PDA

View Full Version : Bush plotted to bomb Al-Jazeera HQ


Felix the Cat
11-27-2005, 11:02 AM
(Remember the Belgrade TV station bombed back in 1999?)

EXCLUSIVE: BUSH PLOT TO BOMB HIS ARAB ALLY (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=16397937&method=full&siteid=94762&headline=exclusive--bush-plot-to-bomb-his-arab-ally-name_page.html)

PRESIDENT Bush planned to bomb Arab TV station al-Jazeera in friendly Qatar, a "Top Secret" No 10 memo reveals.

But he was talked out of it at a White House summit by Tony Blair, who said it would provoke a worldwide backlash.

A source said: "There's no doubt what Bush wanted, and no doubt Blair didn't want him to do it." Al-Jazeera is accused by the US of fuelling the Iraqi insurgency.

The attack would have led to a massacre of innocents on the territory of a key ally, enraged the Middle East and almost certainly have sparked bloody retaliation.

A source said last night: "The memo is explosive and hugely damaging to Bush.

"He made clear he wanted to bomb al-Jazeera in Qatar and elsewhere. Blair replied that would cause a big problem.

"There's no doubt what Bush wanted to do - and no doubt Blair didn't want him to do it."

A Government official suggested that the Bush threat had been "humorous, not serious".

But another source declared: "Bush was deadly serious, as was Blair. That much is absolutely clear from the language used by both men."

Yesterday former Labour Defence Minister Peter Kilfoyle challenged Downing Street to publish the five-page transcript of the two leaders' conversation. He said: "It's frightening to think that such a powerful man as Bush can propose such cavalier actions.

"I hope the Prime Minister insists this memo be published. It gives an insight into the mindset of those who were the architects of war."

Bush disclosed his plan to target al-Jazeera, a civilian station with a huge Mid-East following, at a White House face-to-face with Mr Blair on April 16 last year.

At the time, the US was launching an all-out assault on insurgents in the Iraqi town of Fallujah.

Al-Jazeera infuriated Washington and London by reporting from behind rebel lines and broadcasting pictures of dead soldiers, private contractors and Iraqi victims.

The station, watched by millions, has also been used by bin Laden and al-Qaeda to broadcast atrocities and to threaten the West.

Al-Jazeera's HQ is in the business district of Qatar's capital, Doha.

Its single-storey buildings would have made an easy target for bombers. As it is sited away from residential areas, and more than 10 miles from the US's desert base in Qatar, there would have been no danger of "collateral damage".

Dozens of al-Jazeera staff at the HQ are not, as many believe, Islamic fanatics. Instead, most are respected and highly trained technicians and journalists.

To have wiped them out would have been equivalent to bombing the BBC in London and the most spectacular foreign policy disaster since the Iraq War itself.

The No 10 memo now raises fresh doubts over US claims that previous attacks against al-Jazeera staff were military errors.

In 2001 the station's Kabul office was knocked out by two "smart" bombs. In 2003, al-Jazeera reporter Tareq Ayyoub was killed in a US missile strike on the station's Baghdad centre.

The memo, which also included details of troop deployments, turned up in May last year at the Northampton constituency office of then Labour MP Tony Clarke.

Cabinet Office civil servant David Keogh, 49, is accused under the Official Secrets Act of passing it to Leo O'Connor, 42, who used to work for Mr Clarke. Both are bailed to appear at Bow Street court next week.

Mr Clarke, who lost at the election, returned the memo to No 10.

He said Mr O'Connor had behaved "perfectly correctly".

Neither Mr O'Connor or Mr Keogh were available. No 10 did not comment.

Jimbo Gomez
11-27-2005, 01:03 PM
Too bad he didn't do it. :(

Starr
11-27-2005, 06:41 PM
Off topic I know, but the Al Jazeera website has been down for over a week. Anyone know why?

Atlas
11-27-2005, 06:53 PM
The muslims have the right to watch their own TV. I don't see why it should be detroyed or censored. I'd rather see the main western medias being blow up by Al Qaeda.

Niko Bellic
11-27-2005, 06:55 PM
Too bad he didn't do it. :(

If America was being invaded by China or Russia, media buildings would be on the list of targets. It makes perfect sense that when you're trying to take down a country, you knock out their communication infrastructure. I don't get all the wailing about how terrible it was that bombing Al-Jazeera was even considered.

Starr
11-27-2005, 07:06 PM
The muslims have the right to watch their own TV. I don't see why it should be detroyed or censored.

This is our way of bringing them freedom.:p It is funny how we hear that Al Jazeera is all propaganda,etc. From everything I have read on that site, they are 1 million times more objective then anything I have seen or read in the U.S media.

Jimbo Gomez
11-27-2005, 07:07 PM
The muslims have the right to watch their own TV. I don't see why it should be detroyed or censored. I'd rather see the main western medias being blow up by Al Qaeda.

It's got nothing to do with what rights they have. They speak about killing white people on that network, it needs to be destroyed, simple as that. Your hatred for israel is sound, but it's silly to translate that into islamophilia. The muslems are just as evil. To think they control the world's oil supplies without even making a use for it themselves pisses me off.

Starr
11-27-2005, 07:20 PM
The muslems are just as evil

I don't know about the word "evil", but I don't disagree with the main point of what you are saying. I just find it amusing, that they continue to use the line and so many people in the west continue to believe it that "we are bringing them freedom" or "spreading democracy" when they want to blow up or censor Al Jazeera because it reports things that the west does not want reported and because it is non-kosher.

Atlas
11-27-2005, 07:23 PM
it needs to be destroyed, simple as that.

They speak about killing white ? Really ? Never heard that actually.
But even if it is true, I guess they just want to kick all white out of their nations ( which I actually agree with, if we don't want them here, they don't have to tolerate us in their nation either )... so I doubt they have a problem with white in Europe, as long as they don't tell them what they can or can't do.

Your hatred for israel is sound, but it's silly to translate that into islamophilia.

I don't have a problem with Islam as a religion, and I'm not Islamophile either, because it's true that most of them are non-white and swarthy but if all muslims were white, it shouldn't be an issue for us.

The muslems are just as evil.

Once again, those in Europe yes, not the others, otherwise, if you think ALL muslims are bad, even in their own countries, tell me why ?

Starr
11-27-2005, 07:25 PM
They speak about killing white ? Really ? Never heard that actually.


I didn't want to say it because I thought maybe I was missing something, but neither have I.

Jimbo Gomez
11-27-2005, 07:29 PM
your first point:
they see Europe as their countries. Ever heard of el Andaluz?

your second point:
during the last millenium or so, and the centuries before that too actually, they tried all they could to conquer Europe and convert it to their religion. If you wonder why the balkanoids are so swarthy and why albaina is islamic, the answer to that consists in 1 word: Turkey.

your third point:
every time one of their guys blows himself up in one of our cities and kills a lot of white Christian bystanders, all that scum in Algeria, the Sudan, Palestine, Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Moslem Brotherhood in Egypt and literally dozens of other groups in other places dances around with joy. because in their minds, they are fighting a home game vs the evil Christians.


Al Jazeera allows that scum to reach millions of other moslems. It cannot be allowed to do this.

Starr
11-27-2005, 07:34 PM
your third point:
every time one of their guys blows himself up in one of our cities and kills a lot of white Christian bystanders, all that scum in Algeria, the Sudan, Palestine, Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Moslem Brotherhood in Egypt and literally dozens of other groups in other places dances around with joy. because in their minds, they are fighting a home game vs the evil Chrisians.


I am not naive enough to say it would not be happening at all, but would this be happening as much if we were not doing what we do? How many people in the west celebrated when the bombs rained down on Iraq?

Jimbo Gomez
11-27-2005, 07:47 PM
I don't care about that anymore Starr. Things are happening as they are right now. Perhaps we should have acted differently in the Middle east policy during the last 40 years, but unless you have a time machine we can use to undo the mistakes of the past, there really is no use to speculate about that anymore. They want us dead, they're not afraid of us, and they're willing to die to kill us. When we colonized them we interfered in their affairs a lot more than we do now, but they were docile back then. of course, they feared the colonizers. I think the solution is pretty clear.

Atlas
11-27-2005, 07:51 PM
I am not naive enough to say it would not be happening at all, but would this be happening as much if we were not doing what we do? How many people in the west celebrated when the bombs rained down on Iraq?

I wanted to answer that but your faster than me.

The bigger mistake was finally probably to colonize them a long time ago, that only created hate towards us and immigration recently. As you said Stan, too bad we can't turn back the clock, because if everyone stayed in it's own origin place, there wouldn't be so many trouble nowadays.

Felix the Cat
11-27-2005, 07:55 PM
if we don't want them here, they don't have to tolerate us in their nation either )... so I doubt they have a problem with white in Europe, as long as they don't tell them what they can or can't do.
This is an example of the "territorial" thinking which I discussed here (http://www.thephora.net/forum/showpost.php?p=13158&postcount=22), which is instinctive to Europeans but completely alien to Middle Easterners

Withdrawing from "their" lands will not win their friendship since they see the whole world as "their land"

Such a withdrawal will increase Arab violence against the West, since it will be seen as stemming from infidel weakness, or insanity

(The London bombings are a textbook example of the phenomenon: they did not occur when Britain attacked Iraq, but when the British began to withdraw troops from the country)

Arab brains are simply "wired" differently to ours

Starr
11-27-2005, 08:25 PM
I don't care about that anymore Starr. Things are happening as they are right now. Perhaps we should have acted differently in the Middle east policy during the last 40 years, but unless you have a time machine we can use to undo the mistakes of the past, there really is no use to speculate about that anymore. They want us dead, they're not afraid of us, and they're willing to die to kill us. When we colonized them we interfered in their affairs a lot more than we do now, but they were docile back then. of course, they feared the colonizers. I think the solution is pretty clear.


What solution are you talking about? Colonization? since as you said they are willing to die to kill us, I wouldn't count on that being the best solution. The repurcussions of that would make the iraqi "resistance" and the suicide bombings that now occur, among other things, look like a cake walk.

Or is it more like what my dad said after 9/11. "blow them all up" "the only good muslim is a dead muslim" LOL

We need "bomb mecca" "bomb the Kaaba" otto/Emperor_Palpatine to weigh in.:p

Felix the Cat
11-27-2005, 08:26 PM
The bigger mistake was finally probably to colonize them a long time ago, that only created hate towards us and immigration recently. As you said Stan, too bad we can't turn back the clock, because if everyone stayed in it's own origin place, there wouldn't be so many trouble nowadays.

Atlas, you have forgotten the casus belli which took the French army to Algiers in 1830, which was Arab slave-raiding of Christians in the Mediterranean and southern Europe

The reason Arabs no longer engage in such behaviour is not because they now respect that Europe is "our land" but because they fear another invasion

It follows that the surest way of encouraging Arabs to renew their attacks on Europe is to let them think we are no longer able or willing to attack them in "their land"

Jimbo Gomez
11-27-2005, 08:32 PM
Starr: something not completely unlike that. As long as they fear you they'll behave to you. We don't need to nuke 'em all, just putting the fear in them that we might do that will suffice.

The cube is right there.

Lenny
11-27-2005, 09:55 PM
would this be happening as much if we were not doing what we do?"In 711 the Berber Tarik invaded and soon conquered Visigothic Spain" (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/conqspain.html)

Damn those Visigothic Spaniards agitating the poor Muslims so much that they were forced to invade Europe! :mad: :rolleyes:

(Does anyone else find it a cool coincidence that even in the books of history one of the most significant numbers for north-Africans relating to whites is 711! Some things never change :cool:)