Must Listen: If Bush was Joking, Why is Blair Panicking?

Stop what you’re doing and listen to this NPR report on the British cover-up of Tony Blair holding Bush back from bombing the headquarters of Arab satellite station Al Jazeera.

Blair putting a restraining hand on George Bush casts Bush as somehow trigger happy…with Blair constantly reaching for the cold flannel to mop his forehead and calm him down

Day to Day’s Madeleine Brand interviewed the Guardian’s Jonathan Freedland, who reported the questions being asked in England are: If that good-natured, wacky cut-up George Bush was just joshing, then a) why was his proposition – and Blair’s attempts to talk him out of it – included in an official memo; and b) why is the British government going to such great lengths – invoking a gag order and threats of criminalization against anyone who might leak the memo’s contents – to squash it?

The answers to those questions include the possibility that there are other things in other memos, both about Bush’s idiocy and Blair’s restraining hand. And maybe, just maybe, the actual bombings of Al Jazeera in Iraq and Afghanistan, including the one at the Hotel Palestine in Baghdad, which killed one Al Jazeera journalist and critically wounded two more, were not the pure accidents the Bush administration claimed.

Nabil Khoury, a U.S. State Department spokesman in Doha, said the strike on the Arab satellite TV network’s office was a mistake, and he called upon al-Jazeera not to jump to conclusions. “My personal view is that it is a mistake, a grave mistake. It is something we all regret,” Khoury said. “I personally cannot imagine that a country which respects general freedoms can target media establishments.”

Time to get a more vivid imagination, Nabil.

Some Al-Jazeera employees felt the bombing might have been deliberate, for the station has been reporting extensively on the plight of Iraqi civilians and the number of casualties from U.S. bomb attacks…

Chief editor Ibrahim Hilal, speaking from the station’s headquarters in Doha, said witnesses “saw the plane fly over twice before dropping the bombs. Our office is in a residential area and even the Pentagon knows its location.”

Meanwhile, Freedland paints an even more nauseating picture.

The idea of Blair putting a restraining hand on George Bush casts Bush as somehow trigger happy…with Blair constantly reaching for the cold flannel to mop his forehead and calm him down. That’s not a flattering image, really, for either of them.”

17 Comments

  • Joseph Cowan
    November 24, 2005 - 9:26 pm | Permalink

    I pray the MSM take heed. I hope the whole world wakes to this peril.

  • November 25, 2005 - 5:54 am | Permalink

    Not a flattering image and perhaps not a true one…
    I would love to know if this suggestion that Blair, at any time during the Iraq debacle, acted or tried to act as Bush’s brakes is actually true. Wasn’t he fully and absolutely complicit each step of the way? Downing Street propaganda scientists have held this fig leaf up to our wondering eyes before. They are just trying to design a defense for Tony Blair should he need it at impending impeachment hearings, war crime tribunals, International Criminal Court proceedings etc.Don’t underestimate the machievellian dark arts of this crowd. They never allow a chance to manipulate the public to pass them by especially in their moments of crisis.

  • November 25, 2005 - 7:49 am | Permalink

    If blair differed with chimpy over the bombing and killing of journalists, it was in method only and not in idea. Remember the arms expert that turned up dead?

    When you initiate a war of conquest based on lies, commit war crimes and crimes against humanity; your options become fairly “limited.” None of these “thugs” can claim the “high road” now.

    I pray that citizens of England will initiate Blair’s removal from office and that the evidience and outrage will make its way across the pond to help the US deal with the chimperor and his criminal band of thieves.

  • Malcom
    November 25, 2005 - 8:30 am | Permalink

    This is a good observation.

    The world need to know, Bush not only talked about it, he probably ordered it. The attacks against Al-Jazeera in Afghanistand and Iraq, as well as the attack against Al-Arabia in Baghdad are good exampled of the evil intention of GWB and Rumsfeld and their hate against free Arab media.

    http://www.noquestionsasked.org/blog.htm

    has a very good analysis of this issue as well.

    Shame of Blair and the british people who chose the liar for the second time, they should have known better, your media is not as screewed up as the ones in the US.

    /M

  • Ricardo
    November 25, 2005 - 8:51 am | Permalink

    Why would Anyone believe Anything the Bush administration says Ever?

  • Romelee
    November 25, 2005 - 9:14 am | Permalink

    Another news worthy of following up on that will be swept away . How can anyone believe them now They keep putting something else up to take away something else. Shame on our reporters .

  • November 25, 2005 - 9:23 am | Permalink

    Malcom – the British people didn’t choose Blair a second time. The election system in Great Britain is very different from the American one. People vote in their constituencies for the various candidates for their constituencies from the various parties contesting in each constituency – only 17 thousand people voted for Blair in his constituency, and Blair got considerably fewer votes from his constituents than before. People more likely vote for the candidate who belongs to the party they favour.

    Thus, Labour did win in the last general elections, although it lost a considerable number of seats in Parliament compared to those they had before the elections. Tony Blair being the leader of the Labour party, kept his position as Prime Minister – but the people didn’t “re-elect” him. Most of those who voted for Labour did so holding their noses, and it was the “lesser evil” compared to the Tories. The Liberal Democrats came in third in these general elections, gaining several more seats in Parliament than they had before, and the Tories lost some seats. So you are wrong to shame the British people.

    Regards,

    Vera

  • Mike
    November 25, 2005 - 10:04 am | Permalink

    Remember:
    The media reports only what it is told. Leaks typically happen because someone within government ordered it for a reason. Both Blair and Bush have to continually lie themselves out of a previous lie or predicament in order to confuse the public. They are very adept at misleading and confusing the real issues. They practice it every day. Rule of thumb for bush: whatever is said through the media is in reality the exact opposite of the truth. It’s a simple codebreak. I wish the american public understood this. He’d be impeached on his first go around.

  • Ron
    November 25, 2005 - 11:21 am | Permalink

    Don’t forget that besides all the ordinary lying and manipulation of facts from by-now seasoned lyers and manipulators, “they” have the “ding an sich”—a veritable army of psy op people, Ph.D.’s in Psychology honed to twist the truth and your mind into a veriable pretzel. Remember the email from Zawahiri to Zarquawi that was forged, but imperfectly done enough that it was spotted as a forgery… nevertheless, the MSM never pointed it out and it is still quoted by right wingers as authentic back-up for some of their ideas.

  • Catherine Lelli
    November 25, 2005 - 11:32 am | Permalink

    You can be as hard on the bush administration as you like. They deserve it. But please don’t be too hard on the American people. I for one, did not believe we should invade Iraq along with most Americans.This war was not about stopping terrorist. it was for oil. Google PNAC. The republican party had to steal elections so they could implement their plan. Most of the designers of PNAC are now serving in this administration. It is my understanding that Blair was threaten with economic ruin of Britian if he didn’t go along with bush. If we ever get rid of the e-voting machines and go back to paper ballots, the republicans will lose, and perhaps the democrates can bring back respect for America. Pray for us. Please. We need to get these thugs out of office.

  • November 25, 2005 - 12:09 pm | Permalink

    In the opinion of former US ambassador Wilson (husband of the outed CIA agent), Blair may have been double-crossed by Bush and the “regime change crowd” in the White House and Pentagon:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/11/24/uwilson.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/11/24/ixportaltop.html

    So perhaps the story about Blair trying to hold Bush back bombing al Jazeera is not so far-fetched after all.

  • jp
    November 25, 2005 - 12:56 pm | Permalink

    Is there a British whistleblower somewhere to leak more on this? “Official Secrets Act” and all … I know,I know: its asking a lot; but a fire has been set in the world, and the authorities won’t even acknowledge the smoke.

  • James
    November 25, 2005 - 12:59 pm | Permalink

    Not surprising at all. I don’t think many Americans truly understand how much of a dangerous idiot most Europeans really consider Bush to be. The public here detest the man, and he’s the commonest subject of ridicule. Most of us thought Blair was ok before he led us into this Iraq shambles. Now he’s a really unpopular PM with the general public.

  • November 25, 2005 - 3:36 pm | Permalink

    Aw come now you Brits, you broke the Nazi codes during WW2 and not one Churchillian type can come up with Smirkys, Blair, war bombing plans.

  • Acryinthewilderness
    November 25, 2005 - 3:48 pm | Permalink

    It’s been obvious from the start of the Bush administration that Tony Blair regards Bush as a lunatic…Blair is to be commended for doing the world a favor and acting like a “poodle” in order to try to restrain the mad cowboy from even greater harm…Blair deserves the Nobel Peace prize in the fture if he can restrain the lunatic another 3 years–unless the American people decide to get rid of him sooner, using the Constitutional Amendment to replace a president who is “impaired” and unable to perform his duties (rationally).

  • Moonsha
    November 25, 2005 - 8:56 pm | Permalink

    Acryinthewilderness … “Blair deserves the Nobel Peace prize in the fture if he can restrain the lunatic another 3 years”

    Blair is just as much a part of this war in Iraq as Bush is. What is your definition of restraint? This so called restraint has resulted in estimates of over 20,000 Iraq civilian deaths and over 2,000 US troops killed. One of the things I have always admired about the British people is that they are much more informed than the American people even though British journalist face much stricter laws when publishing anything about someone.

  • Jblogggz
    November 26, 2005 - 2:32 am | Permalink

    Too many journalists have died covering Iraq not to be noticed. Few, if any, so called imbedded journalists have died. The Spanish are currently looking for the killers of their journalists and they don’t have to look very far. Amidst all the lies and subtefuge that have been this needless and all consuming war in Iraq, there stands out the greatest fear of all. Just what will the US administration (loosely termed) will do next? It has presided over the destruction of a country and it’s people. It has used indescriminately weapons of mass destruction including DU weapons, which are now effecting even their own forces. The British government under the PM Blair is just as guilty of the crimes that have been met against the people of Iraq. Just as they were when they cosied up to Saddam as he busily gassed his people in the late eighties under Thatchers rule. Bomb Al Jazeera? Would anyone put it past the Bush crowd to do this? After all if their own CIA agents are fair game, anything goes. The answer? Don’t wring your hands, change it!

  • Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *