||This article appears in the June 1, 2012 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
MARRIAGE MADE IN HELL:
Tony Blair Deployed
To Secure Obama Re-election
by Nancy Spannaus
[PDF version of this article]
May 25Apparently it's not just the $250,000 a pop speaking fees that have been bringing former British Prime Minister Tony Blair to the United States over the past year. According to reports in the May 21 Mail Online and the Daily Telegraph, confirmed by EIR's own sources, Blair has signed up as a key advisor to help Barack Obama's win re-electionas a stepping-stone to his own planned return to power in Great Britain.
In typical understated fashion, the British press revealed that six months ago Blair privately advised Obama on "renewal in office and re-election." For the past two months or so, Blair has pretty much camped out in the United States, and has plans to continue to do so.
This is not surprising, given that Blair was an advisor to British puppet Obama in his first election, and has had his signature on every evil policy Obama has implementedhealth care, pre-emptive war, environmentalismas EIR has fully documented. The kicker, according to the British press accounts, is that Blair then intends to launch a comeback in British politics, hoping, as the Mail notes, that "enough time has passed for people to have forgotten the disastrous effect of the Iraq war on his image and how he was humiliatingly forced from office by Gordon Brown."
But will the American population tolerate this blatant British imperial hand manipulating the U.S. election result? Already, Obama and putative Republican nominee Mitt Romney are vying for unpopularity, even among the party faithful who participate in the primaries, not to mention the population as a whole, who have rushed en masse to identify themselves as "independent." Given the reckless international confrontation course which British puppet Obama is taking, the impending blowout of the bankrupt world financial system, and Obama's increasingly blatant dictatorial measures, it is not to be excluded that he will create the political circumstances in which the Presidential elections would be cancelled.
As Lyndon LaRouche has emphasized, there is only one safe way to secure the future of the nation, and that is to remove Obama from the Presidency now, preferably through Section 4 of the 25th Amendment, thereby overturning the chessboard and creating the opportunity for the nation to survive.
Obama in Trouble
There is no question but that Obama's British controllers have reason to be worried about his re-election. Despite having intimidated all potential challengers out of the field, the Obama re-election campaign is finding it increasingly difficult to assemble the machine required to win. And this is despite the fact that the pack of Republican contenders have done their very best to serve as a "committee to re-elect the President," by competing to present policies even more lunatic and murderous than his.
Yet, recent polls show the equally disastrous Mitt Romney, now the all-but-assured Republican nominee, to be gaining enough ground to pose a threat of winning. Informed intelligence sources in Washington evaluate the election outcome as "too close to call."
Meanwhile, the American electorate is exhibiting signs of terminal disgust with both candidates, and the election process itself.
For example, recent Republican primary results, in the period since all his opponents have dropped out, have given frontrunner Romney no more than 70% of the vote. And on the Democratic side, in three statesWest Virginia, Kentucky, and ArkansasObama has won only 60% of the vote. Perhaps most stunning was the West Virginia vote, where an incarcerated felon from Texas, the only other person on the ballot with Obama, won a full 40% against Obama. In Arkansas, it was challenger John Wolfe who garnered 42% of the vote, and in Kentucky, Obama's opponent was "undecided," which took 40%. Twenty-nine percent of North Carolina Democrats also went for "none-of-the-above" against the hated president.
Even more alarming, from the standpoint of the state of the American population, is the abstention rate in the primary election process. In contrast to the surge of involvement in Obama's 2008 campaign, and even 2010much of which was based on wishful thinking and abreaction to the Bush reignthe turnout in primary elections this spring is remarkably low, in some cases hitting record lows. This has been particularly noticeable in Texas.
Such depoliticization is nothing less than suicidal. It reflects not only distrust of the incumbents in the current governmentwell-deserved, of coursebut in the sense of responsibility by the citizens themselves, who still have before them, despite many lost opportunities, the option of mobilizing for the good of the nation: the removal of Obama, and the program of the LaRouche National Slate of congressional candidates.
Inaction leaves the fate of the United States, and the world, in the hands of the British controllers of Obama and Romneyand, very possibly, that evil servant of Queen Elizabeth, Tony Blair.
Blair's Bag of Horrors ...
Just as many Democrats are now shocked to see how Barack Obama's policies of war, austerity, and dictatorship have become indistinguishable, or worse, than those of his predecessor George W. Bush, so the British population had reason to be shocked by the way "New Labour" spokesman Tony Blair's followed in the footsteps of his conservative predecessor, Margaret Thatcher.
Blair came into prominence in the 1990s, first as the leader of the parliamentary Opposition, and then Prime Minister between 1997 and 2007. He immediately set about to implement policies of economic austerity against the very constituency which elected him, Labour. One of his signature policies, of which he has often bragged, is the establishment of the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) within the National Health Service, which has set the pace for implementing Nazi medical practices of denying medical care deemed "too expensive" for those with lives "not worthy to be lived," internationally. It is precisely this policy, with much of its personnel, that President Barack Obama has taken over as a model for his health-care "reform."
On foreign policy Blair, also broke with the traditional Labour mold, setting forth a policy in 1999, in a speech at the Chicago World Affairs Council, for abrogating national sovereignty, whenever supranational institutions, or even groups of powerful nations, thought it appropriate. The test case was the NATO out-of-area deployment against Serbia in 1999, the first instance of what became known as the Blair Doctrine of limited sovereignty in the name of the "Responsibility to Protect."
During the Clinton-Gore Presidency, Blair's closest relationship was clearly to Gore, who echoed his British de facto mentor on questions of privatization, austerity, green fascism, and war-mongering. With George W. Bush's election, however, Blair immediately latched on to the new President, to form a partnership which produced one bloody war after the other now, for more than 10 years. It was Blair who laundered the "sexed-up" intelligence on Saddam Hussein's "weapons of mass destruction." which served to justify the U.S. war against Iraq in 2003. He also stood by Bush's, and now Obama's, side in the debilitating, worthless war in Afghanistanand is promoting the next war, against Iran.
No sooner was Bush gone, however, than Blair was in Washington hobnobbing with his "great friend" Barack Obama, and pushing his fascist policies domestically and internationally. They have all been pushed through, with no effective resistance being mounted.
And Some Liabilities
But will Blair be an asset for Obama's flailing re-election campaign? Not if people actually understand who he is. For example, Blair's appearances at a couple of college campuses this Spring, one in Los Angeles and the other in Maine, have brought forth vociferous demonstrations, where he was condemned, rightly, for being a war-monger with blood on his hands.
Blair's filthy, and unrepentant, lies in instigating the 2003 Iraq War have created an issue that will not go away. Internationally, he was condemned in 2011, along with Bush, as guilty of crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, and genocide by an international tribunal convened in Malaysia, the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission, which reviewed his role in the Iraq War. Domestically, he has been confronted with the repercussions of that war in two ways.
First, there was the sensational July 2003 death of David Kelly, a British scientist who had spoken out against the Blair government's lies about Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction. Kelly's death, while ruled a suicide, exhibited many characteristics casting that judgment into doubt; it occurred shortly after he had been subjected to a public pressure campaign by the Blair government for speaking out against the unjustified war.
Second, there is an ongoing British government inquiry, called the Chilcot Inquiry, into the "lessons to be learned from the Iraq conflict." That Inquiry, established in January 2009, has taken testimony from all the major policy players in the run-up to the war, including Blair himself, and in the course of this, cast a long shadow over the truthfulness, not to mention the ethics, of the Prime Minister and his underlings. The Inquiry has had to carry out many repeat interviews, and is not scheduled to release its results until July 2012, at the earliestwith potentially devastating results on what's left of Blair's reputation.
War-monger is not the only charge which threatens to stick on Blair; there is also the charge of extraordinary corruption. For a politician who claims the right to invade and overthrow heads of state because of their alleged human rights abuses and ethical lapses, he has had a particularly stunning array of business dealings with such designated dictators.
Start with Qaddafi. Blair's first big pact with the Libyan leader occurred in Feburary 2004, when he went to Tripoli and signed a deal that would lead to extensive oil-drilling rights for BP in Libya. In 2007, Blair and Qaddafi met again in the Libyan town of Sirte, where Blair agreed to supply military hardware and expertise to the Libyan government, including British Special Air Services (SAS) training for Libyan special forces.
According to British press reports, Blair also secured a consultancy role with the Libyan Investment Authority, a fund which manages the country's oil wealth. While Blair denied the charge, his position on the board of JPMorgan, which was a member of the Libyan British Business Council, may well point to the means of his involvement.
During 2011, and the run-up to the assassination of Muammar Qaddafi in October of that year, the British press provided one scandal after another on the involvement between Blair and the Qaddafi family, not only including the above arrangements, but other special favors for family members. These deals, of course, did not deter Blair from turning against Qaddafi when higher-ups decided the Libyan leader had to be eliminated, as an object-lesson against national sovereignty in the illegal Libya "liberation."
Then there's the case of Kazakstan, the former Soviet republic ruled by the reputed autocrat President Nursultan Nazarbayev. Blair is a paid advisor to the Kazakstan President, and, according to the Financial Times, has already been paid at least $13 million for his services. "Anti-totalitarian" Blair is apparently not concerned about reports that Nazarbayev runs roughshod over his opposition, as long as he gets his checks.
Blair's access to money after his resignation as prime minister in 2007, is amazingly broad. His Tony Blair Associates provides the vehicle for lucrative international contracts, which some suspect are not unrelated to his trading on his position as Envoy for the Middle East Quartet. Since 2008, Blair has been on the board of JPMorgan Chase. And then there's his Faith Foundation, which provides a platform for giving him speaking engagements, for which he charges significant sumson the condition that the amount remain secret!
A Marriage Made in Hell
Forget the gay marriage "issue" for a minute; what we're talking about here is a marriage made in the bowels of Hell called the British empire. Blair and Obama are both instruments of a British Fabian fascism which seeks to rule a world that has been stripped of nation-states, and population. In such a world, whether it be by economic disintegration, or nuclear confrontation, human life as we know it will not survive.
For now, think like an American. The British monarchy, against which we made our revolution, has deployed one of its key agents to try to determine who should be our next President. Do American citizens have the guts to resist such treason? Will a sufficient number of leaders emerge to stop the Blair-Obama combo in its tracks?