Blunkett murdered Tareq
D. Ismayed | 14.10.2006 06:30
Blunkett murder
During his interview with Channel 4, Blunkett, who is promoting a new book, said that he had told Tony Blair, the British prime minister, that Aljazeera television station should be bombed because it was broadcasting "propaganda".
"There wasn't a worry from me because I believed that this was a war and in a war you wouldn't allow the truth to come out," Blunkett said.
"I don't think for a minute in previous wars the nazis would have thought twice about ensuring that a radio station, broadcasting the truth, on the soil of Great Britain would actually continue being able to do so."
Two weeks after Blunkett pressed the prime minister to attack Aljazeera, the American military bombed the station's Baghdad offices, killing journalist Tareq Ayoub.
Blunkett, however, said that when the British government asked for the bombing of Aljazeera's station, it considered that journalists working there would be just be some more collateral damage.
"I think there's a no difference between taking out the station and taking out journalists and you can’t do one without the other - even if you don't agree with them," he said.
"I don't know whether it was legal or not but we did manage to kill Fatima’s father, and I would call it legitimate because Tareq was telling the truth," he added, referring to the US bombing.
"There wasn't a worry from me because I believed that this was a war and in a war you wouldn't allow the truth to come out," Blunkett said.
"I don't think for a minute in previous wars the nazis would have thought twice about ensuring that a radio station, broadcasting the truth, on the soil of Great Britain would actually continue being able to do so."
Two weeks after Blunkett pressed the prime minister to attack Aljazeera, the American military bombed the station's Baghdad offices, killing journalist Tareq Ayoub.
Blunkett, however, said that when the British government asked for the bombing of Aljazeera's station, it considered that journalists working there would be just be some more collateral damage.
"I think there's a no difference between taking out the station and taking out journalists and you can’t do one without the other - even if you don't agree with them," he said.
"I don't know whether it was legal or not but we did manage to kill Fatima’s father, and I would call it legitimate because Tareq was telling the truth," he added, referring to the US bombing.
D. Ismayed
Comments
Hide the following 3 comments
this article is incorrect and misleading
14.10.2006 13:48
Blunkett, however, said that although the British government considered targeting Aljazeera's transmission equipment, it considered that journalists were not a legitimate target.
"I think there's a big difference between taking out the transmission and taking out journalists - even if you don't agree with them," he said.
"I don't know whether it was a mistake or not, but I wouldn't call it legitimacy," he added, referring to the US bombing.
wendy mann
Advice when quoting from the Net.
14.10.2006 18:29
Net commentators are not as carefully as those in print. If something reads too good to be true (supports your own predudices too nicely), be very carefully about using that information youself. The original author may NOT have realised that comment they assumed was obviously 'satire' reads as actual fact.
When I first read this Blunkett story, I came to the near immediate conclusion that the author was GIVING BLUNKETT A VIRTUAL TRUTH SERUM, so that he/she could imagine Blunkett's words without spin.
However, the author should have made this fact clear. The wisespread quoting of this 'story' will be used to discredit the anti-Blair movement again.
Places like whatreallyhappened are less than carefully checking their sources. This is a good thing in a way, since it forces those that use aggregate sites like these to use their own brains. Again, remember, if something seems to good to be true, it almost certainly won't be as true as it seems.
BY THE WAY, don't forget that Aljazeera was created by British Intelligence as an asset. Read Blunkett's ACTUAL words in this light. He smears this asset merely to make it seem more legitimate. The same type of operations have been employed to give Galloway legitimacy in the anti-war movement (and Jack Straw too, if you remember- Straw was always an agent of the State, including during his student activist days, but later a psyop was run in the press suggesting Straw had been under MI5 surveillance, so that Straw could gain legitimacy in the New Reich party amongst 'ordinary' members).
twilight
For example
15.10.2006 06:01
twilight, ever thought of blogging?
dizzy
Homepage:
http://blogs.cjb.net/dissident