Latest replies

20 Oct 2015 10:06:36
kim memo or no memo, info is leaked for a reason.
the timing is on the eve of chilcott getting stick from familes and corbyn to get this report out .

19 Oct 2015 18:08:28
Franky that was misdirection. How do you expect chilcott to look at a private conversation between 2 people who aren't going to admit what was discussed.

This is an internal government memo from the state dept to white house which has only become public due to a court order.

19 Oct 2015 16:58:12
Regarding the OP
I read a while back that Bush/Cheney would never be held accountable for the war on Iraq, some sort of law was changed that excludes them from EVER been prosecuted for the Iraq war.
I would assume that Bliar has the same get out of jail card.

19 Oct 2015 17:06:40
kim do you honestly think the memos are any different from the private conversations blair and bush had to which the chilcot report is looking into?

19 Oct 2015 16:11:12
Franky these were state department memos on Hilary Clintons private server which a court has subpoena'd. Chilcott never saw them as they weren't submitted to the inquiry as evidence. Basically details were kept from the inquiry.

19 Oct 2015 14:09:58
nothing gets leaked from the whitehouse unless there is a reason behind it, as for chilcott I think he is aware what's going on the other side of the pond.

pmqs you have 3 questions (which I think is a joke in its self)
and even thou corbyn detests blair as much as me, I can't see he him going down that route unless this syria vote goes ahead and I suppose he could draw parrallel's with the iraq war.

i think he will stick to the tax credits questions myself.

19 Oct 2015 08:05:16
Franky apparently chilcott has not seen this memo and there are calls to reopen the inquiry for the fresh evidence.

Its came out because I believe an American court demanded to see the emails.

Regards pmqs there's ways to phrase questions.

18 Oct 2015 22:58:25
Story has made it into the MSM in Australia.

18 Oct 2015 22:06:38
in my opinion this information was allowed to be leaked to serve one purpose, to take the heat out of the chilcot report once it comes out, so its preparing the public .

no doubt chilcot has told the establishment what he can't cover up and hence they drip feed us something we all knew.

an example of a truly independent panel was the Hillsborough panel where stuff came out that the families never knew about and it caught the PM with his trousers down hence the apology and being on the back foot.

bringing it up on prime minister question time is an interesting idea, he's going to be putting his old boss on the BBQ and not attacking the tories directly, so I am not sure how the question can be directed at cameron unless he ties it in to syria somehow?

18 Oct 2015 14:35:11
No problem at all, I can't stand going to the dentists either!

Enjoyed the discussion in any case.

18 Oct 2015 12:53:43
Fair enough. I have toothache so am a bit tetchy. Your dentists are shocking. Something I shall be bothering my elected representative with.

I agree questions should be asked. I just question the motives of some people in doing so. There is a lot of historical revisionism around on the right to try to make hitler seem less bad and the easiest way is the holocaust. Its the same we way the left worships Stalin. Bizarre.

18 Oct 2015 12:42:47
If you mean corbyn he needs to win an election in just over 4 and a half years time. Its by no means a certainty and a lot can happen.

By that time who knows what may have happened and what else will have come out. A weeks a long time in politics 4 years us an eternity.

Maybe if Corbyn raises it at pmqs and pushes for a response from Cameron. Maybe some of you should email it in as a question.

18 Oct 2015 12:03:32
Kim, the point about political correctness was not aimed at you - I should have made that clear. But there is a lot of it that goes on when people broach subjects like this which makes them difficult to discuss.

Personally I believe the number of victims to be very important and never understood the argument that it isn't. Not because it makes it a better or worse act, but from the point of view of why were we told such half truths in the first place? What is the origin of those facts that later turn out to be false? These are important questions, the answers to which will help us to understand when and how we are being lied to again. I read once that the only source for the figure of 6 million was a nazi who had been tortured during the Nuremburg trials. He could have been forced to say it for all we know but regardless of that its a very flimsy source of info that was used to support what we thought was a fact about the figure of 6 million later to find out it was no fact.

When you then read about a Jewish prophesy dating back to the late 1800's stating that Israel would be created once 6 million Jews had been sacrificed - the figure itself seems to be very significant indeed.

Taking into account the Balfour declaration during ww1 and the treaty of Versailles between the wars - it would seem that a lot of the conditions for the wars were manipulated and controlled by people more powerful than any prime minister or president. Then as we all know - the state of Israel followed, as was prophesised many years earlier.

I don't think anybody is apologising for hitler, I'm sure he was a very ruthless man, which in turn made him the perfect puppet. The nazi's did many heinous crimes which nobody sane would support. But all I'm interested in is finding the true version of events, then finding out why that version differs from the original narrative - and who stood to benefit from that.

You talk about all these thousands of bits of evidence that support the official narrative yet many of those have been eroded away over the years, some of which I've mentioned in my original post. So I don't feel like I'm wrong to question these things, if others hadn't have done so we wouldn't know today things like the real uses of zyclone b, the revision of the numbers who died, the fact there was no gas chamber in dachau, that Jewish skin and flesh was not made into lampshades/soap. there's much more than that too believe me. So I think its important we question these things.

The term revisionism is sometimes labelled at people who have questioned the official narrative and its a term that has been used with negative connotations I. e. Making out those people to be trouble makers or even disrespecting the dead. What's interesting is that over the years the official narrative has had to be revised in the light of many questions asked by those searching for the truth. I don't see revisionism as a bad thing because after all we know the saying about 'the victors write the history books'.

I do agree with you about the focus being on Jewish prisoners and I think that only goes to highlight the agenda at play here. The Zionists had wanted Israel created for a long time and finally got their wish in the back drop of what happened in those camps, the narrative of the persecution of jews supported their actions.

I do not support or apologise or defend hitler and his party. But I want to know the full truth and I want to understand the purpose of the the lies as well as the truth.

18 Oct 2015 11:40:24
Hope jc hangs him out and sends him to the Hague.

18 Oct 2015 01:22:29
Agreed Ed033.

I wouldn't be surprised if this article will be used to gauge public opinion (by looking at the comments for instance) before it's decided whether to run with it via other outlets or not.

Watch this space.

18 Oct 2015 10:06:28
I'm in no way politically correct.

Lets get one thing straight. The nazis were filth. Eugenics is disgusting. The idea of removing people from the gene pool because they don't fit some ideal version is reprehensible.

It doesn't matter if they murdered sixty thousand or six million. Its just a statistic. Its the act itself that matters. It's the thought process behind it. What annoys me is the fixation on the Jewish victims to the exclusion of everyone else. I. e. the disabled, the homosexual, the political opponents.

There are literally thousands of items of evidence that this happened yet for some reason there is a group of hitler apologists out there trying to discredit events. In itself this is a conspiracy. I question the motive.

And also not to mention the other crimes perpetuated by the nazi regime. In creating such a regime which allowed the erosion of basic human decency and encouraging the view of your enemies as sub human this created an environment where the likes of Oradour or Wormhoudt could happen.

As someone said above psychopaths usually end up in charge. I think that says a lot about the human race.

Stalin, Yezhov, Beria, Hitler, Himmler, Amin, Mao, Milosevic. There have been many monsters who's underlings have committed atrocities in the name of some misguided ideal. What about the Americans at My Lai or Fallujah. Pick a terrorist group. The human race can't help itself.

Back to Hitler. Whatever his redeeming points he still started a war with the intention of conquering a large part of my country and removing by any means a large part of the population in order to create living room for the Germans. This is undeniable. Twenty million of my countrymen and women died in this war for one lunatics dream of empire. That's a third of the population of this island. Yet some people defend him.

18 Oct 2015 09:46:32
We all expected it but now the evidence is out in public. What happens next will be interesting.

18 Oct 2015 00:50:20
Yes interesting but not surprising in the least, just what most of us expected.

Didn't Alistair Campbell reveal that Rupert Murdoch had been phoning Blair directly, encouraging him to back the usa in Iraq in exchange for positive coverage by news international?

17 Oct 2015 22:37:00
Kim is it really black and white though? I think not

I'm personally very sceptical about the official narrative surrounding the goings on at the camps. The fact that the official narrative has had to be amended heavily over the years as certain 'facts' were proved not to be fact - says a lot. We were told 6 million Jews were systematically killed but where is the evidence of that? Turns out that figure has had to be decreased as people questioned the facts.

The Nuremburg trials have been shown to be a white wash in many ways, who were the people making judgements? Were the nazi's interrogated under torture? If so, I'm not sure how relevant that testimony is. We were told zyclone b was used to gas people but actually we now know it was used to clean the bed sheets and dorms of prisoners. Why would this be done if indeed the plan was to kill the prisoners all along? I'm of the opinion that these camps were set up for forced labour not as death camps, the nazi's needed that labour in their attempts to win the war so killing off all of their work force would make little sense.

There is evidence that many or most of the prisoners at the camps died from typhoid or starvation as the war came to an end but that version of events would not support the official narrative which led eventually to the creation of the state of Israel as a refuge for the persecuted Jews. I think it was Dachau camp where we were told of stories of mass gassings also? Only to find out later that there wasn't even a gas chamber there?

And then the propaganda stating that the skin of Jews was used to make lamp shades and their flesh made into bars of soap - only to be discovered later that those claims are baseless. When the establishment version of events is used as a political football (in creating Israel etc) only for us to find out that many elements of that narrative were either false or mis-interpreted - I have a big issue with that.

As you allude, I believe hitler and the nazi's were funded by Zionist Jews. If true, there is a much bigger picture here than one evil man doing as he pleases.

This topic is very close to my heart but whenever you even broach the subject with most people you get looks akin to those aimed at a serial killer. Its amazing how powerful a tool political correctness is to the elite. I also have a problem with that.

17 Oct 2015 19:33:19
The thing is there are very few people at the top who ain't monsters. Hitler tried to force the psychos at the top out, now we are playing the long game.