 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jimv1 Great Old One Joined: 10 Aug 2005 Total posts: 2734 Gender: Male |
 Posted: 30-08-2013 11:47 Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| Pietro_Mercurios wrote: |
Perhaps they finally realised that 2003 was about to come back and bite them on the arse? |
The quote of the day is that Iraq poisoned the well of public opinion in terms of this country's involvement in a middle east crisis and we were already hearing the rumbling spin of sexed-up reports from Syria.
It must have been playing heavily on the Tory mind over the last couple of days as Defence Secretary Philip Hammond confused al-Assad with Saddam Hussein twice during a Newsnight interview, as he mentioned 'deterring Saddam Hussein from further use of chemical weapons'.
I'm pretty glad that Miliband grew a pair and didn't toe the Tory/US line on this. Despite the implications for the 'special relationship', policy needs to be considered and all implications worked out before we go off to kill more people - innocent included - in another foreign land. Hopefully, it's a landmark for British Politics where we realise we can't go on punching above our weight as world police and be used as a european justifcation for America's interests.
The speed and zeal of Cameron on hearing the US battle cry shows how much he and his advisors mistook the mood of the country. But it's no surprise to me as today's Tories are a Cargo Cult to Thatcher's and still see a good war as strong leadership and an election winner.
This decision is a game-changer and whatever has been said of his weaknesses over the summer, places Miliband on the World Stage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Jonfairway Great Old One Joined: 09 Mar 2005 Total posts: 1185 Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 30-08-2013 12:56 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Quote: | Renowned investigative journalist Michael Hastings was working on story about CIA Chief John Brennan at the time of his mysterious death
The mysterious death of famed investigative journalist Michael Hastings took a surprising turn this week when it was revealed that the target of his latest expose was CIA Director John Brennan.
[link to www.dailymail.co.uk]
The "off the books" weapon being sold to the rebels (by the CIA) was likely being overseen by Brennan himself (the current CIA Director) which Michael Hastings was about to out in his next article (the "undocumented" sales of the weapons, not the actual use of the weapons). They knew that having Michael Hastings expose the sale of the weapons to rebel forces would not only cause massive damage to Brennan, the CIA, and the administration as a whole, but would also ruin their ability to pull off a misdirected "chemical attack" such as the recent one, therefor he had to be "removed".
His behavior grew increasingly erratic. Helicopters often circle over the hills, but Hastings believed there were more of them around whenever he was at home, keeping an eye on him. He came to believe his Mercedes was being tampered with. "Nothing I could say could console him," Thigpen says. One night in June, he came to Thigpen's apartment after midnight and urgently asked to borrow her Volvo. He said he was afraid to drive his own car. She declined, telling him her car was having mechanical problems. "He was scared, and he wanted to leave town," she says. The next day, around 11:15 a.m., she got a call from her landlord, who told her Hastings had died early that morning. His car had crashed into a palm tree at 75 mph and exploded in a ball of fire. |
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message2335257/pg1
now i must admit i did think about this exact thing !!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pietro_Mercurios Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 30-08-2013 13:03 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Infowars and Godlikeproductions? Is that what we've sunk to? Both paragons of reliability. No doubt David Icke also has some reliable insider info. to disseminate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Jonfairway Great Old One Joined: 09 Mar 2005 Total posts: 1185 Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 30-08-2013 13:13 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Quote: | | Infowars and Godlikeproductions? Is that what we've sunk to? Both paragons of reliability. No doubt David Icke also has some reliable insider info. to disseminate. |
all depends what is written at the end of the day....
do we assume that a particular person shall not be heard ?
i'm not saying everything is Gospel !! it isnt
but do they tell any more porkys than MP's for instance ?
it is an interesting link
His car was blown up, he was investigating the head of the CIA, it is linked to arming the Rebels ?
lets be honest
if any of that is true ????
and i mean any of it...
then there is a lot to answer too ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pietro_Mercurios Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 30-08-2013 13:25 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Jonfairway wrote: | ...
lets be honest
if any of that is true ????
and i mean any of it...
then there is a lot to answer too ? |
And there lies the real problem with sites like infowars. Quite often, some of it is true, but then, so much of it is pure bollox. Few have the time, or the wherewithal to unpick it all. At stress points like this, it quickly becomes clear that there are more than a few truly dodgy interests involved, some even worse than MPs.
Quid est veritas? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pietro_Mercurios Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 30-08-2013 13:42 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| sherbetbizarre wrote: | Here's a Mail article from January 29th - no longer on the site, but here on web.archive... I assume it's real (unless these things can be faked) but anyway, the sources appear to be infowars.com and Cyber War News...
... |
It was removed because The Daily Mail was taken to court, made to pay compensation and forced to issue a retraction and apology.
| Quote: | http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article-2311199/Britam-Defence-David-Goulding-Philip-Doughty.html
Britam Defence, David Goulding and Philip Doughty
Daily Mail, 18 April 2013
An article on 29 January reported allegations on the internet that the US Government had backed a plot to launch a chemicals weapons attack in Syria and blame it on the Assad regime.
The reports made reference to an email said to have been from David Goulding, the Business Development Director of Britam Defence, to company founder, Philip Doughty. The email had been published on the internet after Britam’s computer system was illegally hacked in Singapore. It referred to a proposal that Britam would deliver chemical weapons to Syria for enormous financial reward and suggested that the directors were willing to consider the illegal proposal.
We now accept that email was fabricated and acknowledge there is no truth in any suggestion that Britam or its directors were willing to consider taking part in such a plot, which may have led to an atrocity.
We apologise to each of them and have agreed to pay substantial damages. |
So, I'll have to remove the offending piece and so forth, pending some checking with the other Mods.
P_M |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Jonfairway Great Old One Joined: 09 Mar 2005 Total posts: 1185 Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 30-08-2013 13:42 Post subject: |
|
|
|
agreed !
but how about this ?
http://www.thenation.com/blog/172774/obama-opposed-syria-war-plan-clinton-petraeus-panetta-gen-dempsey#
| Quote: | Last week, we learned that Hillary Clinton and David Petraeus, now thankfully pursuing other opportunities and spending more time with their families, had cooked up a plan to arm and train the ragtag Syrian rebels, thus getting the United States directly involved in that horrible civil war.
Now we learn that Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs—both of whom are about to join Clinton and Petraeus in the private sector—also backed the Clinton-Petraeus plan, |
that name Patraeus looks awful familiar !!!!
hang on
wasn't that one of the chaps said DEAD reporter was investigating ?
mmmmm
and that plan looks just like ??????? err
well thats up to everyone to decide... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Cochise Great Old One Joined: 17 Jun 2011 Total posts: 1104 Location: Gwynedd, Wales Age: 58 Gender: Male |
| Posted: 30-08-2013 13:44 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| This sort of ties in with the point I was making on the Savile thread. If you can't trust the people who _should_ be trustworthy, who do you trust? Not trusting anyone at all isn't really a practical option, although that seems to be the way we are headed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Jonfairway Great Old One Joined: 09 Mar 2005 Total posts: 1185 Gender: Unknown |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Analis Great Old One Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Total posts: 851 Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 30-08-2013 21:17 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| lkb3rd wrote: | The good news is that in reading comments after the news reports people are overwhelmingly skeptical about the ridiculous load of crap we are being fed.
This is a new and encouraging development.
Unfortunately, I think it will result in a clamping down of the police state, rather than the criminals ceasing their criminal activities. |
I fear it will in fact result in a tougher line, because the main reason of the strong public opposition is internet and nothing else. People certainly did not make their mind by reading the press or watching TV news !
It probably explains why western rulers have been so agressive when it comes to internet recently, notably about Snowden's revelations. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Analis Great Old One Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Total posts: 851 Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 30-08-2013 21:44 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Spookdaddy wrote: |
I get your point. But you could argue that Saddam Hussein didn't need to use chemical weapons during the Anfal campaign - as I understand it Kurdish fighters had little hope of overpowering Saddam's conventional forces without him having to resort to chemical weapons.
In the case of the Anfal campaign you could argue that chemical weapons were deployed largely as revenge against a civilian population - so, although I do get the point, observations about a lack of tactical value from a military point of view are possibly moot. |
I understand, but the context was completely different : the Iraqis had used chemical weapons for years, in a complete impunity. With the tacit agreement from communist, western and arab powers. The Anfal campaign was not under scrutiny from the whole world. And the Kurds had a long history of insurrection, the Iraqi government wished to eradicate even their vaguest will to resist. I believe that they had just grown so used to use chemical weapons that it had become a trivial matter for them.
Here, the greater plausibility is really on the rebel side. I just don't believe that Bashar Al Assad is a sniggering Joker, obsessed by outsmarting the whole world at every occasion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jimv1 Great Old One Joined: 10 Aug 2005 Total posts: 2734 Gender: Male |
| Posted: 01-09-2013 10:27 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Here's a 'What If.....' that occured to me the other day.
What if Obama had no taste for a conflict in Syria and while talking to Cameron and assessing the Coalition position, also had his aides put out the feelers to Miliband and persuaded him to vote against? This would explain how Ed suddenly grew a pair, the US and the Coalition could still make the right bellowing noises and make themselves look big like cats do yet allow time to make a more considered decision.
For a while it looked like the US was ready for action but....
| Quote: | A US military attack against Syria was unexpectedly put on hold on Saturday, after president Barack Obama said that while he backed the use of force after what he called "the worst chemical weapons attack of 21st century", he would first seek the approval of Congress.
Obama said he had decided the US should take military action against Syria and had been told by his advisers that while assets were in place to launch strikes immediately, the operation was not "time sensitive". He said Congressional leaders had agreed to hold a vote when lawmakers return to Washington next week.
It was a dramatic turnaround by the White House, which had earlier in the week indicated it was on the verge of launching strikes against Syria without the approval of Congress. Only on Friday, secretary of state John Kerry had delivered a passionate case for taking action against Assad. |
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/31/syrian-air-strikes-obama-congress |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Analis Great Old One Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Total posts: 851 Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 01-09-2013 16:05 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Why, it's not as if they hadn't done that for decades, is it ?
They do that because jihadists are fanatical, easily manipulated and efficient fighters to destabilize ennemy governments, and once they have won, if they win, they can use their presence as a pretext to turn against them and to conduct a direct intervention.
We should note that they support not only islamist fighters, but also political islamists. As it appears they did in Tunisia and Egypt. The goal was probably to put Arab countries under a strong control. Except that in Egypt, it backfired. Now the Western countries are more hated by Egyptian liberals than before.
And remains the issue of their privileged relationship with fundamentalist Saudi Arabia. Former Saudi ambassador in the USA, Prince Bandar Bin Sultan, who survived his assassination attempt one year ago but was left severely wounded for months, has regained control of the kingdom's military intellligence. His links with the US militaro-industrial complex are well known ( he is notably a close friend of the Bush family), and he has often been accused of being the true head of Al Qaeda. It appears that he is pulling the strings behind the war on Syria.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/10266957/Saudis-offer-Russia-secret-oil-deal-if-it-drops-Syria.html
| Quote: | Saudis offer Russia secret oil deal if it drops Syria
Saudi Arabia has secretly offered Russia a sweeping deal to control the global oil market and safeguard Russia’s gas contracts, if the Kremlin backs away from the Assad regime in Syria.
Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
12:00PM BST 27 Aug 2013
The revelations come amid high tension in the Middle East, with US, British, and French warship poised for missile strikes in Syria. Iran has threatened to retaliate.
The strategic jitters pushed Brent crude prices to a five-month high of $112 a barrel. “We are only one incident away from a serious oil spike. The market is a lot tighter than people think,” said Chris Skrebowski, editor of Petroleum Review.
Leaked transcripts of a closed-door meeting between Russia’s Vladimir Putin and Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan shed an extraordinary light on the hard-nosed Realpolitik of the two sides.
Prince Bandar, head of Saudi intelligence, allegedly confronted the Kremlin with a mix of inducements and threats in a bid to break the deadlock over Syria. “Let us examine how to put together a unified Russian-Saudi strategy on the subject of oil. The aim is to agree on the price of oil and production quantities that keep the price stable in global oil markets,” he said at the four-hour meeting with Mr Putin. They met at Mr Putin’s dacha outside Moscow three weeks ago.
“We understand Russia’s great interest in the oil and gas in the Mediterranean from Israel to Cyprus. And we understand the importance of the Russian gas pipeline to Europe. We are not interested in competing with that. We can cooperate in this area,” he said, purporting to speak with the full backing of the US.
The talks appear to offer an alliance between the OPEC cartel and Russia, which together produce over 40m barrels a day of oil, 45pc of global output. Such a move would alter the strategic landscape.
The details of the talks were first leaked to the Russian press. A more detailed version has since appeared in the Lebanese newspaper As-Safir, which has Hezbollah links and is hostile to the Saudis.
As-Safir said Prince Bandar pledged to safeguard Russia’s naval base in Syria if the Assad regime is toppled, but he also hinted at Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if there is no accord. “I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us,” he allegedly said.
Prince Bandar went on to say that Chechens operating in Syria were a pressure tool that could be switched on an off. “These groups do not scare us. We use them in the face of the Syrian regime but they will have no role in Syria’s political future.”
President Putin has long been pushing for a global gas cartel, issuing the `Moscow Declaration’ last to month “defend suppliers and resist unfair pressure”. This would entail beefing up the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF), a talking shop.
Mr Skrebowski said it is unclear what the Saudis can really offer the Russians on gas, beyond using leverage over Qatar and others to cut output of liquefied natural gas (LGN). “The Qataris are not going to obey Saudi orders,” he said.
Saudi Arabia could help boost oil prices by restricting its own supply. This would be a shot in the arm for Russia, which is near recession and relies on an oil price near $100 to fund the budget.
But it would be a dangerous strategy for the Saudis if it pushed prices to levels that endangered the world’s fragile economic recovery. Crude oil stocks in the US have already fallen sharply this year. Goldman Sachs said the “surplus cushion” in global stocks built up since 2008 has been completely eliminated.
Mr Skrebowski said trouble is brewing in a string of key supply states. “Libya is reverting to war lordism. Nigerian is drifting into a bandit state with steady loss of output. And Iraq is going back to the sort of Sunni-Shia civil war we saw in 2006-2007,” he said.
The Putin-Bandar meeting was stormy, replete with warnings of a “dramatic turn” in Syria. Mr Putin was unmoved by the Saudi offer, though western pressure has escalated since then. “Our stance on Assad will never change. We believe that the Syrian regime is the best speaker on behalf of the Syrian people, and not those liver eaters,” he said, referring to footage showing a Jihadist rebel eating the heart and liver of a Syrian soldier.
Prince Bandar in turn warned that there can be “no escape from the military option” if Russia declines the olive branch. Events are unfolding exactly as he foretold. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Quake42 Warrior Princess
Great Old One Joined: 25 Feb 2004 Total posts: 5310 Location: Over Silbury Hill, through the Solar field Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 03-09-2013 10:41 Post subject: |
|
|
|
This has been reported in a few places but not, as far as I can see, in any mainstream media. Another Saudi connection.
| Quote: | Syrian rebels “say Saudis gave them chemical weapons.”
August 31, 2013
An article published by Mint Press News, written by Dale Gavlak and Yahya Ababneh, reports that Syrians on the ground in Gouta and Damascus report chemical weapons were used by the rebels.
The Mint Press website has apparently crashed under strain on its server but the article has been mirrored on anti-war.com.
According to the article, numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families, reveal that many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via Saudi intelligence and were responsible for carrying out the gas attack.
The father of a rebel fighter who reportedly died during the attack said “My son came to me two weeks ago asking what I thought the weapons were that he had been asked to carry,” and described the weapons as having a “tube-like structure” while others were like a “huge gas bottle.”
A female rebel fighter reportedly complained, “They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them, we didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.”
A well-known rebel leader in Ghouta reportedly said “Jabhat al-Nusra militants do not cooperate with other rebels, except with fighting on the ground. They do not share secret information. They merely used some ordinary rebels to carry and operate this material. We were very curious about these arms. And unfortunately, some of the fighters handled the weapons improperly and set off the explosions.”
Mint Press warn that some of the information in their article cannot be independently verified – but the reported evidence of locals may cast more doubt on the case for the US to play a more direct role in supporting Al Qaeda-sympathising rebels and adding to the casualty figures in the country.
AS HRI has reported before, we are sceptical about the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government, and the recent release by the US State Department of a four page intelligence summary and a series of unsupported allegations by John Kerry have done nothing to dispel our doubts on the matter.
We applaud the decision of the UK Parliament not to intervene militarily in the Syrian conflict, a decision which raises the UK’s moral standing in the world. The issue of alleged chemical weapons use in Syria should be investigated impartially and thoroughly. It is quite clear that the United States government and their intelligence services are not the people to do this work as they have been supplying the rebels, have a track record of bending intelligence to their own ends, have reportedly tried to stop the UN inspectors from doing their work and, as Kerry’s statements and today’s intelligence assessment make clear, are incapable of putting together an objective report on the matter, being primarily concerned with propaganda and apparently believing that a series of unsupported statements of belief add up to cogent proof.
|
http://humanrightsinvestigations.org/2013/08/31/syrian-rebels-saudis-chemical-weapons/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pietro_Mercurios Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
