"Jewish Cabal" influences Blair?

[Anonymous]

I guess that revenge could work, though of course it raises the political heat in the region.

Would it not be in Israel's interests, though to have Iraq as a very weak secular dictatorship (as it apparently was prior to the war,) rather than a developing state, not under any sanctions regime, that has the potential to go in a very secular and hostile direction?

Rationally, I might go with the status quo option if I was in charge in Israel. I guess that not all decisions are made on a rational basis though.

 

[Cavynaut]

What was the benefit to Israel of a war in Iraq? Or is the cabal just interested in Syria?

Isn't there talk of reopening an oil pipeline from Iraq to Israel? That would benefit Israel.

 

[Anonymous]

Perhaps (though I haven't heard this one), but it would have to go through either Syria or Jordan to get there and these two states aren't exactly chummy with Israel. (Though if something happened in Syria... )

 

[Anonymous]

Would it not be in Israel's interests, though to have Iraq as a very weak secular dictatorship (as it apparently was prior to the war,)

Saddam bankrolled suicide bombers - depending on how cynical you are, that could be a good or a bad thing for Israel.

But let's face it, Gulf War II was not waged for Israel's benefit. Oil, revenge for Saddam trying to kill Bush pere, al-qaeda, WMD, regime change - these are all far more popular and obvious rationales. Does anyone really think that the US and UK would go through all the hassle they had with the security council, jeopardising relations with the EU and the future of NATO just for a few missiles fired at Israel over a decade ago?

 

[Anonymous]

No, because the UK doesn't give a shit about Israel, and rightly so...

 

[Yithian]

Saddam bankrolled suicide bombers - depending on how cynical you are, that could be a good or a bad thing for Israel.

But let's face it, Gulf War II was not waged for Israel's benefit. Oil, revenge for Saddam trying to kill Bush pere, al-qaeda, WMD, regime change - these are all far more popular and obvious rationales. Does anyone really think that the US and UK would go through all the hassle they had with the security council, jeopardising relations with the EU and the future of NATO just for a few missiles fired at Israel over a decade ago?

I agree that the reasons why Gulf War 2 was waged was not for the benefit of Israel,however, it is possible that Israel wished it were so. The above reasons doesn't stop Israel from trying to influence the UK/US to go into Iraq.

 

[Anonymous]

So does this suggest that Tam's claim is a bit iffy? If the US and UK were going to do it anyway, then was/is there really any significant influence from a "jewish/zionist cabal"?

 

[Cavynaut]

Perhaps (though I haven't heard this one), but it would have to go through either Syria or Jordan to get there and these two states aren't exactly chummy with Israel. (Though if something happened in Syria... )

As far as I can recall, it goes through Jordan.

 

[Jerry_B]

Saddam bankrolled suicide bombers...

Evidence, please.

 

[Jerry_B]

No, because the UK doesn't give a shit about Israel, and rightly so...

If only that were true - the UK govt. is more openly stand-offish with Israel, but has some serious investments in the Israeli state. It tends to hand out criticsm with one hand and money with the other. You can guess which is more intersting to the Israelis.

 

[Yithian]

Evidence, please.

I'm not sure about 'bankrolled' (although its certainly possible) but there is television footage of Mr Hussein meeting the families of dead suicide bombers and very publicly handing them cheques...

edit: Can't find any footage of the personal meetings but there is pretty strong evidence here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2846365.stm

and many other places.

 

[Anonymous]

As far as I can recall, it goes through Jordan.

I know that Jordan is perhaps one of the more moderate nations in the region, but I can't see them helping Israel (or "the Zionist entity") out with oil "stolen" (as it would be portrayed in the area) from the Iraqi people. It would be political suicide. Do you have a source for the story? (I have a suspicion that this might be one of the many rumours flitting around at the moment, but I could very easily be wrong. )

 

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure about 'bankrolled' (although its certainly possible) but there is television footage of Mr Hussein meeting the families of dead suicide bombers and very publicly handing them cheques...

He gave the families very large sums of money (or at least compared to the average local income). I'm not sure how significant this was, though, compared to the more active support provided by other nations in the area. I still reckon that if this "Jewish cabal" exists, then at worst all it did was support decisions that had already been made.

 

[Anonymous]

Evidence, please.

All I meant by "bankrolled" was that he gave cheques to the families of suicide bombers. Apologies for suggesting anything else.

I would like to agree with The Yitthian that Tam Dalyell is all for exposing all the influences on government policy - it's just a pity he started and stopped with the old international Jewish conspiracy canard. I can think of reasons why the UK might support Israel which have nothing to do with Jewish string-pulling.

 

[Cavynaut]

I know that Jordan is perhaps one of the more moderate nations in the region, but I can't see them helping Israel (or "the Zionist entity") out with oil "stolen" (as it would be portrayed in the area) from the Iraqi people. It would be political suicide. Do you have a source for the story? (I have a suspicion that this might be one of the many rumours flitting around at the moment, but I could very easily be wrong. )

It was either last Sundays 'Observer' or the one previous. Unfortunately whichever copy it was has long since gone to the recycle bin.

I think Jordan lives on a knife edge anyway, don't forget they allowed some coalition troops limited access during GW2, so they must be used to opposition within their own state vis-a-vis their realtionship with Israel and the West.

 

[Jerry_B]

All I meant by "bankrolled" was that he gave cheques to the families of suicide bombers. Apologies for suggesting anything else.

So, not really 'bankrolling' suicide bombers then. Giving money to their families after the fact isn't the same thing at all.

 

[Yithian]

So, not really 'bankrolling' suicide bombers then. Giving money to their families after the fact isn't the same thing at all.

I agree that it's not the same as providing the money to pay for training and for the 'handlers' also to buy the explosives. But it does give a greater incentive for the bombers themselves to go through with it, knowing their families will be financially secure.

 

[Anonymous]

So, not really 'bankrolling' suicide bombers then. Giving money to their families after the fact isn't the same thing at all.

Point taken. I shall endeavour to be more accurate.

 

[Anonymous]

I think Jordan lives on a knife edge anyway, don't forget they allowed some coalition troops limited access during GW2, so they must be used to opposition within their own state vis-a-vis their realtionship with Israel and the West.

Found the bit in The Observer.

Sources at the State Department said that concluding a peace treaty with Israel is to be 'top of the agenda' for a new Iraqi government, and Chalabi is known to have discussed Iraq's recognition of the state of Israel.

The pipeline would also require permission from Jordan. Paritzky's Ministry is believed to have approached officials in Amman on 9 April this year. Sources told Ha'aretz that the talks left Israel 'optimistic'.

James Akins, a former US ambassador to the region and one of America's leading Arabists, said: 'There would be a fee for transit rights through Jordan, just as there would be fees for Israel from those using what would be the Haifa terminal.

http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,940054,00.html

Still sounds pretty far-fetched, though, as it would be an extremely overt level of co-operation with both Israel and what may be seen in the region as a US/Israeli puppet installed in Iraq. At least the co-operation during the war was very limited in terms of what was publicly admitted to (though not to many people believe that.)

 

[Anonymous]

Another viewpoint

Going back to the concern by TD about the presence of advisers with Jewish connections close to the PM, maybe it would help to conduct a thought experiment.

In the past there was concern voiced in some quarters that Blair was on the verge of becoming a Catholic (RC). What would this mean if he did?

First of all, there wouldn't be any constitutional problem with it. (Though there would be if he was Lord Chancellor, etc.)

The Unionists would go bananas, accusing him of bias towards the republicans. Pretty much all hell would break loose in NI.

Would TD be concerned about the undue influence that Roman Catholics held? I'm not sure. Would there be a reason for concern? I would hope not.

Bear in mind that being Catholic isn't the same as being a republican. (Though try telling that to Paisely and co.) In fact there are a plenty of catholics serving in the British Army (in NI.)

Similarly, we had Jews supporting the anti-war movement in the UK. In addition, surveys in the US indicated similar levels of opposition among American Jews as among the US population as a whole. (I'll try to find the source for this claim. IIRC it was in a recent copy of The Observer.)

Views/opinions?
(Apologies for the rambling and incoherence. Very late night. )

 

[Anonymous]

if you replace the word 'jew' with 'lizard people' this thread makes more sense

isreal does seem to have a high preoccupation with western governments consideering the messes we left in other colonies. but not many other colonies have massive oil reseves in the region.

also a lot of politicians play the standing up for isreal approach to get money from the pro-isreal lobbies but this is hardly evidance of undue influence. many other groups have powerful lobbies and we don't talk of sinister cabals of farmers or sport shooters.

i think tam dayell fluffed his words a bit, he doesn't seem like the sort of guy to have 'protocols of the eldars of zion' on his bed side reading table.