• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

GHod bless Britain

Inkpen - flags from schools and public buildings etc, I'd have no problem with, I don't actually think anyone would. It happens quite a lot already though, the business park where I work they fly the Union Flag out the front. I wonder if fear of offence has been imagined, or used as an excuse to avoid the cost of putting up a flag pole ;)

I am sure that Elf and Safety comes into it somewhere!! :)
 
Think of Britain today in comparison to America. We all talk of a collapsing country, a bad place to live, a country going down and in decline. In the US they're in a horrendous financial crisis and debt, but people are still proud of their country as it will always represent Liberty and Freedom.
I shouldn't think whinging about your lot is a uniquely British trait, Americans probably do it too. I hope (and believe) that underneath people know how good we have it - in comparison to a great many others in the world - over here in Britain, and are proud of the place and proud to be a Brit, even if we don't shout it from the rooftops.
 
(Applause Smilie, can't seem to find one) for Hootnow's contribution to this thread. Don't care for the anti-religious stuff (not that I am religious, just find the bashing tiresome), but still, good to have some balance on social perspectives.

I am strongly of the opinon that both Bush and Blair are not praying to the same 'GHod' as most religious folks. Plus are both quite happy that their apparent religious mutterings brings further shame on said GHod.

This is who I believe these guys really pray to;

220px-Baphomet.png


Their actions are that of satanists IMO and that is who I believe Blair is referring to.
 
I shouldn't think whinging about your lot is a uniquely British trait, Americans probably do it too. I hope (and believe) that underneath people know how good we have it - in comparison to a great many others in the world - over here in Britain, and are proud of the place and proud to be a Brit, even if we don't shout it from the rooftops.

Unfortunately, this lack of national pride is leading people to ignorance. In my school the general feeling is extremely anti-patriotic but very Zionist. I was once having an argument with my mates about who'd win a war between the UK and Israel. Because kids in my school (apart from me, fortunately) have been brainwashed to believe that Israel are the best country in the world with the best army, they all thought that Israel would win and remained completely oblivious to the fact that the Israeli army is basically the army of the 51st State. What really tinkled me off about this argument was the fact that I was the only one using the word 'British', whereas everyone else was using the word 'English', as if the English would fight a war without the rest of the Union.

People in my school talk of emigrating when they're older. Disgraceful. They visit America as tourists and, oh, they wanna move there. What absolute pricks. the grass is always greener on the other side.
 
Forget Gaddafi. Blair's NEW best friend is a despot guilty of even bloodier slaughter
By Paul Scott

Last updated at 12:49 AM on 5th March 2011

One morning a month ago, amid the kind of hearty backslapping and synthetic bonhomie at which he is so adept, Tony Blair played host to a select group of bankers for what is known in the business as a ‘billion dollar breakfast’.

As is so often the case these days, the principal criterion for gaining admission to the event at a luxurious Swiss hotel — and some much sought-after ‘face time’ with the great man himself — was that you should be very seriously rich.

Mr Blair, tight-grinned and tanned in a trademark open-necked white shirt and dark suit teamed, oddly, with a pair of Australian riding boots, was in his element, holding court as red-waistcoated staff poured Buck’s Fizz and coffee for the invited international money men.

article-1363166-0D7944B7000005DC-222_468x312.jpg


Scene of horror: The skulls of victims of the Rwandan massacres

At the former Prime Minister’s side throughout was a rake-thin and bespectacled black man whom Blair was conspicuously keen to introduce to the assembled movers and shakers. Not surprising, perhaps, given that the event — at which Mr Blair was officially the chairman — was arranged in sole honour of Paul Kagame, the president of the African state of Rwanda.

And this being Mr Blair, the subject on his lips throughout the stylish meeting, held during the World Economic Forum in Davos, was cold, hard cash. Or, more to the point, how much he could persuade the super-rich investment bankers to plough into businesses in his close friend Mr Kagame’s emerging economy.

It is a task to which Mr Blair is devoting much of his time. Both he and his wife Cherie are regular guests of Kagame, flying in on a fabulously luxurious private jet (of which more later) and staying in a smart suite at the Rwandan capital Kigali’s finest lodgings, the Serena Hotel.

Their relationship, it has to be said, is something of a love-in. Mr Blair describes Kagame, a former rebel soldier in the once war-torn country, as a ‘visionary leader’ and ‘great friend’. For his part, the grateful Kagame has called on his people to name their children after his new English chum.

Meanwhile, Mrs Blair recently paid a misty-eyed tribute to his regime’s promotion of the rights of women.

Which, one imagines, must have put an ironic smile on the face of one of Rwanda’s leading female journalists, Agnes Nkusi Uwimana, now languishing in Kigali’s grim Central Prison.

Last month, the newspaper editor began a 17-year sentence for publishing critical articles in the run-up to the country’s blatantly fixed presidential elections last August that saw Kagame — the country’s leader since 2000 — returned to office with a 93 per cent majority.

Another writer on her paper was jailed for seven years. Meanwhile, their paper was summarily closed down by presidential order. Indeed, the increasingly dictatorial Kagame has now closed down all the independent media outlets the country once had.

No wonder Amnesty International has condemned the jailing, while the White House recently attacked Kagame’s growing political suppression.

Even so, Miss Uwimana and her journalist colleague can count themselves lucky. Others have suffered much worse fates.

The sham elections, at which 53-year-old father-of-four Kagame banned the two major opposition parties from standing and stood against three members of his own ruling coalition, were marred by the mysterious deaths of some of his political opponents and critics.

In June, the acting editor of another newspaper was shot in the face and killed. The journalist, Jean-Leonard Rugambage, was silenced because he exposed corruption involving Kagame and claimed he had uncovered the government’s involvement in the attempted murder of a former Rwandan army general exiled in South Africa.

Worse was to come. A month later, the vice-president of the country’s Democratic Green Party, which had been due to stand against the president’s Rwandan Patriotic Front ruling party, went missing before his almost decapitated body was discovered. Kagame’s government denied any involvement.

In October, the woman leader of the central African country’s most prominent opposition party, FDU-Inkingi, was jailed under new defamation laws brought in by Kagame to stifle opposition.

Then, two months ago, four exiled political rivals who used to be part of Kagame’s inner circle, but now accuse him of corruption, were jailed by a court for up to 24 years in their absence.

Which makes Mr Blair’s congratulatory letter to Kagame, hailing his ‘popular mandate’ after the vote, seem a bit of a sick joke.

Blair’s robust backing for his latest dodgy friend bears striking similarities to his long-time support of Libya’s Colonel Gaddafi, to whom he shamelessly cosied up during his time as PM, and to whom he has remained close ever since.

article-1363166-010B093A000004B0-393_468x596.jpg


Presidents Robert Mugabe, centre of Zimbabwe and Paul Kagame, right, at an African Union summit in 2007

But could Kagame prove to be even more of an ill-advised friend?

Damning evidence is beginning to emerge that he ordered the systematic genocide of tens of thousands of rival Hutu civilians in revenge for the massacre of up to 800,000 of his Tutsi people in three months of bloodshed in 1994.

In October, the United Nations published a damning 550-page report which detailed the mass rape and torture of Hutu civilians after the Tutsi army, led by Kagame, chased fleeing Hutus into the neighbouring Democratic Republic of Congo.

Witnesses to the atrocities claim there were ritual beheadings, while women and children were set alight, bludgeoned with hammers and shot. The UN has said that Kagame may face trial for war crimes.

Even so, Blair remains defiantly behind the increasingly despotic leader. Two months ago he launched a passionate defence of him, saying: ‘I am a believer in and a supporter of Paul Kagame.’

At the same time, he is said to have rolled his eyes when a Washington-based journalist questioned him about the scathing UN report into the Rwandan regime.

Blair has installed a team of handpicked advisers from his personal charity, the African Governance Initiative — which he set up in 2008 to assist three African countries — at the very heart of the corrupt president’s administration.

article-1363166-00214BA500000258-861_468x286.jpg


Massacre: A Rwandan soldier looks at hundreds of skulls displayed at the Bisesero memorial in the west of the country

The young team of between eight and ten aides, led by a Yale graduate, have taken up key roles in the President’s personal office, working for the country’s prime minister, in the cabinet office and on the Rwanda Development Board.

Which does rather invite the question — just what is in all this for Blair himself? Well, as is so often the case with the former Labour leader, the line between charity and personal aggrandisement is often more than a little hazy.

Take, for example, those flights Blair has made into Rwanda on a sumptuous private jet. The plane is one of two blue-and-white Bombardier BD-700 Global Express jets — costing ?ú30 million each — owned by the ruler of a country where 60 per cent of the people live in poverty.

In a bid to cover up the millions he has splurged on the aircraft, Kagame’s government set up a private investment company, registered in South Africa, as a front.

However, official records reveal that all the directors of the company, founded in May 2008, work for the president.

Just to make the whole thing even more fishy, the planes, whose registrations are ZS-ESA and ZS-XRS, are piloted by South Africa crews and operated by a private jet company based at Lanseria airport near Johannesburg.

Blair, who has amassed an estimated ?ú50 million fortune since leaving Downing Street in June 2007, is said to have made at least three flights across three continents in one of the planes.

article-1363166-027292A9000004B0-102_468x345.jpg


Friends: Blair with Gaddafi at his desert base outside Tropoli while he was Prime Minister in 2007

As long ago as 2009, he was spotted using one of the jets to attend meetings in Israel, Zurich and Abu Dhabi, before being flown into Kigali for a meeting with President Kagame.

At the time, Blair had personally corralled a group of European investment bankers in a bid to persuade them to speculate in Rwanda’s emerging IT and bio-fuels industries. Quite what Blair was doing accepting the flights, which would have cost in excess of ?ú500,000 if he were paying himself, is anyone’s guess.

His trips to Israel can be explained by his duties as the West’s unpaid Middle East peace envoy. But his regular trips to Switzerland and Abu Dhabi are usually about further lining the pockets of his well-cut trousers.

For three years, Blair has acted as ?ú500,000-a-year adviser on ‘development and trends in the international political environment’ for Swiss insurer Zurich. Meanwhile, he is often required to fly to Abu Dhabi in his ?ú1 million-a-year capacity as consultant to the United Arab Emirates’ super-rich sovereign wealth fund Mubadala. None of which sounds exactly charitable.
 
Last edited:
Continued;


article-1363166-0ABCE249000005DC-599_233x423.jpg


Kagame casts his vote at a polling station in elections last year

And there is also further reason to suspect the lines between Blair’s twin roles as money-maker and the new self-appointed saviour of Africa are being stretched to something approaching breaking point. Last August, Blair, who pumped millions of pounds of aid into Rwanda during his time as PM, published a lengthy self-congratulatory article about his African charity work — which involves him helping to secure investment — on his personal website.

As one of many such glowing tributes to himself, it was, understandably, barely noticed at the time. But hidden away in a question and answer session is a fascinating admission about the structure of his charity, the Africa Governance Initiative. Describing how the charity works in Rwanda, Sierra Leone and Liberia, Mr Blair stressed first that he deals directly with each country’s leader.

Then he added: ‘The second thing is that AGI then hire a team of young people to come and live in the country — from JP Morgan, or they may have been in Downing Street or in the American system.’

Seasoned Blair watchers will know, of course, that he is a senior adviser to JP Morgan, a major U.S. investment bank, which pays him a reported ?ú2 million a year to brief it on ‘the political and economic changes that globalisation brings’.


No doubt his paymasters at the bank are grateful that Mr Blair is able to put its young executives in on the ground floor of the fast-expanding Rwandan economy.

In recent months, Mr Blair has come in for flak over the ‘opaque’ nature of a complex network of companies set up to control his business interests, because they exploit a loophole that means he can keep his earnings from his business interests and his appearances on the international lecture circuit a secret.

Figures from one of his charities, however, reveal the scope of his influence. Three months ago, a Sainsbury family charity, the Gatsby Foundation, declared it had paid ?ú992,000 into Blair’s Windrush charity. The money was, it said, for charitable projects in Rwanda.

Meanwhile, The Gates Foundation, set up by Microsoft founder Bill Gates, says it paid ?ú1.5 million to Windrush in 2008 for similar projects in Sierra Leone.

Friends of the former Prime Minister defend him by saying he personally likes Kagame and believes his country’s brutal recent history means allowances must be made for him.

But one source close to Mr Blair told me this week: ‘Tony’s got a blind spot when it comes to this guy. He is surprisingly easily charmed, and Kagame has gone out of his way to be a very generous host with plane rides and things.

‘But Tony’s credibility has taken an absolute kicking over Gaddafi and, frankly, he can ill afford to get tied up with another dangerous nutcase.’

Surely, even the discredited and morally dispossessed Mr Blair can see that getting into bed with one bloodthirsty tyrant is regrettable, but two starts to look downright careless.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-guilty-bloodier-slaughter.html#ixzz1Zzi5mbpS
 
Last edited:
The worst part is I go to a Jewish school where patriotism is extremely frowned upon. I'm a massive patriot, yet wherever you go in my school there's a fudging Israel flag but not a Union Jack to be seen! On Israel's Independence Day you're encouraged to wear an Israel flag as a cape, but if you ever did that with a Union Jack you'd probably get told off. They give us endless assemblies that we sometimes even miss lessons for highlighting Israel's achievements which is always finished with Hatikvah (the Israeli National Anthem) being sung, but never have we ever been taught about how the state THAT FUNDS THE SCHOOL should be glorified and never have we sung GHod Save The Queen at my school unfortunately. In American Jewish schools they teach you to be Zionist and Patriotic. Here it's only Zionism.

To all you who complain about the UK and talk about wanting to leave: get out because you're really what makes this country bad.

I find that very strange mate, what denomination are you/your friends/the school? My Jewish friends, mostly secular and Reform Jews, from militant zionists to moderates (ie pretty standard two state solution) to pro-Palestinian to one state solution (all of the people in that land democratically electing a mixed government) are both very proud to be Jewish and British. For them, there is no disconnect. The majority of them spend time in Israel and are deeply involved in the Jewish world, even if they don't agree with the country's policies. But they're also deeply connected with Britain and its politics, society, culture etc.

As for the Israel vs. UK thing, there's really no competition. The Israeli armed forces are obviously potent but the British armed forces are one of the best in the world and one of maybe three which have the ability to rapidly project power worldwide. The airforce, army, navy, training etc are all superior. Not to mention that the UK has military bases in Cyprus so would be immediately able to strike at Israel whereas Israel wouldn't be able to get near the UK. Basically, the UK would smash Israel, whether attacking or defending. I can't really see the argument for otherwise to be honest.

But what silly friends you have, how did this conversation even come up? ;) Fair play to you for developing your own opinions though.
 
I find that very strange mate, what denomination are you/your friends/the school? My Jewish friends, mostly secular and Reform Jews, from militant zionists to moderates (ie pretty standard two state solution) to pro-Palestinian to one state solution (all of the people in that land democratically electing a mixed government) are both very proud to be Jewish and British. For them, there is no disconnect. The majority of them spend time in Israel and are deeply involved in the Jewish world, even if they don't agree with the country's policies. But they're also deeply connected with Britain and its politics, society, culture etc.

As for the Israel vs. UK thing, there's really no competition. The Israeli armed forces are obviously potent but the British armed forces are one of the best in the world and one of maybe three which have the ability to rapidly project power worldwide. The airforce, army, navy, training etc are all superior. Not to mention that the UK has military bases in Cyprus so would be immediately able to strike at Israel whereas Israel wouldn't be able to get near the UK. Basically, the UK would smash Israel, whether attacking or defending. I can't really see the argument for otherwise to be honest.

But what silly friends you have, how did this conversation even come up? ;) Fair play to you for developing your own opinions though.

It's the United synagogue, which is Orthodox, however the school isn't very religious but extremely Zionist. Most people that attend (like me) are pretty secular, but the school tries to be as religious as possible as there are some religious people that go, and the school want us to be a as proactive in Judaism as possible. I don't know how the conversation started, I only started hearing it halfway through and immediately I butted in. The sad thing is my friends don't actually know they're being brainwashed, and I really would like some newspaper to find out about how it's quite wrong. There's an Israel flag at every entrance as well as multiple other places in the school, but there are only a few Union Jacks in history classroom displays. I have no problem with the school being Zionist but it should be more proud to be British and focus more of its attention here rather than in a country we don't even live in. I blame the government for enforcing no rules.
 
Back