How refreshing to have what I shall describe as a "public servant" speak out against Blair and his Government. General Sir Richard Dannatt did this by questioning our involvement in the war in Iraq. That this was condoned by Des Brown presumably means it had the tacit approval of Gordon Brown; yet that is of little consequence.

The General makes a number of important points. Firstly Britain is a Judaic-Christian society, and by implication, the muslimization of our country is a bad thing. Secondly he recognizes that the threat to our society is inherent in this country, by virtue of the many Muslims who have been colonizing it (illegally) for many years now. As I stated in an earlier post on this site, our army should be here removing these people and repatriating them, not fighting in Iraq. The police here are no longer up to doing this. They have been Kevinized and Bimboized by this government for a considerable period.  Iraq will become three separate states and at the end of the day that would be a good thing, as long as we get on with those that control the oil. There will still be factional fighting across the Sunni-Shiite borders, but hopefully not on the scale we see now. The problem may be what becomes of Baghdad. Where have we seen that before - Jerusalem?

Afghanistan is another matter, as he points out. He states that it is a war that has to be won. Perhaps, but can it be? What the hell do the allies think had happened to the Taliban. Did they think they had been destroyed? No, far from it. They wilted into the background to bide their time in the full knowledge that the situation would deteriorate; now their time has come again (see blog written a couple of years ago).

The key to Afghanistan is Pakistan. That country is in a very unstable situation. I believe it will become a fundamentalist Islamic state, with dire consequences for all. I stated this over a year ago to one of the secretaries at the British High Commission there, when considering visiting the country for personal reasons. General Musharraf's interviews here in the British media recently show a man who is deeply worried and, more importantly, very much on the defensive. Yet the key to that country's, and Afghanistan's future, rests largely with London and indeed the rest of Britain. Dissident Pakistanis and others have been coming here, with the full support of our Government for many years now, although they will of course vehemently deny this. It is from here, where they have total freedom to say what they want without persecution, without litigation, where they are funded by the state with benefit hand-outs, that they manipulate events in their country. I would suggest that a majority of Pakistanis here do not support their present government and would prefer to see an Islamic state formed. It is difficult to find Pakistanis here who do not despise the USA, and many who care not an iota for the country they inhabit - Britain. They, from  here, are pivotal players in this game, funding enemies of the present Pakistani state. London is one of the money laundering capitals of the world.

Admittedly in Pakistan Musharraf is also trying to douse this radicalism, but with very limited success. One need only look at all the madrassas over which he exercises no control. Terrorists from here have demonstrably been there to be educated and trained.

Getting back to Sir Richard's statement that the war in Afghanistan has to be won, in a way it has to be. If Pakistan falls the Islamic world will have nuclear bombs, we can forget about Iran' or North Korea's attempts to develop them. But I believe it will fall. Consider that in Afghanistan there are two main languages spoken, Pashtu and Deri. There at least four other languages spoken. The point is, this is not a unified country, it is a tribal society, allegiances being owed to tribal factions and forever changing tribal affiliations. Consider also that there is no border between Pakistan and Afghanistan, other than on paper, which counts for very little. This has been the case for centuries, even before the days of the British Raj. Few have managed to control these people. An ancestor of mine, General John Jacob, the founder of Jacobabad, which the Americans used to bomb Afghanistan, did; unfortunately times have changed and most of his strategies and tactics would not be useable today. Yet some would, and I suggest the military read some of his views and opinions.

Why, after the war was won, examples were not made of some of the highest officials of the then Iraqi Government, and the machinery of state then not taken over by the allies, completely mystifies me. Even someone like Tariq Asiz could have temporarily been installed as head of state. I do wonder whether it was not he who supplied the allies with intelligence during the last months of Sadam’s regime. Then, over a short period of time, hostile elements could have been weeded out of the ‘government’, the military, the police etc. To try and impose the American way of life, which quite frankly has become universally disliked, was naïve in the extreme.

My overriding concern however is for my country, which has almost been destroyed by Blair and his government. It is fundamentally financially unstable. Britain has been culturally and socially undermined. No one man in British history has done more than has Tony Blair to bring this country to its knees.