The Illuminati and the Deception of History by Terence Smart (best way to read books .TXT) 📖

We have seen with the murder of Jean De Menezes in London that nobody will get in the way of uncovering the war on terror or stopping the war in Iraq. Anyone who is a threat to these plans will be eliminated by the Illuminati’s intelligence agencies. Dr. David Kelly was one of those threats.

Dr David Kelly was a British scientist, who worked as a weapons inspector for the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM). He was renowned for his expertise in his field; over the course of his career, he developed an intricate understanding of Iraq’s weapons programmes. Thus, the government and secret services regularly sought his advice.

Kelly was a senior member of a United Nations inspection team in Iraq, Kelly's mission was to discover whether Saddam Hussein was hiding weapons of mass destruction - and to determine whether America and Britain would go to war.

Kelly came to public attention in July 2003 when an unauthorised discussion he had off the record with BBC journalist Andrew Gilligan about the British government's dossier on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was cited by Gilligan and led to a major controversy. Kelly's name became known to the media as Gilligan's source and he was called to appear on 15 July before a parliamentary Foreign Affairs Select Committee investigating the issues Gilligan had reported. Kelly was questioned aggressively about his actions. He was found dead two days later. Despite leaving no note for his wife or his beloved daughter, who was due to get married three months later, the government's Hutton Inquiry into his death concluded in 2004 that Kelly committed suicide. On the morning of his death Kelly had also booked a return ticket to Iraq in connection with his work.

After repeated calls for a full inquest into Kelly's death, the Labour government instead decided that official papers about the affair should be kept secret for an unprecedented 70 years. Why keep it hidden if they have nothing to hide?

Kelly was supposed to have killed himself by overdosing on painkillers and cutting his own wrists even though there was little blood found at the scene. Dr. Kelly worked with U.S. military interpreter Mai Pederson for 5 years and she said in an interview with the daily mail (UK) that “Kelly could not have killed himself by hacking into his wrist - because he could only move his arm with difficulty due to an old injury”. 'He couldn't even cut a steak,' says Pederson. She also rubbished claims he had taken 29 Co-Proxamol painkiller pills before cutting his wrists, saying he struggled to swallow pills. For Kelly suffered from 'unexplained dysphagia' - a syndrome that can make it almost impossible to swallow pills, while food and other substances are ingested without a problem. This has been confirmed by other friends. Pederson recalls offering him a pill for a headache which he refused, saying he couldn't swallow any pills and explaining he'd had the problem for years.

In 2010, a number of medical doctors went public disputing Dr. Kelly’s supposed suicide. They said that cutting the small ulnar artery would not have caused enough blood loss to kill Kelly. The blood evidence at the scene also didn’t add up. Only a very small amount of blood was found near his body and on his trousers. For blood loss to have killed him, he would’ve had to lose much more blood than this. The Hutton Inquiry added that an overdose of co-proxamol may have contributed to Kelly’s death. But the doctors who disputed the Inquiry’s findings argued that the amount of co-proxamol in Kelly’s body was not enough to have constituted a fatal dose.

Basically Kelly said that British government's dossier on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq had a lot of ‘spin’ added to it or was ‘sexed up’, basically it was a lie. They can’t let a former weapons inspector in Iraq get away with saying that so before he lets anymore information out he had to be silenced.

Alex Jones (infowars.com) had an interview with Michael Shrimpton, a UK national security lawyer and he said Dr Kelly had been murdered by a team of assassins and the charade of an apparent suicide was then played out to cover this up. Shrimpton went on to explain that his source from within the intelligence community knew David Kelly personally, and did not believe that he had committed suicide. After making their own enquiries, says Shrimpton, this source determined that Dr Kelly had not committed suicide, but rather had been assassinated.

The incision in Kelly's wrist was probably to conceal the injection of both Dextroprypoxythene, the active ingredient in Co-Proxamol, and Succinylcholine, a muscle relaxant, rather than as evidence of his bleeding to death, as highlighted by a group of six doctors in letters published in the British press. Shrimpton further agreed with the doctors by pointing out that Kelly only had one Co-Proxamol tablet in his body and that this was not sufficient to kill him.

According to Shrimpton, Kelly was murdered because he had been talking to the press and there was a fear of what else he might discuss with journalists. Furthermore, Kelly was due to return to Iraq and may have learned fresh information on that trip which Whitehall could not afford to trust him with.

Also in 2010, Boris Karpichkov, a former KGB agent, revealed that a MI5-linked intelligence officer told him that Kelly had been “exterminated” and his death made to look like a suicide.

It’s been rumoured that Dr. Kelly’s computers, seized by intelligence officers during his Foreign Affairs Select Committee questioning, contained a very sensitive book that Kelly had written. A book revealing lots of government-incriminating information about Kelly’s experiences with UK intelligence agencies. It’s alleged that his death was orchestrated to stop this book from coming out.

There is no doubt that these Jewish Zionist neocons were the ones who instigated the Iraq war. They wanted Iraq destroyed long before 9/11.

The three primary architects of the war in Iraq were Richard Perle (Defense Policy Board chairman), Paul Wolfowitz (Deputy Defense Secretary) and Douglas Feith (Undersecretary of Defense for Policy) — all neocon Jews and dual citizens of the U.S. and Israel

“The neoconservatives of course were the main driving force behind the war. They initiated the idea of using force to topple Saddam in two letters written to President Clinton in early 1998. Over the next five years, and especially after 9/11, they pushed relentlessly for war against Iraq. No other group or institution in the United States was seriously committed to invading Iraq over that five year period. Indeed, there was significant opposition to invading Iraq, even after 9/11, within the State Department, the intelligence community and the Uniformed Military. The neoconservatives are, by their own admission, deeply committed to Israel. In fact, many of them are connected with key organizations in the Lobby like the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and the Washington Institute for Near East Policy”. John Mearsheimer, World Affairs Council of Oregon, U.S.A and below a link to the video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htmO1Cyl73s

Paul Wolfowitz, exploited 9/11 to push for military action against Saddam Hussein’s regime. Colin Powell, in “Phase Two” of the 9/11 Commission Report, remarked that Wolfowitz argued that “Iraq was a problem that had to be dealt with.” He wanted to exploit 9/11 to answer the “Iraq problem.” What was this problem? How to get rid of Saddam’s regime. US Jews and the Israeli government foresaw “a domino effect, with Saddam’s fall followed by that of Israel’s other enemies: Arafat, Nasrallah, Assad, the ayatollah and maybe even Gadaffi.

Benjamin Netanyahu nagged the US government to attack Iraq for decades. In 1990, Netanyahu claimed that “everybody is threatened by Iraq.” In 1998, Netanyahu called on the Clinton Administration to attack Iraq. In 2002, Netanyahu exaggerated the threat of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and also claimed that overthrowing Saddam’s regime would create regional stability. These claims were untrue. As the world now knows, Iraq had no dangerous "weapons of mass destruction," and posed no threat to the US. Moreover, alarmist suggestions that the Baghdad regime was working with the al-Qaeda terror network likewise proved to be without foundation.

The crucial factor in President Bush's decision to attack was to help Israel. With support from Israel and America's Jewish-Zionist lobby, and prodded by Jewish "neo-conservatives" holding high-level positions in his administration, President Bush - who was already fervently committed to Israel - resolved to invade and subdue one of Israel's chief regional enemies.

There was no link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11. But that never mattered. All that had mattered was that US Jews and the State of Israel wanted Saddam gone. The 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq cost over two trillion dollars, led to the death of 1 million Iraqis, and cost the lives of over eight thousand US servicemen. Despite these costs, the grip of the Zionist lobby on the US government and a Zionist vision of the Middle East that still defines US foreign policy are intact.

Uri Avnery - an award-winning Israeli journalist and author, and a three-time member of Israel's parliament - sees the Iraq war as an expression of immense Jewish influence and power. In an essay written some weeks after the US invasion, he wrote:

"Who are the winners? They are the so-called neo-cons, or neo-conservatives. A compact group, almost all of whose members are Jewish. They hold the key positions in the Bush administration, as well as in the think-tanks that play an important role in formulating American policy and the ed-op pages of the influential newspapers... The immense influence of this largely Jewish group stems from its close alliance with the extreme right-wing Christian fundamentalists, who nowadays control Bush's Republican Party. Seemingly, all this is good for Israel. America controls the world, we control America. Never before have Jews exerted such an immense influence on the center of world power."

In Britain, a veteran member of Britain's House of Commons bluntly declared in May 2003 that Jews had taken control of America's foreign policy, and had succeeded in pushing the US into war. "A Jewish cabal have taken over the government in the United States and formed an unholy alliance with fundamentalist Christians," said Tam Dalyell, a Labour party deputy and the longest-serving House member. "There is far too much Jewish influence in the United States," he added.

Part of the 9/11 plan was to destroy Iraq on behalf of Israel. Iraq was partially weakened during the Gulf War of 1991 and with sanctions by the Western governments ever since.

Let us start with the lies about the Gulf War first.

Public opinion in the U.S.A was not yet ready to accept the idea of a military intervention against Iraq in 1991. In an attempt to sway public opinion against Iraq a huge Jewish lie was fed to the public. The willingness of the American people to go to war changed completely, however, on October 10, 1990, when a fifteen-year-old girl from Kuwait was introduced to Congress. This was all a Jewish plan to convince the Americans to go to war with Iraq. This girl, “Nayirah”, told Congress that she had been working as a volunteer in a hospital in Kuwait, and that there she had seen how Iraqi soldiers had taken little babies from their incubators and thrown them on the floor.

Television flashed her testimony around the world. It electrified opposition to Iraq's president, Saddam Hussein, who was now portrayed by U.S. president George Bush not only as "the Butcher of Baghdad" but – so much for old friends – "a tyrant worse than Hitler."

It just goes to shows yet again how pathetic the media is, and how controlled it is.

Bush quoted Nayirah at every opportunity. Six times in one month he referred to "312 premature babies at Kuwait City's maternity hospital who died after Iraqi soldiers stole their incubators and left the infants on the floor and of "babies pulled from incubators and scattered like firewood across the floor." Bush used Nayirah's testimony to lambaste Senate Democrats still supporting "only" sanctions against Iraq – the blockade of trade which alone would cause hundreds of thousands of Iraqis to die of hunger and disease.

Nayirah, though, was no normal eyewitness. She was the daughter of one Saud Nasir