Translate

Showing posts with label Syria. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Syria. Show all posts

Wednesday, 14 December 2016

BBC agenda to confuse and bore everyone about Aleppo so we will support toppling Assad to not hear his name ever again

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b085nsyk

0234

The situation in Aleppo is moving fast and the question now is how the UK government can proceed. Crispin Blunt is chair of the foreign affairs select committee and Alison McGovern is co-chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Syria.

Mishal Husain:

Aleppo was just a few years ago a flourishing city of two million people, Syria's economic capital built on a heritage of ancient settlements. Today, entire neighbourhoods are nothing but rubble. Many residents are living in appalling conditions. If our MPs could have foreseen that, how would it have affected the decisions of those who voted against intervention in Syria in 2013 in the wake of President Assad's use of chemical weapons. We will be speaking to two MPs who voted against taking military action against the regime in a moment, but first our Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen. When we look back on this time on the fate of Aleppo, Jeremy, will Aleppo make a mockery of the idea of international community if a city is allowed to suffer in this way for so long?

Jeremy Bowen:

I think the concept of an international community in which everybody tries to do the best for everybody else is frankly a nonsense anyway. I think that the West has stepped aside from the mess that's in Syria I think for all kinds of reasons a major one was the feeling that after the lesson taken in the intervention in Iraq in 2013 was that intervention was not going to work and what that has meant for the Western point of view is that there hasn't been any real traction there because the way to get influence in Syria over the last few years is to use force and the West has chosen not to. The Russians, the Iranians, Hezbollah from Lebanon have chosen to do, so they have shaped the environment, if you like. 

Mishal Husain:

Stepped aside, yet as the UN's Staffan de Mistura told us the other day, there are twelve countries involved one way or another and obviously the fight against IS is happening in Syria. 

Jeremy Bowen:

Yes, including Western countries, including Britain, including the United States but they have done it in a rather ill-thought out way. If you compare the Western policies involved in Iraq in the last year or so it's a bit more thought out. It is not thought out in a particularly efficient way in Syria and you know the thing the phrase I keep using about the Syrian war is that it is a mini-World War because so many outside powers are involved including really powerful nations, and that's what makes it so hard to try to deal with because all those countries have their own agendas and they don't all involve Syria. 

Mishal Husain:

Let me turn then to the two MPs who are with us in the studio: Crispin Blunt, Conservative Chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee and Labour's Alison McGovern Co-Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Syria. If you had known in 2013 today Aleppo would look as the newspaper pictures and television show us, Alison McGovern, would you have voted differently?

Alison McGovern:

There just isn't a yes/no answer to this because I know that it's extraordinarily doubtful that my vote by itself could have made a profound difference to this situation. Nonetheless, every day I regret perhaps not raising it more and not bringing the Prime Minister back to the House of Commons, not applying more pressure and of course given what's happened you constantly go over and over in your mind what the opportunities were ...

Mishal Husain:

But more pressure to do what? You were given the opportunity to intervene in Syria and you decided against it.

Alison McGovern:

I think if we constantly focus on 2013 important though that it is and I wouldn't dream for a minute of docking any accountability for that but if we constantly focus on that then we're not focusing on Syria now and that's precisely why Andrew Mitchell and I brought the emergency debate to the Commons yesterday. I'm afraid the Foreign Secretary came with very little to say but we could have said was "Here is a strategy to protect civilians", "Here is how we will work with others to get people out, to get aid in however we can and wherever we can and to get accountability and monitoring of some kind, preferably by the UN, but with British monitoring if necessary so that Assad and others know that there will be accountability.

Mishal Husain:

Before we go to talk about what next for Syria, Crispin Blunt, I want to ask you the same question that if you'd been able to see what Aleppo would look like today whether you would have voted differently. 

Crispin Blunt:

No, I think even with the benefit of hindsight I would have voted the same way because the question we were asked was really about disarming the Assad regime of its chemical weapons. The means by which we were going to do that wasn't going to work and in the end it was the Russians that disarmed its ally of chemical weapons because they weren't prepared to have their ally breaching international law ...

Mishal Husain:

Even if chemical weapons were the issue of the moment, it could have brought the regime down but it certainly would have controlled the regime it was able to do .... [sic]

Crispin Blunt:

And then if your mission was then going to take the regime down, then you need to follow through all the following steps and had we evem been prepared to follow all the steps it might now be us in the position of the Russians with the last vestiges of Alawite resistance in the areas they were resisting supporting a Free Syrian Army and finding ourselves precisely in the same position ... [sic]



Mishal Husain:

So it was Iraq that haunted you? Not to end up in a similar position?

Crispin Blunt:

It's the lessons of our intervention over the last two decades that if you're not prepared to will the means all the way through to the end around the consequences you're likely to get what happens after you intervene [sic] then you might be better off not starting in the first place, and if you can't get the international community into the same place around the same strategy then one or two actors in the international community then taking on a strategy on their own is very likely.

Mishal Husain:

Alison McGovern, you were talking about a strategy you want the government to put forward for protecting civilians. On the ground in Aleppo today even the UN can't really be part of monitoring this ceasefire it seems even they are unable to give assurances about the immediate protection of civilians.

Alison McGovern:

Well, quite, and it is a very worrying development that we are seeing this morning where what was last night apparently an evacuation now looks delayed and it's incredibly worrying and we need to put pressure on our government to be asking questions about that but it doesn't end in Aleppo. This won't end in Aleppo. There are besieged people elsewhere in Syria and what makes anyone think Assad will finish this in Aleppo? Where will we be next and what will we do? Will we stand by and watch in exactly the same way as it is done elsewhere [sic] and quite honestly if we allow the international humanitarian law to be shredded in this way, you know, this certainly won't end in Aleppo and which country will be next? I know that people despair of the UN and the international system, don't we all? We're all realists, but what do we stand for if we don't stand for people's right for somebody to care and stand up for them when they're having their basic right to life absolutely obliterated in front of our eyes, then what do we stand for?

Mishal Husain:

Crispin Blunt, what position or what strategy would you like to see the government take on Syria now?

Crispin Blunt:

There was a vestige of hope a year ago when the International Syria Support Group got twenty nations round the table who agreed a plan for Syria that included Russia and America, it included Iran and Saudi Arabia and there was hope because the whole international community of players was signed up to the same strategy. We need to get back to that place ...

Mishal Husain:

Isn't that moment now past?

Crispin Blunt:

That moment has passed and Russia has taken responsibility for her actions and must be held accountable for her actions ... 

Alison McGovern:

That moment hasn't passed. Only recently the Prime Minister agreed with the European Council tha sanctions would be applied to Russia if the situation in Aleppo got worse. The situation in Aleppo got worse and what do we hear from the European Council? Our government didn't even raise sanctions. Well, you know what, there's another European Council at the end of this week so they can raise sanctions then.

Mishal Husain:

Just very briefly, Jeremy Bowen, do you think Russia will stay the course in Syria in terms of the reconstruction or once Assad is in control of the whole country will that be it for them?

Jeremy Bowen:

I think Russia's agenda is about its influence there. Their main thing is to have the top man in Syria on their side and they've got that and they will do what's necessary, I think, to sustain it. On that vote in 2013 the main consequence of that was its effect on the US decision to intervene which while that would not have ended the war it might have made it worse. It changed the war and perhaps dealt a mortal blow to the regime.

This is all a meaningless word salad. What made the most sense was Mishal Husain's questions but the responses were all nonsense.

In 2013 both Alison McGovern and Crispin Blunt voted against military action in Syria.  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23892783

In 2015 both of them voted for military action. http://www.cityam.com/230150/syria-airstrike-vote-heres-how-your-mp-voted 

The most obvious question Mishal Husain did not ask was what happened between 2013 and 2015 to change their minds. 

Do you suspect that the agenda of the BBC is only to appear to explain Syria to us while in fact conspiring to confuse and bore us and refusing to ask obvious questions or make a respectable attempt to elicit coherent answers from MPs?

If you want Western foreign policy explained to you, go directly to  https://www.rt.com/on-air. Do not pass go and do not collect £200.

POINTS TO NOTE ABOUT THE SYRIAN WAR

  1. Being a vassal state of the US, the UK does exactly what the US tells it to do.
  2. The US neocons want Assad toppled to show Russia what's what ie a uni-polar world under the full spectrum domination of the US and who's top dog nation of the world ie the US. 
  3. ISIS are US-paid mercenaries paid to attack whichever country the US pays it to attack.
  4. US and Saudi Arabia are in cahoots together.
  5. Saudi Arabia being Sunni hate Shiite Muslims. 
  6. Assad is Shiite.
  7. ISIS is Sunni-indoctrinated by Saudi Arabia and funded by the US.
  8. The US cannot completely control ISIS but as long as ISIS is attacking Assad, the US is happy.  
  9. ISIS is also attacking Iraq and this the US is not so happy about because Iraq already has a Western puppet in place. 
  10. The Peshmerga are being funded by the US to fight ISIS in Iraq.
  11. The US are now paying two separate groups of mercenaries ie ISIS and the Peshmerga to fight each other. Crazy, isn't it?
  12. Neocon foreign policy is funded by the defence industry in the NATO member states. By bribing key politicians (or hiring them as consultants) in key groups such the Defence Select Committee and Foreign Affairs Select Committee, they control Western foreign policy.
  13. The defence industry is only interested in arms deals which explains why it is so attached to warmongering neocon foreign policy and why the political establishment hate Trump and want to destroy him, because he doesn't want any more stupid wars that result in the death of American soldiers in wars whose purpose no politician can explain properly. 
  14. Crispin Blunt was against military action against Syria in 2013.
  15. Crispin Blunt was for military action against Syria in 2013.
  16. Alison McGovern did the same thing too, but then she's a capricious, incoherent and emotional woman, so there's no point asking her because she probably can't remember anything through the mists of her bleeding heart do-gooding and wearing her heart on her sleeve to show off to her constituents. 
  17. In 9 June 2015 Crispin Blunt because the Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee.  
  18. In December 2015 Crispin Blunt voted for military action against Syria. 
  19. What does the Foreign Affairs Select Committee do? http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/foreign-affairs-committee/inquiries1/parliament-2015/the-fco-and-uk-arms-exports-inquiry-16-17/ It scrutinises arms exports. 
  20. If you were in the defence industry or are an arms manufacturer, it would be very useful to hire Crispin Blunt as a consultant, wouldn't it?
  21. Would you say that this adequately explains Blunt's change of mind from being a peacenik to being a warmonger?
  22. It is for these reasons that people are dying.
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, 8 January 2016

Justin Webb interviewing two women from Germany about Cologne attacks on New Year's Day 2016

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06twjtk

8:43
Chancellor Angela Merkel has said Germany must have a "fundamental" debate about how to integrate new migrants after a wave of sexual assaults on New Year’s Eve which have been blamed on migrants. Speaking in the programme is journalist and activist Kubra Gumusay and editor-in-chief of Bild Zeitung - Germany’s most read newspaper - Tanit Koch.

Kubra Gamusay is an oxymoronic Muslim Feminist, which Justin Webb omitted to mention. You can hear her witter on about Muslim feminism at http://www.islamandfeminism.org/kuumlbra-guumlmuuml351ay.html

Bild Zeitung is the German equivalent of The Sun, which Webb also omitted to mention.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild

Despite being often recognised as a right-wing publication, in January 2015 Bild began a petition against PEGIDA, an anti-Islamisation protest group.



JW:

Germany is having an anguished debate about the attacks around New Year on women walking in and around the railway station in Cologne. The Right accuse the establishment of covering up the crimes of Muslim immigrants, including some from Syria and North Africa. The establishment is reacting in pretty pained fashion. Angela Merkel speaking yesterday in Berlin saying deportation should be considered for foreigners who commit crimes. Let's talk to Kubra Gumasay who is a journalist and activist in Hamburg and to Tanit Koch who is Editor In Chief of Bild Zeitung which is Germany's most-read newspaper. Good morning to you both. 

The wittering women chorus:

Good morning, Justin! 

JW:

Kubra, first of all: does everyone accept now this was mishandled?

KG:

Well certainly yes especially since after the events it was found out that many women who have been sexually assaulted had struggled and reporting especially the way the victims have been dealt with. There were quite a few problems with the event in specific but in general what we have right now is a problem in the way we talk about these topics. Sexism is an issue in Germany not only within the immigrant community but also within the immigrant communities. We are now having a debate that focuses on the other, the immigrant, the refugee as the barbarians who are coming into our country to basically assault our women - those sexist men - and we are now experiencing a very racist turn of the debate. 

JW:

Tanit Koch, would that racist turn be avoided if the truth was told earlier about incidents like this?

TK:

Absolutely. I am not actually sure there is a "racist turn". There is some issues that haven't been addressed during the last years or decades which should have been addressed before are now in the focus. I absolutely think that the - forgive the language - cock-up by the police and police communication in Cologne certainly has not helped at all but actually worsened the matter of people distrusting the establishment, politicians and the media. 

What I would have said if asked this question:

"Of course not. Germany is now experiencing an unprecedented flood of immigration that is pouring oil on the fire of pre-existing racial tensions caused by uncontrolled immigration and Islamophobia general to liberal democracies towards Islamic State. The foreigners and immigrants the Germans most particularly hate and fear are Muslim migrants, and it is this group that is reported to have molested German women. Xenophobia includes hatred and fear of foreigners, and the most foreign of foreigners are foreigners of another race, especially if their religion has values you already know to be opposed to yours. Islamic State are Muslim and Islamic State jihadis come from Syria and North Africa. The men reported to have molested German women during the New Year were men of that religion coming from precisely these places. The hatred and fear is both racial and religious as well as deeply and undeniably visceral."    

JW:

And of course it wasn't just the police, was it, the state broadcasters as well have had to apologise because they didn't report the facts even though they knew them.

TK:

Well, they have apologised. I think you shouldn't over-estimate that one incident because that was the [inaudible] of news at seven o'clock and reported the incidents later on that day so they apologise for not doing main news which definitely was a mistake and is absolutely feeding into the trust issue raised by radical right wing movements and parties.

[Of course Koch doesn't want the German public to make too  much of the media not broadcasting the truth, being Editor in Chief of the Bild and therefore part of the media herself!]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/08/cologne-attacks-hard-questions-new-years-eve?CMP=fb_gu

Gaby Hinsliff:

Many Germans are asking why politicians, police and broadcasters seem so reluctant to discuss what happened under cover of the crowds (the state broadcaster EZF apologised for not covering the attacks until Tuesday), and whether it’s because the attackers are widely described as looking Arab or north African. Which is why, of course, liberals like me are reluctant to talk about it.

The parallels between German politicians’ discomfort over Cologne and Britain’s response to predominantly Asian gangs grooming girls in Rotherham for sexual exploitation aren’t exact, but there are lessons to be learned.

The first is that pushing victims under the carpet for the sake of cohesion is dangerous. When allegations about older Asian men preying on white girls in northern cities initially surfaced, well over a decade ago, it was the BNP that first took up the cudgels. Unfortunately, that meant journalists and politicians instinctively shied away, wary of giving the BNP publicity.

By trying not to give succour to racists, the risk is that we end up miserably self-censoring.
You really can't trust these liberal cunts, who have absolutely no fucking idea about journalistic integrity, can you? But at least Gaby Hinsliff is coming clean now. Most white middle class women think foreign males are interesting and more worthy of attention than men of their own race and emasculated white men allow them to indulge this preference. They don't even know they are doing it. It is as natural to them as picking up a baby and cooing at it.
http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/harriet-and-hoods.html


What I would have said if asked this question:

"Germans have indeed lost faith in their government and their media, which they now know to be rotten with Political Correctness. It was after all their Chancellor Angela Merkel who invited the migrants to Germany in the first place, only to withdraw her invitation a week later, like an indecisive and neurotic woman who enjoys playing with a man's feelings, just because he allows her to. The suspicion that only pro-migrant reports were allowed by the media was not particular to Germany, for the BBC, CNN and other Western liberal media are just as guilty. http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/female-journalists-pro-migrant-coverage.html The best thing pro-migrant politicians such as Merkel and Reker can do for themselves and their people is to resign, and let those more in touch with the understandable anxieties of the German people take their places. Germany should close its borders, leave the EU and lie down quietly in a dark room and reflect on its future. Denial is a feminine vice and more denial at this stage would only enrage German public opinion. That public life is filled with ranks of vacillating and incompetent women who constantly pull their punches and witter on about their nonsense such as Muslim Feminism and Germany integrating yet more aliens will just infuriate an already irritated and anxious German public. All female journalists guilty of a pro-migrant stance should also resign."
Why Females Prefer Immigrant Males by Simon Sheppard" 

 JW:

Kubra Gumasha, do you accept that there is a real risk to not just women's rights actually but other rights as well that our accepted and seen as part of secular modern European society that are not necessarily respected by some of those who come in and that has to be said plainly?


KW:

No, I certainly agree that people who come into Germany should who fled to Germany and seek rescue here are not people who went through integration process who have basically declared that they will comply with all of the values here. That certainly hasn't happened so obviously I don't expect that we won't have any issues with that. I mean that is a struggle that we will be something we have to deal with that in the future and I do believe that we will actually be able to manage that, it's just the way we handle it and at this point Germany has missed in the past years the point we should have talked about who we are as a country, who do we mean when we say "we". We have not yet managed to be a society that is inclusive, that speaks of "we" and then includes people who have not been born in Germany but certainly do feel German, who have a German passport, speak the language so what we need right now in Germany is a debate on who we are and who we want to be.

 What I would have said if asked this question:

"What has to be said plainly is that no nation that already has an immigrant problem should be accepting any more of these migrants. Those already here can be used as slave labour or have the option of being returned to where they came if they object to being used as slave labour. The perception that these migrant swarms who molest European women are somehow privileged over European men will create a simmering resentment that could be the source of riots and, perhaps, revolution."

 JW:

Is that the debate you are going to get now, Tanit Koch?

TW:

Actually, I think the debate we are going to have is what we expect of people coming into the country that have been treated - as you yourself the BBC have reported - with great hospitality that those people have to understand what our way of life is not just our views but our way of life. I am bit frustrated that in particular Cologne had these appalling incidents because I have lived there myself and Cologne is the party city of Germany which has a history and prides itself on its great tolerance and openness towards people coming into that city from all over the world so the debate is going to be not just how to reassure ourselves of what we are and who we are but also to tackle certain issues that have come into the country because of course when you haven't grown up in Germany you cannot possibly be used to our way of life but people who do not abide with the law simply have to learn that this cannot be accepted. 
INTERVIEW ENDS.

What I would have said if asked this question:

"The topics of debate should be as follows:

 1) How Europeans managed to get themselves into this situation in the first place. (It was feminism causing the European birth rate to decline that caused the labour shortage making immigrant labour so attractive to governments of senescent and shrinking populations afraid of alienating the female vote by telling women to have more babies earlier and bring them up properly as stay at home wives. The illegitimate offspring of single mothers entering the educational system would inevitably lower standards of education and behaviour making the next generation of indigenous labour less attractive but immigrant labour more attractive as employees to German businesses. A generous welfare state is also a disincentive to work.) The Pill, the Sexual Revolution and abortions- all may share some blame for our dependency on immigration.

 2) Where these migrant/refugee swarms came from. They are of course from the countries that NATO so blithely bombed at the behest of the Americans. Even as Hitler plotted to expel the Jews from Germany, he had in mind somewhere to send them - Madagascar. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan 
Incompetent and short-sighted European governments bombing Syria never even considered for a moment where those escaping their bombing would go - to Europe, as it turned out. The Cost Germany Is Paying For Washington’s Wars

3) If we were a proper dictatorship, our benign dictator would have made the women have enough legitimate children younger and made the proles work, without giving a stuff about their so-called human rights. If this had happened, there would be no need for immigrant labour. Anti-immigration parties should tell their supporters exactly what they have to do if they want to solve the problem: abolish the welfare state, marry earlier, have more children and abolish all anti-discrimination pro-feminist legislation."

 Do you just get the feeling that my suggestions will not be acknowledged, let alone discussed in mainstream media?

Do you think ISIS would just let anyone come into their country, molest their women and then let an idiotic Muslim woman who thinks she is a feminist witter on about Islamic State's national identity not being sufficiently inclusive to the kuffar, eh, eh, eh?


at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, 6 December 2015

Mishal Husain: "bombing Syria sounds more about image than what we can achieve"



MPs voted this week to authorize British forces joining airstrikes against Islamic State forces in Syria. General Sir Simon Mayall is former defence advisor to the government on the Middle East and the Prime Minister’s security envoy to Iraq during first half of 2015; Aimen Dean is a former al-Qaeda member who switched to work for MI5 and MI6 in 1998.

Mayall: "A huge demographic bulge of young people" [in the Middle East while the West ages] - demographics is destiny. They have plenty of angry young men prepared to sacrifice life and limb, turbo-charged by their religion.

So this is what ISIS have.

What have we got? Imbeciles in government, and imbecilic senescent voters in denial who don't marry, don't have legitimate children or don't bring up whatever children they have properly, who refuse to sacrifice anything or take any risks unquestioningly swallowing the absurdities the government stuffs down their unresisting throats to justify their atrocities while pretending to believe that Muslims become terrorists for no particular reason other than they are Muslim.

Dean: "ISIS is a symptom, not the cause."

Husain: "This sounds more about image than actually what we can achieve" in response to Mayall saying Britain should "be there" because it is a permanent P5 member, we have a UN Resolution blah blah".

So this is why our government bombs people, is it? And you are OK with this, are you?

We deserve what's coming to us, for bombing people for image reasons and thinking this right and proper while pretending to be horrified and outraged that ISIS are gunning for us.

https://t.co/HgAQI6s7C8 from 1:36


General Wesley Clark: The US will attack 7 countries in 5 years
at 1 comment:
Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, 11 October 2015

Putin Tells Everyone Exactly Who Created ISIS

at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, 6 October 2015

Paul Craig Roberts on the Syrian Crisis


at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, 8 September 2015

British values of the rule of law and assassinating whomever wherever whenever

Under UK law you can be an "immediate threat" even if what you planned but didn't do was in LONDON in summer, as you are assassinated in August in SYRIA.

This was the rule of law that the now silenced Anjem Choudary was mocking. God's laws do not change because He does not keep making mistakes and try to cover up for them by changing them all the time to confuse people until no one knows what the law really is any more, not even the judges. The rules of natural justice require that the consequences of breaking a law to be accessible and foreseeable.

But if you can be considered an "immediate threat" even if the time for the terrorism you were alleged to have been plotting in London has come and gone and was not even committed justifies your assassination in Syria, then this rule of law is arguably neither accessible nor foreseeable.

Cameron was so anxious to crow about these the assassination of Ruhul Amin and Reyaad Khan that he forgot about the so-called government-defined British values of "the rule of law".

If there is a rule of law then that rule would be clear. If you are following it, you would have to stick to it, not vary the application and interpretation of it to fit in with what you wish to do while refusing to give coherent and verifiable reasons. This really does not suggest that the rule of law is being followed.

This war between Islam and the West is an ideological war, therefore some demonstration of moral superiority would be necessary in order to win hearts and minds, as well as force of arms. It does not appear that Western leaders understand this. While even ISIS terrorists say they follow the rules of their holy book, Western leaders seem determined to follow no particular rule or interpretation of any law except what suits them, and nothing is more guaranteed to bring your law into contempt than doing precisely this. The psychopath is not merely a deranged murderer as is commonly supposed, but someone who is without conscience or compassion for the people he hurts, without principles, and who will commit any crime if he thinks he can get way with it according to his mood of the moment. This would be the Western politician.

It was David Cameron who displayed his ignorance of the rule of law on the David Letterman Show when he couldn't answer what Magna Carta meant in English. I am sure it was not only the English who thought putting down promises you never intend to keep on a piece of paper with your signature was a very useful device in politics to trick people into supporting you and to mess your enemies around. These days it is called the manifesto.

If liberals no longer believe in liberalism and the fundamental principles of freedom of belief, contract, association and expression as well as the rule of law, what do they still believe in? Liberalism these days seems synonymous with sexual licence, an exaggerated respect for the slut and gay marriage under a dysfunctional system of government called representative democracy. Are we sure that these are the Western moral values that we want to be seen to be defending to the death, if at all, once the dust of history has settled?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34181475


If this were done, what conclusions can the world reasonably reach about how the British government adheres to its declared British values of the rule of law?

The idiot politicians who keep wittering on about winning hearts and minds remain clueless about what is actually necessary to win the propaganda war. This can only be done credibly by showing moral superiority and moral superiority cannot be credibly displayed when you break your own rules, and actively go against your own principles, can it?
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,

Saturday, 27 September 2014

Ken O'Keefe on bombing Syria


The one-sided and short version

The full version with Lawrence Korb also speaking

at No comments:
Labels: , ,

Wednesday, 5 February 2014

It is an honour to be remembered by Louise Mensch






I think this is unbeatable, as far as selfish narcissistic bitches go.  Do not forget that our pussywhipped uxorious male politicians have wives who are these selfish narcissistic bitches and will do their every bidding. They are also terrified that their wives would divorce them while they are in office too.

It happened to Putin in Russia, so we can't expect narcissistic malicious selfish British women to hold back for either party or country, because they just wouldn't get it or wouldn't care even if they did.  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22817368

David Cameron's wife Samantha is the 'driving force’ behind gay marriage
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9827638/David-Camerons-wife-Samantha-is-the-driving-force-behind-gay-marriage.html

Syria: Samantha Cameron 'Pushing For Action'
http://news.sky.com/story/1115922/syria-samantha-cameron-pushing-for-action

MPs have a register of interests.  Perhaps it is high time that PM as well as MPs also have a register of their wives' political interests if we are not to be led by the nose to doom and damnation by these irresponsible and immoral selfish narcissistic women.





at 1 comment:
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, 30 January 2014

Western hypocrisy on Syria




at No comments:
Labels: , ,

Wednesday, 9 October 2013

Was it Diane Abbott or Nick Griffin who was more responsible for preventing military strikes on Syria?

http://news.sky.com/story/1151770/diane-abbott-sacked-in-milibands-reshuffle

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/aug/27/diane-abbott-labour-syria
Diane Abbott could quit if Labour backs strikes on Syria
David Cameron expected to have enough backing to win Thursday's emergency vote on using force

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/08/labour-set-whip-mps-over-syria-diane-abbott-warns-she-could-resign
Labour set to whip MPs over Syria as Diane Abbott warns she could resign
Shadow public health minister says intervention "would put me in a very difficult position" as Labour signals it will whip MPs in support of Miliband's stance.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/aug/27/diane-abbott-syria-intervention-labour
Diane Abbott voices opposition to Syria intervention
Shadow public health minister says she would be in 'very difficult position' if Labour backs military strikes

http://m.jamaicaobserver.com/mobile/columns/Implications-of-the-British-Parliament-s-Syria-vote_14977675
Implications of the British Parliament's Syria vote by Diane Abbott herself.

Note how this modest woman did not even mention how she dug her heels in over the bombing of Syria.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/syria-how-your-mp-vote-2238483

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23942041
BNP's Nick Griffin claims he 'influenced' Syria vote

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsIVJq14doo

I think it was Diane Abbott.

She is the only politician left who still stands up for principle and says what she believes to be the truth.  In the corrupt political environment we have her sacking was inevitable.

at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Sunday, 1 September 2013

The Bishop of Bradford's grammar and the Syrian Question

http://nickbaines.wordpress.com/2013/09/01/something-must-be-done/

It is a cry that has gone up many times in the last couple of weeks. Something must be done about Syria. But, what exactly… and to what end?
  • Something to save the lives of innocent children?
  • Something to save the lives of innocent children from chemical attack?
  • Something to save the lives of innocent children from any form of violent attack?
  • Something to save the lives of innocent children from a future shaped by sectarian hatred, rage and revenge?

You have to laugh at the grammar of the Bishop of Bradford who wrote this egregious piece of idiocy.

If you ever you wanted an example of inane prattling, you can find no finer example than this.  

All properly formed sentences and questions would have a subject and a verb, but the bishop himself does not know this.   

What is he trying to say?

Fuck knows.  

What is he actually doing?

Wringing his hands and show to all and sundry that his wringing his hands like the good liberal he is.   

Being a nationalist, my guiding principles are:

  1. to only embark on a course of action that serves the long term national interest
  2. to refrain from embarking on any course of action that is detrimental to the long term national interest

The Bishop of Bradford only cares to display his liberal credentials, but the average voter cares nothing about his liberal credentials or about UK foreign policy because these matters are too abstract and far-removed from the concerns of the ordinary voter who only cares about the price of beer, milk, bread and other such mundane matters.

They might be prevailed upon to give a stuff or two about women and children if the women and children concerned are British, or European, or Western, but these women and children are Muslim, and we all know that the average non-Muslim Briton does not much care for Muslims.      

Ordinary voters suspect that the British political establishment is in thrall to Israel and her allies and/or Western arms manufacturers whose business will be improved when the government buys and uses armaments on its new and latest victims.  They assumed that there would be enough lobby fodder MPs to approve Cameron's warmongering, but were very pleasantly surprised.   

This was thanks to Diane Abbott, who threatened to resign if Ed Miliband rubber-stamped Cameron's proposal to romp into yet another war of liberal interventionism.   

All it takes is a few good men and women in Parliament capable of logical thought and moral reasoning to dig their heels in.   

Sadly, for the Church, it is now stuffed with second rate female vicars and infested by liberalism, feminism and third rate minds.  

Montaigne:

"Grammar is the logic of language."

"The greater part of world's problems is due to questions of grammar."  [When you let women have too much power, the study of grammar will be neglected, and the ability to reason logically will be arrested. Feminine hypocrisy and cowardice will be rewarded while masculine courage and truth punished.  These are all signs of a matriarchy, and the most conclusive sign of a matriarchy is when the institution of marriage has been desecrated with the connivance of those who are supposed to maintain the morals of the people ie the Church.]
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, 29 August 2013

Diane Abbott courageous and correct in threatening to resign if Miliband endorses military strikes against Syria

All hail Diane Abbott for threatening to resign if Miliband endorsed Cameron's plan for military strikes against Syria without UN Security Council sanction!

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/08/labour-set-whip-mps-over-syria-diane-abbott-warns-she-could-resign

I now know I voted for the best candidate when I voted for her during the Labour leadership elections when I was a member.

Diane Abbott - the best Labour leader we never had?  

Diane Abbott as leader - Lord Mandelson as its Director of Communications, under my advice and Lord Glasman's http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/apr/24/blue-labour-maurice-glasman - wouldn't that be just wonderful?
at No comments:
Labels: , ,

Wednesday, 28 August 2013

Syria: the unanswerable question

How is attacking Syria in the national interest?


Should the Conservative Party adopt the principles Claire Khaw recommends? · 24 like this.
6 hours ago near London · 
  • "The Conservative Party supports, first and foremost, the principle of free speech and of promoting and conserving the long-term national interest. The national interest includes solvency, social stability through the promotion of the institution of marriage between a man and a woman, stable prices through fiscal prudence as well as the maintenance of standards of morality and education that are considered respectable and enviable by other nations and which are maintained from one generation to the next."

    Sadly, the Conservative Party has no principles it would care to share with us.  Those who have noticed do not care or are overwhelmed by apathy and incomprehension as to the nature and purpose of having political principles.

at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Monday, 15 July 2013

Why doesn't Andrew Bridgen get on with the job of collecting his 46 signatures to save the country from SamCam?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2363955/Samantha-Cameron-pushing-Prime-Minister-to-end-bloodshed-Syria-defence-chiefs-warn-arming-rebels.html
Why is this unelected woman influencing UK foreign policy?

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/article3816483.ece

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9827638/David-Camerons-wife-Samantha-is-the-driving-force-behind-gay-marriage.html
Why is this unelected woman proposing social policy that would fundamentally change the way the British relate to each other sexually?

Why do the British allow themselves to be governed by someone who is clearly pussywhipped?

http://storify.com/1partyst8/british-prime-minister-pussywhipped-big-time

Silly question: because the British are stupid, obviously, and it may be catching.

http://www.christian.org.uk/news/us-boy-6-wins-right-to-use-girls-toilets-at-school/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+christianinstitute+%28The+Christian+Institute%29 is the sort of shit we are now getting in our demented matriarchy, but nobody cares.  Most people don't care because most people are stupid.

Soon there will be enough transgender people to make all toilets gender neutral.  I can imagine how awful it must be for transgender people every time they need to use a public toilet.  Strange looks and threats all the time, probably.  This means gay men can no longer cottage each other in peace and women will be RAPED silly by men who will have the right to use their toilets.

It is just SHIT living in a nation of stupid cunts, I can tell you, and I am sick of it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/06/09/tory-mp-andrew-bridgen-says-david-cameron-should-quit_n_3410483.html
How many signatures has Andrew Bridgen got now?

Does he want a bit of help from me?
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,

Saturday, 11 August 2012

How China and Russia could end Western hegemony once and for all on Monday 13 August

Dump the Dollar and the Euro ALL AT ONCE.  It is cheaper than war.   

I have really had enough of the disgraceful and disgusting foreign policy of the British government and their NATO partners in crime, who are the poodles of Israel.

What they are doing in Syria is beyond belief and beyond contempt.   Only insanity can be an excuse.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/10/britain-aid-syrian-opposition-groups

Britain to give £5m aid to Syrian opposition groups




002.190
YUSUFALI: Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.
PICKTHAL: Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors.
SHAKIR: And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits.

022.039
YUSUFALI: To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid;-
PICKTHAL: Sanction is given unto those who fight because they have been wronged; and Allah is indeed Able to give them victory;
SHAKIR: Permission (to fight) is given to those upon whom war is made because they are oppressed, and most surely Allah is well able to assist them;

It can be seen that NATO is transgressing these verses.  In fact, they regularly transgress these verses, and recent examples are Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and now Syria.  Iran will be next.

How can it be moral to ruin people's lives, have them kill each other and then invade them ... for WHAT?  Just so they can isolate Iran so they can rob them of their oil?

Do our political classes even know why they are doing what they are doing and why they are doing it?  It certainly ain't for the Syrians.  It is that hypocritical claim which is so SICKENING.

Russia and China could easily put a stop to this when the markets open on Monday.   
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Mark Parker entertains doubts

26:00  Psyop is just another word for state propaganda. 35:39 @DigitalGnosis ​​I dont believe Homer was a person Homer was a pagan. There wi...