Some
British leaders openly referred to this eerie interest-oriented approach.
Lord
Palmerston who served as the British Prime Minister in the mid 19th
century, explained this point of view in a speech he made in 1856:
When
people ask me, ..., for what is called a policy, the only answer is that we
mean to do what may seem to be best, upon each occasion as it arises, making
the Interests of Our Country one's guiding principle.7
Palmerston
also said:
We
have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are
eternal and perpetual.8
Edward
Grey, the then Foreign Minister of the UK, supported this view with the
following words:
British
Foreign Ministers have been guided by what seemed to them to be the immediate
interest of this country, without making elaborate calculations for the future.9
Ambassador
Davies, the special advisor to former US President Truman, said the following
about former British Prime Minister Churchill:
Whatever
Churchill's greatness, he was 'first, last and all the time a great Englishman,
more interested in preserving England's position in Europe than in preserving
the peace.10
The
mentality that chose British interests over peace influenced many British
leaders throughout the course of history. The main reason behind this tendency
is the fact that those leaders could never stray far from the effect of the
British deep state, for which the most important thing was persuading the
entire world to accept so-called British superiority, stemming from the faulty
ideas about evolution.
Because of this mentality, Britain has always been the one country that had the greatest say in occupation policies around the world. Indeed, there are only 22 countries in the world it hasn't occupied at some point in history. The territories once occupied by the British amount to 90% of the world's entire lands.11 Currently, 22 countries are still a part of the United Kingdom, and 14 of them are overseas. The Queen of England, Elizabeth II, is the queen of these 22 countries, plus an additional 16 countries. These countries are Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Barbados, the Bahamas, Grenada, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and Grenadine Islands, Belize, Antigua and Barbuda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, and Fiji. Even though those countries gained their independence, Queen Elizabeth II is still considered their queen.
The Queen,
considered the head of the Commonwealth of Nations, appoints a governor-general
to those countries as representatives. She usually appoints retired politicians
or other elite names, on the advice of the Prime Minister of the respective
country. The governor-general gives royal assent to legislation passed by
parliament, signs official documents, officially opens and closes parliamentary
sessions, revokes the parliament before the elections, and carries out other
similar functions.12 In other words, Britain still enjoys serious
power – and in many cases sole power – in these countries.
A prime
example is the constitutional crisis of Australia that took place in 1975.
Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam adopted a clear stance against the
British deep state and exposed its sinister plots against his country to assert
Australia's independence. Three years after his election in 1972, Whitlam was
saying Britain's MI6 was operating against his government: 'The Brits were
actually decoding secret messages coming into my foreign affairs office.'
The bold
attitude of Whitlam wasn't left unanswered by the British deep state. The Queen
of the UK, acting under the influence of the British deep state, dismissed
Australian Prime Minister and dissolved the Parliament in 1975. According to
the Guardian, after this incident, 'Australian politics never
recovered, nor the nation its true independence.'13 Today,
Australia is still a Commonwealth realm. This example alone is enough to show
how strong the British deep state hegemony can be on other countries.
Under the
influence of the deep state, Britain, on the lands it occupied throughout
history, has usually worked to emphasize the differences between various
ethnical and religious groups. The deep state has indoctrinated them to believe
that they are enemies and the concept of 'superior race' has always been a part
of this policy. The British deep state chooses one ethnical group amongst a
multitude of groups that have lived together for maybe centuries and tells them
'you are the superior race', and then pits them against each other. It is
convinced that such a strategy will make ruling these societies easier, as
fighting groups cannot come together 'to form a single, joint power'. History
is full of examples of this policy.
For
instance, the horrible genocide that took place in Rwanda was not a random,
regional occurrence. It wasn't independent of the British deep state either.
The
policies of the British deep state usually focus on creating division, fueling
existing division or creating artificial divisions. With regards to other
nations, the deep state has always sought to 'maintain sharp clashes, make up
divisions if none exist, and fuel the existing but insignificant
disagreements'. The ones that fail to conform to these policies are eliminated
through various methods if necessary, because as explained above, the most
important thing for the ones behind these plans is the 'interests of Britain'.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder