bush, Blair (& Olmert, for the 2006 blitzkrieg of Lebanon) should be held up to the same light as Saddam Hussein for their baseless aggression against Iraq & Afghanistan. Of course, the crimes Saddam was actually tried & convicted for were trivial in comparison to his larger crimes of using chemical WMD against Kurds & Iranian forces, but they were left off the charge sheets because the WMD being used came straight from the US & UK, which obviously made them culpable.
The victors always set the rules and the same thing happened at Nuremberg in 1945/46. While Axis commanders & officials were properly found guilty of many of their horrendous crimes, they were charged only with crimes unique to Axis forces. The indiscriminate bombing of civilian populations, just as one example, was left off the sheets: Goering and the Luftwaffe command faced no charges over bombing civilian areas in London, Liverpool etc. as that would have meant the RAAF & USAF commanders would have had to face similar proceedings regarding indiscriminate bombing raids on places such as Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki. So while Nazi & Imperial Japanese military & civilian leaders indeed were tried & convicted for their activity, no such equivalency applied to their Allied counterparts.
I hold no hope that it's going to happen to any of our contemporary "War On Terror" leaders, either. Even if they "lose" in Iraq they'll still be the ones with the money, power and the massive weaponry, so any attempt to prosecute them under International Law would be an exercise in futility. Vietnam was lost and no reparations have been made. The people responsible weren't held accountable. Reagan's administration was actually convicted by the World Court for high crimes in Nicaragua in the 80s (including selling weapons to now apparent mortal-enemy Iran to fund the brutal Contras) and the US still has yet to comply with the verdict. Why should right now be any different?
You know, there's a funny thing about us and Vietnam. Our two nations' ties are closer than they ever were. Ever have Vietnamese eggrolls? sorry - nevermind.. Anyways, It's Weird. Do you know they have a statue of John McCain there? He was a POW there.
The 1980's was flat out wild here. There was all kinds of El Salvadorians and Nicaraguans coming thru here. "brutal contras" lol EVERYONE was brutal then. Just ask how kind and helpful the Sandanistas were to a Mosquito Indian. Who should really get on trial for that would be the "we'll show HIM" democratic controlled congress then. I can understand fundamental disagreements, but they were just disagreeing to be disagreeing. Newt Gingrich pulled similar crap like that against Clinton, but not that bad.
Wait a minute... If you were convicted by the world court for something, where do you go to jail at?
I got this weird vision of a guy with mirror shades and a shotgun in Antarctica and some guy in a white suit saying, "What we have here is a failure to communicate". ...and boiled eggs. I better go
Conviction doesn't necessarily mean jail, in this case the US was ordered to compensate Nicaragua financially, which it did not.
As for the Sandinistas (short version), they were elected democratically in 1984 with 67% of the vote - an election whose results were verified by US allies. The fact that they ran (and were elected in a landslide) on a Marxist platform including broad social & economic reforms made them a danger to US/Reagan ideals. The Contras which sprung up to resist the Sandinistas were funded by US arms sales to Iran (an enemy at the time, hence the approval of Saddam's WMD strikes - and by the way, some people would call selling weapons to enemies "treason"). The atrocities carried out by the Contra paramilitaries eclipsed anything the Sandinistas did in return. The executions, torture and of course murders of women, children, old people, priests, foreign aid workers and anyone else seen to be pro-Sandinista left the body count in the tens of thousands. Strange how it's ok to fund and arm insurgents in a foreign country and call them "freedom fighters", while the same thing happening to "us" in another country is called "terrorism".
If people have information, and the more people the better, then they can make informed decisions.
Not decisions they are told to make by those in power.
What really frightens the new world order is a world of knowlegable, informed people making their own decisions based on a full range of information.
And with this information people can challenge those in power about what is happening or vote against them.
Assuming that you have free elections - in the case of the US perhap's another 1776 is called for.
How many people here would be having this conversation without the net providing a range of views and information.
I never expect anyone to agree with me, all I ask is that people have enough information to come to their own decisions - agree or not is your choice.
Just make sure that you are happy with your choice.
This doesn't directly relate to Blair, the Downing St memo's are better there but when it come's down to the lies told prior to the invasion of Iraq this makes interesting reading.
" President George W. Bush and seven of his administration's top officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Nearly five years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, an exhaustive examination of the record shows that the statements were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses. http://www.publicintegrity.org ... ntext=overview&id=945
Then again, Bush bases a number of his statements on British Govt ' information '
"On January 28, 2003, in his annual State of the Union address, Bush asserted: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production." Two weeks earlier, an analyst with the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research sent an email to colleagues in the intelligence community laying out why he believed the uranium-purchase agreement "probably is a hoax."
and
"In the closing days of September 2002, with a congressional vote fast approaching on authorizing the use of military force in Iraq, Bush told the nation in his weekly radio address: "The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons, is rebuilding the facilities to make more and, according to the British government, could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order is given. . . . This regime is seeking a nuclear bomb, and with fissile material could build one within a year." A few days later, similar findings were also included in a much-hurried National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction — an analysis that hadn't been done in years, as the intelligence community had deemed it unnecessary and the White House hadn't requested it."
You can add Finland to that list now as we got new law that allows blocking certain (not defined) addresses to be blocked, nobody controls list so it is kind of dictatorship. Intention was good, but it wen't awfully wrong at some point.
