UK joins Syrian invasion with material military support

The UK's government mouthpiece, the BBC, echoes the propaganda of its masters by attempting to portray the Syrian conflict as a totally gods-versus-devils war in which Assad's government- the democratically-elected government- has no morals whatsoever and is interested only in slaughtering its own voters . This is, of course, Western propaganda nonsense. The Syrian government is engaged in fighting various external agencies ranging from MOSSAD, the CIA, MI6 to French and Saudi-paid mercenaries . Add to this the opportunistic local, bribed and religious warlords and the chaos becomes clear as a Western construct designed to overthrow another State which opposes Zionism and US of AIPAC regional hegemony. It's an open secret that Iran is the goal of this Western-fed ' civil war' and its slow pace has forced the British to attempt to circumnavigate the Russian and Chinese vetoes in the UN Security Council. Whilst Assad remains an active player- which he certainly does despite the incredible avalanche of Western money, weapons, lies and hypocrisy ranged against him- the pre-arranged plan to attack Iran cannot be executed. Supporters of international law can thank Assad for that.

British involvement in the Middle East is- and always has been- the scurrilous and treacherous slithering of the invader. Some Arab States , to their shame , have collaborated- usually for the advancement of the power and treasure-chests of tyrannical arab dynasties. We saw, in the similar assault upon Libya, British, French and US disregard for international law . William Hague was an eager and active liar then but the current torrent of disinfomation and rabble-rousing issuing from his septic mouth is a wonder to behold. In this sick and dangerous man you see the arse-end of British colonialism personified.

 

Muslims who have no sympathy with their brothers who are being repressed by yet another dictator for life...nothing new. Notice the typical blaming of the Jews and the US. Reminds me of Chavez's supporters' claims that Chavez was murdered by the imperialists. Always blame others.

 

Sectarian screechings duly noted. Thank you for your interest.

 

Two little sister who are now orphans living in the street, who before the US - Saudi led Jihadists were armed and funded and poured into Syria had parents a home and peace and stability.

Now they have nothing

and you wonder why half the world hates you and grow up hating you...................



- - - Updated - - -

am I dreaming but was this written by a German of all people??????.......................................

 

Who do you blame for the suicide car bombings in Syria? Who do you blame for the executions of lined up and tied up civilian Assad supporters? Who do you blame for the executions of women and children whose husbands/fathers refused to be press-ganged and take up arms to join the fight against Assad? Who do you blame for the kidnapping of unarmed foreign national civilians and the extortion of ransom money and political demands at the threat of execution of the hostage? Syrian "rebel" terrorists have just taken 21 more hostages, Filipino UN peacekeepers.

 

I blame Assad. He is creating a civil war rather than give up his position. I blamed Murabak the same way, as well as Ghadaffi. As long as he refuses to step down and end the charade, the rebels will fight their larger enemy as they know how. He has to let his people have a say. their rage is formenting by him and years of his rule.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes and I am sure you have a point.

 

So you're blaming others. Gotcha.

 

Erm should I blame myself? Duh!

I am blaming the ruler of that country.

 

Bit of a shame, we cant hide our fingerprints all over the so called Arab Spring any longer, Assad is proving too stubborn. Can someone jog my memory here, what did Assad do that requires us to over throw him?

 

Blame who you want, the point is, you're blaming others!

Terrorists set off car bombs and you blame someone other than the terrorists who set off the car bombs.

 

Can someone explain to me how this plays out?
US is clearly helping expand KSA influence in the area ...with Israeli help and French backing... it does not make sense .

 

Good question!

Of course, Assad played his role in the uprising, like when he pulled a "Tienamen Square" on the protestors.

But to expand on your question, I'm wondering, what was so bad about Assad that having Islamic extremist terrorists in charge will be so much better?

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think the terrorist supporters care about the future. Either that or they actually want Islamic terrorists and extremists to take over and have a new safe haven with chemical weapons.

 

Divide and conquer

Create as much sectarian conflict as possible to make countries weak then steal their resources.

It's what happens when their sanctions don't work.

 

What resources? Syria is mostly farmland and same goes for (the inhabited part of) Egypt.
The only relation i see between Iraq, Syria and the unreasonable persistence of tension between Turkey and Israel are the Kurds , who of course also implicate Iran. I don't want to speculate but a pillow puppet state in the middle of everything would be very convenient for "everyone".

 

Iran has plenty resources so to take Iran they need to weaken Syria

 

Yep it doesnt make a lot of sense, ive only 2 theories really, possibly a combination of the two. One the central bank theory. Two: A Caliphate deal struck with the Muslim Brotherhood/ Islamists in exchange for no more terrorist attacks. We know the MB are all over these uprising and have been in close contact with Obama, we know they were set up to bring the Caliphate back and we know Al-Qaeda was an offshoot of the MB. These uprising really do have a foul stench about them.

 

9/11 hijackers were not MB and the Jihadists are Wahabi ideology from Saudi

 

That sounds interesting and I'd like to mull them over but I can't for the first, maybe can you expand on the Central Bank idea please? Maybe another thread if it strays a bit but I'm curious about it. I know there's something definitely crooked about how these central banks work but it's hard to pinpoint an agenda outside mere greed, at least for me. Thanks.

- - - Updated - - -

I still can't get people to clue in about the impending NATO military conquest of Iran.

 

Bin Laden while not Wahhabi certainly spent time in Saudi, i believe he was Wahhabi as a youngster and member of the MB for a while. I recall reading him saying Wahhabis were very similar in ideology with him.Of course he wasnt that keen on the MB because they were more a political movement while BL wanted to use the sword.

 

Well as i posted in a different thread just tonight, i remember years ago (years before any uprising was even thought of) a friend told me of the bankster conspiracy which i was very very skeptical about. In the end he said well these are the countries without central banks, watch for these countries to fall. Years later we see them all falling. Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran and Nth Korea in the cross hairs.

Look through out history, if countries or leaders try to break from this bank model, try their own currency (which we are allowed to print our own debt free!) a war or assassination isnt far away.

 

Fascinating.. I think I'll research this.

 

when we talk to you we have to talk in a language you understand
that is what your media do too

When we say Jihadist and AQ it does not mean to us what it means to you. We make it simple for you to understand.

AQ was not born out of the MB.
The Bin Ladens are one of the top wealthiest powerful families in Arabia. They owned pilot training schools in USA They are the ones building the towers and Mecca and roads etc. They are Wahabi. Bin Laden is Wahabi. He dressed like Wahabi and talks like Wahabi and follows Wahabi ideology.

You are confused between Ikhwan the word Ikhwan.

You think the world Ikhwan means Muslim Brotherhood like the ones in Egypt.

No!

Ikhwan of Arabia were the Wahabi fanatics out in the desert that Al Saud had to keep under control so he could secure his reign.

Look up any book on Abdelwahab and the Wahabis and you will see they were called the ikhwan.

Your governments are distorting the word and meaning and trying to draw your focus away from the real problem.

The jihadists in Syria and everywhere else you support them are ideologically Wahabi.

You r governments are supporting an ideology that believes that everyone is infidel except them. Morsi is an infidel to them so how can they be MB?

Morsi doesn't grow his beard as they do, dress in short length trousers as they do, blow up monuments and graves as they do. To them he is an infidel. The head of the MB the murshid to them is an infidel.
we all are.
You need to spend some time talking to Arabs and Muslims and learn the differences

- - - Updated - - -

your US general even admitted it on TV

it's no mystery

[video=youtube;9RC1Mepk_Sw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw[/video]

 

Leo Straus and his ideas of never ending wars comes to mind as well as the need to tell 'noble lies' to the general electorate.

 

another clue

If you open any newspaper you will read about the Salafists in Libya and Tunisia and Egypt and Syria etc running wild. You will never read the words Muslim Brotherhood in Homs and Allebbo and Damascus and Benghazi. It is Salafists the ones who want to blow up the pyramids etc and have their virtue and vice police.

So learn what Salafist is and how it is different to Muslim Brotherhood.

This will help explain and how the Saudi wahabis hate the MB.

Written by an Arab and not Fox News or Jihadwatch