Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > New World Order / Global Government

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 26-04-2018, 09:53 PM   #341
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default

How Britain engaged in a covert operation to overthrow Assad
#SyriaWar
Starting just months after the 2011 uprising, UK policy has helped to prolong and radicalise Syria’s devastating war
Mark Curtis
Wednesday 25 April 2018 10:40 UTC
Wednesday 25 April 2018 13:10 UTC

Some commentators in the British mainstream media believe the UK has "done nothing" in the war in Syria and lament the failure to help stop it.

In fact, Britain has engaged in a covert operation with allies to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad for more than six years, and this policy has helped prolong and radicalise the terrible war. It is British action, not inaction, that is the biggest problem with government policy towards Syria. The full story of this covert operation may take years to emerge, but some elements of it can already be pieced together.
Deepening control of the Middle East

UK covert operations appear to have begun in late 2011, a few months after popular demonstrations started challenging the Syrian regime in March of that year. Already repressive, Assad's regime resorted to violence to try to quell the protests, routinely firing into crowds, detaining thousands and subjecting many to torture.

As the number of dead at the hands of the regime mounted, so did opposition to it. The UK and its allies spotted an opportunity, which they had long been looking for, to remove an independent, nationalist regime in the region and deepen their overall control of the Middle East.

Foreign Secretary William Hague planned to establish an interim government in northern Syria and to make Syria’s opposition forces 'come together' on the ground, with the aim of toppling Assad

Qatar began shipping arms to opposition groups in Syria with US approval in spring 2011, and within weeks, the Obama administration was receiving reports that they were going to militant groups. By November, former CIA officer Philip Giraldi wrote that "unmarked NATO warplanes" were arriving in Turkey, delivering weapons and 600 fighters from Libya in support of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), a group of Syrian army deserters.

Britain's MI6 and French special forces were reportedly assisting the Syrian fighters and assessing their training, weapons and communications needs while the CIA provided communications equipment and intelligence.

Thus, David Cameron's government began covert action in Syria while having just overthrown Muammar Gaddafi in Libya, also working alongside Islamists. Some of the Libyan militants joining the Syrian insurgency were reportedly trained by British, French or US forces in Libya to fight Gaddafi. Some would later join the Islamic State (IS) or al-Qaeda's affiliate in Syria, al-Nusra, which became the most powerful Syrian rebel group.
The 'rat line' of weapons

Britain became involved in the "rat line" of weapons delivered from Libya to Syria via southern Turkey, which was authorised in early 2012 following a secret agreement between the US and Turkey. Revealed by journalist Seymour Hersh, the project was funded by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar while "the CIA, with the support of MI6, was responsible for getting arms from Gaddafi’s arsenals into Syria".

The operation was not disclosed to US congressional intelligence committees as required by US law, and "the involvement of MI6 enabled the CIA to evade the law by classifying the mission as a liaison operation".

Hersh noted that "many of those in Syria who ultimately received the weapons were jihadists", some affiliated with al-Qaeda. Indeed, it is believed that Qatar – which was the UK's key ally in overthrowing Gaddafi and was now repeating its role in Syria – was pouring weapons and cash into Nusra. The Telegraph reported on a Middle Eastern diplomat saying that Qatar is responsible for Nusra "having money and weapons and everything they need".
read on here http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns...sad-1437573498
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2018, 10:07 PM   #342
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default

What the Media Won't Tell You About Iran

__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
Likes: (1)
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2018, 07:14 PM   #343
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default

Manchester University Develops Israeli Drone Technology, Despite Growing Student Opposition

__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2018, 06:18 PM   #344
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default



Iran nuclear deal - live updates: Trump reportedly set to pave way for US withdrawal from agreement
European leaders warn the US pulling out of agreement would scupper deal and undo years of work

Clark Mindock, Samuel Osborne, Chris Stevenson New York
@ClarkMindock
Tuesday 8 May 2018 18:59 BST



Donald Trump is preparing to announce to the world whether he plans to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal.

The US president has consistently threatened to leave the 2015 deal because it does not address Tehran's ballistic missile programme or its wars in Syria and Yemen.

European leaders warn such an outcome would scupper the deal and undo years of work, with France's President Emmanuel Macron speaking with Mr Trump via phone during the morning. Mr Trump is said to have told Mr Macron that he is planning on announcing the withdrawal of the US from the deal, according to The New York Times.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a8341146.html
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2018, 10:21 PM   #345
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default

Here Are The Official State Censorship Documents Relating To The Skripal Affair
10th May 2018 / United Kingdom
By TruePublica: Last week we reported that a D-notice (Defence and Security Media Advisory Notice) used by the British state to censor the publication of potentially damaging news stories had been formally issued to the mainstream media to withhold publication of the British ex-spy deeply involved in the Skripal/Novichok affair.

We revealed that Channel4 journalists had been issued these D-notices, which were in respect of a former British intelligence officer called Pablo Miller. Miller was an associate of Christopher Steele, first in espionage operations in Russia and more recently in the activities of Steele’s private intelligence firm, Orbis Business Intelligence.

Steele was responsible for compiling the Trump–Russia dossier, comprising 17 memos written in 2016 alleging misconduct and conspiracy between Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and the Putin administration. The dossier paid for by the Democratic Party, claimed that Trump was compromised by evidence of his sexual proclivities in Russia’s possession. Steele was the subject of an earlier (unsuccessful) D-notice, which attempted to keep his identity as the author of the dossier a secret.

If Miller and, by extension, Skripal himself were somehow involved in Orbis’ work on the highly-suspect Steele–Trump dossier, alongside representatives of British and possibly US intelligence, then all manner of motivations can be suggested for an attack on the ex-Russian spy and British double agent by forces other than Russia’s intelligence service, the FSB.
Get Briefed, Get Weekly Intelligence Reports - Essential Weekend Reading - Safe Subscribe

In other words, the state attempted to clear up the mess it had already made of the Trump dossier, since proven to have made many false assertions, particularly of collusion with senior Russian officials and links to ex-Russian double agent Sergei Skripal.

Yesterday, spinwatch.org revealed that the Skripal affair has resulted in the issuing of not one but two ‘D-Notices’ to the British mainstream media, which are marked ‘private and confidential’. They also disclose the contents of both notices, which have been obtained from a reliable source.

Here is the first one dated 7th March lifted straight from the powerbase website:

From: DSMA Secretary

Date: 7 March 2018

Subject: URGENT FOR ALL EDITORS – DEFENCE AND SECURITY MEDIA ADVISORY (DSMA) NOTICE

Private and Confidential: Not for Publication, Broadcast or for use on Social Media TO ALL EDITORS The issue surrounding the identity of a former MI6 informer, Sergei Skripal, is already widely available in the public domain. However, the identifies of intelligence agency personnel associated with Sergei Skripal are not yet widely available in the public domain. The provisions of DSMA Notice 05 therefore apply to these identities. DSMA Notice 05 inter alia advises editors against the:

‘inadvertent disclosure of Sensitive Personnel Information (SPI) that reveals the identity, location or contact details of personnel (and their family members) who have security, intelligence and/or counter-terrorist backgrounds, including members of the UK Security and Intelligence Agencies, MOD and Specials Forces.’ The full text of DSMA notice 05 can be found on the DSMA website.

If any editor is currently considering publication of such material, may I ask you to seek my advice before doing so?

Please do call or email me if you have any questions or need further clarification.

I would be grateful were the Press Association and Society of Editors to promulgate this notice through their own networks.

Thank you,

Yours sincerely,

John Alexander

Group Captain John Alexander | Second Deputy Secretary | Defence and Security Media Advisory Committee



7th March D-notice can be viewed HERE refers to “the identities of intelligence agency personnel associated with Sergei Skripal not yet widely available in the public domain.”

The 14th March D-notice can be viewed HERE and specifically focuses on “reactions from the Russian authorities” and the publication of Sensitive Personal Information (such as naming the ex-spook in question) or identify personnel who work in sensitive positions.

The use of the word ‘advisory’ is cleverly inserted to give a false impression that this notice is not state censorship. It is indeed nothing less than state censorship.

The mainstream media are ‘advised’ not to publish and if they do there will be consequences. Those consequences include being left out of government and agency press releases, attendance at meetings, official announcements and the like. In other words, complete exclusion alongside other measures to ensure compliance.

As Spinwatch says: “However, the DSMA-Notices (as they are now officially called) are one of the miracles of British state censorship. They are a mechanism whereby the British state simply ‘advises’ the mainstream media what not to publish, in ‘notices’ with no legal force. The media then voluntarily comply.”
http://truepublica.org.uk/united-kin...kripal-affair/
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate

Last edited by iamawaveofthesea; 11-05-2018 at 10:22 PM.
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-05-2018, 06:19 PM   #346
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default

The War You Don’t See

John Pilgers hard hitting documentary looking at how the corporate media manages the perception of the public

https://vimeo.com/67739294
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-05-2018, 08:11 PM   #347
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default

The race to space

I saw a news article recently about how richard branson is training to be an astronaut as part of his business venture to take super wealthy tourists to space. Apparently he is competing with rival ventures by both the billionaire elon musk and the uber wealthy owner of amazon jeff bezos

These three billionaires are all trying to create a space tourism business

This leaves me wondering as the elites tell us that there is terrible 'climate change' due to the burning of fossil fuels and that we must all swap our light bulbs for toxic 'energy saving' ones that contain mercury how exactly these guys would be allowed to fire rockets into space for tourism?

How much fuel would be burned in a rocket launch and how much CO2 would be created in that process? I dread to think
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate

Last edited by iamawaveofthesea; 28-05-2018 at 08:11 PM.
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2018, 07:38 PM   #348
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default

Vietnam demands Monsanto compensate Agent Orange victims after US cancer ruling precedent
Published: August 25, 2018
Source: RT

Following the unprecedented $289mn verdict against Monsanto in California, Hanoi is seeking justice for victims of exposure to the Agent Orange – the notorious chemical the firm supplied to the US military during the Vietnam War.

After a San Francisco jury proved Monsanto not invincible and ordered the chemical giant to pay $289 million to a school worker who argued he got terminal cancer after using its Roundup herbicide, Vietnam has also demanded compensation from the St. Louis-based company.

“The verdict serves as a legal precedent which refutes previous claims that the herbicides made by Monsanto and other chemical corporations in the US and provided for the US army in the war are harmless,” deputy foreign ministry spokesperson Nguyen Phuong Tra said Thursday. “Vietnam has suffered tremendous consequences from the war, especially with regard to the lasting and devastating effects of toxic chemicals, including Agent Orange.”

READ MORE: Jury orders Monsanto to pay California man $289mn in ‘probably carcinogenic’ Roundup trial

Around three million people in Vietnam were exposed to Agent Orange during a brutal chemical warfare campaign between 1961 and 1971, in which 12 million gallons of herbicide produced by Monsanto Corporation, among others, were dropped over the jungle to defoliate it. Because of such a high level of exposure to dioxin, a byproduct found in Agent Orange, millions of Vietnamese continue to suffer health conditions, often resulting in deformities which are passed through gene mutations to future generations
https://www.blacklistednews.com/arti...er-ruling.html
.
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-08-2018, 10:58 PM   #349
alisa2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Land of Oz
Posts: 5,129
Likes: 373 (303 Posts)
Default :)



So true:

7:50 “You don't play the game. The game is done to you—inflicted on you. You have no control over the rules of the game or the pieces on the board. You are just a humble pon waiting for the important game pieces to do what they will with you. They do what they like and you do what you don't like and that's the game you've been forced to participate in.”

Last edited by alisa2; 30-08-2018 at 04:56 PM.
alisa2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 12:03 PM   #350
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default

Declassified docs reveal how Pentagon aimed to nuke USSR and China into oblivion
Published time: 2 Sep, 2018 09:41
Edited time: 3 Sep, 2018 07:39

Plans for a nuclear war devised by the US Army in the 1960s considered decimating the Soviet Union and China by destroying their industrial potential and wiping out the bulk of their populations, newly declassified documents show.

A review of the US general nuclear war plan by the Joint Staff in 1964, which was recently published by George Washington University’s National Security Archive project, shows how the Pentagon studied options “to destroy the USSR and China as viable societies.”

The review, conducted two years after the Cuban Missile Crisis, devises the destruction of the Soviet Union “as a viable society” by annihilating 70 percent of its industrial floor space during pre-emptive and retaliatory nuclear strikes.

A similar goal is tweaked for China, given its more agrarian-based economy at the time. According to the plan, the US would wipe out 30 major Chinese cities, killing off 30 percent of the nation’s urban population and halving its industrial capabilities. The successful execution of the large-scale nuclear assault would ensure that China “would no longer be a viable nation,” the review reads.

The Joint Staff had proposed to use the “population loss as the primary yardstick for effectiveness in destroying the enemy society with only collateral attention to industrial damage.” This “alarming” idea meant that, as long as urban workers and managers were killed, the actual damage to industrial targets “might not be as important,” the George Washington University researchers said.

The 1964 plan doesn’t specify the anticipated enemy casualty levels, but – as the researchers note – an earlier estimate from 1961 projected that a US attack would kill 71 percent of the residents in major Soviet urban centers and 53 percent of residents in Chinese ones. Likewise, the 1962 estimate predicted the death of 70 million Soviet citizens during a “no-warning US strike” on military and urban-industrial targets.
https://www.rt.com/news/437432-us-de...nuclear-plans/
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2018, 12:14 PM   #351
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default

Israel threatens to use nuclear weapons to ‘wipe out’ its enemies
August 31, 2018 at 11:27 am |
Published in: Asia & Americas, Iran, Israel, Middle East, News, Palestine, US

Standing next to a secretive Israeli atomic reactor earlier in the week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu threatened to “wipe out” his enemies. In a speech that many will see as the Jewish state breaking its long silence over the possession of nuclear weapons, the Likud leader warned that it has the means to destroy its enemies.

“Those who threaten to wipe us out put themselves in a similar danger, and in any event will not achieve their goal,” he said on Wednesday during a ceremony to rename the complex, near the desert town of Dimona. The site has long been suspected to be the location where Israel has been developing nuclear weapons.

Iran hit back by describing Netanyahu as a “warmonger”. The threat “atomic annihilation” against the Islamic Republic was denounced as “beyond shameless in the gall”.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20...t-its-enemies/
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2018, 08:26 PM   #352
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default

__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2018, 08:30 PM   #353
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default

BOMBSHELL Documents Expose The Secret Lie That Started the Afghan War

__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2018, 05:11 PM   #354
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default

Target Syria
Will a new war be the October Surprise?
Philip Giraldi • September 11, 2018

t’s official. The Syrian Army assisted by Russian air support is closing in on the last major pocket of terrorists remaining in the country in the province of Idlib near Aleppo. The United States, which has trained and armed some of the trapped gunmen and even as recently as a year ago described the province as “al-Qaeda’s largest safe haven since 9/11,” has perhaps predictably warned Syria off. The White House initially threatened a harsh reaction if the Bashar al-Assad government were to employ any chemical weapons in its final attack, setting the stage for the terrorists themselves to carry out a false flag operation blamed on Damascus that would bring with it a brutal response against the regime and its armed forces by the U.S., Britain and France.

And there is the usual hypocrisy over long term objectives. President Donald Trump said in April that “it’s time” to bring American troops home from Syria -once the jihadists of Islamic State have been definitively defeated. But now that that objective is in sight, there has to be some question about who is actually determining the policies that come out of the White House, which is reported to be in more than usual disarray due to the appearance last week of the New York Times anonymous op-ed describing a “resistance” movement within the West Wing that has been deliberately undermining and sometimes ignoring the president to further Establishment/Deep State friendly policies. The op-ed, perhaps by no coincidence whatsoever, appeared one week before the release of the new book by Bob Woodward Fear: Trump in the White House, which has a similar tale to tell and came out on Amazon today.

The book and op-ed mesh nicely in describing how Donald Trump is a walking disaster who is deliberately circumvented by his staff. One section of the op-ed is particularly telling and suggestive of neocon foreign policy, describing how the White House staff has succeeded in “[calling out] countries like Russia…for meddling and [having them] punished accordingly” in spite of the president’s desire for détente. It then goes on to elaborate on Russia and Trump, describing how “…the president was reluctant to expel so many of Mr. Putin’s spies as punishment for the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain. He complained for weeks about senior staff members letting him get boxed into further confrontation with Russia, and he expressed frustration that the United States continued to impose sanctions on the country for its malign behavior. But the national security team knew better – such actions had to be taken to hold Moscow accountable.”

If the op-ed and Woodward book are in any way accurate, one has to ask “Whose policy? An elected president or a cabal of disgruntled staffers who might well identify as neoconservatives?”
And there is the usual hypocrisy over long term objectives. President Donald Trump said in April that “it’s time” to bring American troops home from Syria -once the jihadists of Islamic State have been definitively defeated. But now that that objective is in sight, there has to be some question about who is actually determining the policies that come out of the White House, which is reported to be in more than usual disarray due to the appearance last week of the New York Times anonymous op-ed describing a “resistance” movement within the West Wing that has been deliberately undermining and sometimes ignoring the president to further Establishment/Deep State friendly policies. The op-ed, perhaps by no coincidence whatsoever, appeared one week before the release of the new book by Bob Woodward Fear: Trump in the White House, which has a similar tale to tell and came out on Amazon today.

The book and op-ed mesh nicely in describing how Donald Trump is a walking disaster who is deliberately circumvented by his staff. One section of the op-ed is particularly telling and suggestive of neocon foreign policy, describing how the White House staff has succeeded in “[calling out] countries like Russia…for meddling and [having them] punished accordingly” in spite of the president’s desire for détente. It then goes on to elaborate on Russia and Trump, describing how “…the president was reluctant to expel so many of Mr. Putin’s spies as punishment for the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain. He complained for weeks about senior staff members letting him get boxed into further confrontation with Russia, and he expressed frustration that the United States continued to impose sanctions on the country for its malign behavior. But the national security team knew better – such actions had to be taken to hold Moscow accountable.”

If the op-ed and Woodward book are in any way accurate, one has to ask “Whose policy? An elected president or a cabal of disgruntled staffers who might well identify as neoconservatives?”
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2018, 05:17 PM   #355
st jimmy
Senior Member
 
st jimmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 2,078
Likes: 1,383 (820 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by iamawaveofthesea View Post
Target Syria
It aren't only Britain, the US and Israel that target Syria...

Between May 2015 and spring 2018 the government of the Netherlands supported 22 armed “moderate groups” in Syria. Which “freedom fighters” received help remained secret, but it has since been found out that one of these “moderate groups” is Jahbat al-Shamiya.
Last spring, the Dutch government suddenly stopped supporting Syrian “rebels” who were fighting against Syrian President Assad.

In March 2017, the Dutch court sentenced Driss M. (42) to 3 years in prison, of which 1 year conditional, because he had joined Jahbat al-Shamiya in 2015 and prepared for the Jihad to kill people.
In 2018, Jahbat al-Shamiya fighters fought with the Turkish army in the attack on Syrian-Kurdish militias in the North Syrian region of Afrin. The Dutch state propaganda “criticised” the offensive by Turkey.

Israel’s favourite Dutch politician Geert Wilders got the most attention in the press. Wilders said: “The Dutch government supports terrorists abroad and lets them roam freely inland” and proposed to rename the cabinet “Willem-Alexander I” to "Terror I'.

The Netherlands has allocated over $80 million to Syrian opposition groups (including the White Helmets).
The Dutch state propaganda has stressed that these “moderate rebels” didn’t receive weapons, but instead more than 25 million Euros worth of trucks (313), communication equipment, uniforms, food, medicines, tents and training. The trucks and communication equipment were of course used in combat, but never mind the facts: https://sputniknews.com/europe/20180...ce-terrorists/

This really shows that today’s “moderate rebels” are tomorrow’s “extremist terrorists”.
This also shows that the Dutch courts are as corrupt as you can get. The “little” Muslim, of which it has not even been claimed that he killed anybody, gets sentenced to 2 years in prison, while the responsible government officials won’t get any punishment (let alone our head of state King Willem-Alexander).
The Minister, who is constitutionally responsible but has nothing to say over his “ministry”, might make some public apology (written by officials in his “ministry”).
__________________
Do NOT ever read my posts.
Google and Yahoo wouldn’t block them without a very good reason: https://forum.davidicke.com/showthre...post1062977278
Likes: (1)
st jimmy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2018, 04:43 PM   #356
alisa2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Land of Oz
Posts: 5,129
Likes: 373 (303 Posts)
Default What arrogance

The United States threatens the International Criminal Court (ICC) because they want to investigate U.S. war crimes.

https://www.facebook.com/ajplusengli...3936698468/U.S.

Mike Vainio said..."This only proves that the United States has committed horrible crimes against humanity not only in Afghanistan but all over the world...

Gert Vogalaar said..."Both the US and Israel have committed serious war crimes. They wiped it under the carpet and they are afraid of anybody investigating them. They are so used to impunity."

Last edited by alisa2; 12-09-2018 at 05:20 PM.
alisa2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-09-2018, 03:28 PM   #357
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default

‘Don’t test us’: Haley threatens US strikes over any attack on Syria’s Idlib
Published time: 12 Sep, 2018 23:31
Edited time: 13 Sep, 2018 14:06

Any attack on Syria’s Idlib province is going to be “dealt with,” US ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley warned, as Washington seeks to stop the Russian-backed Syrian army from retaking the last remaining jihadist stronghold.

The US has struck Syria twice after claims of chemical weapons use by the government in Damascus, Haley said on Wednesday in a Fox News interview.

“Don’t test us again,” she said, addressing the Syrian government and its allies Russia and Iran.
https://www.rt.com/usa/438324-nikki-...ampaign=chrome
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-09-2018, 03:47 PM   #358
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default

Serial numbers of missile that downed MH17 show it was produced in 1986, owned by Ukraine - Russia
Published time: 17 Sep, 2018 09:05
Edited time: 17 Sep, 2018 14:42

The serial numbers found on debris of the Buk missile which downed Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine show it was produced in 1986, the Russian military said. The projectile was owned by Ukraine, they added.

There are two serial numbers found on fragments of the missile, which shot down the passenger airliner in June 2014 according to an international team of investigators led by the Netherlands. The numbers were marked on the engine and the nozzle of the missile.

The Russian military on Monday said they had traced them to a missile which had the producer serial number 8868720.
https://www.rt.com/news/438596-mh17-...sian-briefing/
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-10-2018, 10:10 AM   #359
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default

Gaddafi and Libya - Deep State tactics 101
Jamie Busby
53 minutes ago

On June 7th 1942, Muammar Al-Qaddafi was born in a tent near Sirte, Libya. He was also raised in a tent, as a Bedouin. He joined the military in 1961 and quickly rose through the ranks. On September 1st 1969, Qaddafi and a movement consisting of other young army officers overthrew King Idris. Qaddafi, who we may more commonly know as Gaddafi, had become ruler of Libya; He was 27 years old.

What follows is the truth about the significant events of his leadership, leading up to his demise at the hands of a mob on 20th October 2011. He was beaten and subsequently shot dead, much of it videoed and widely available on the Internet.

I will be quoting the major players of this "game" when possible as it speaks volumes.

David Cameron, while Prime Minister of Britain, said in the commons; "We must not tolerate this regime using military force against it's own people."

Another commentator on American TV declared "The only reason they're interested in Libya is about the oil. Do you think we'd be in Iraq if their major export was broccoli?"

Cameron was lying. The guy on American TV was on the right track, oil was of course involved but that's just half the story. The other half of that story being that it was about currency; Gaddafi planned to introduce the gold Dinar with the goal of it becoming a single African currency.

Dr. James Thring, an anti-war activist, explained; "As soon as you say you're going to change from the US dollar to something else [Dinar] you're going to be targeted... most African countries were keen on the idea."

During the late 1990's, Gaddafi called upon African and Muslim countries to join forces in order to create this new currency. The idea was that it would rival the Dollar and Euro; they would only sell oil and their other natural resources for gold Dinars.

The implications of this would alter the dynamics of world economics; a country's wealth would be determined by how much gold they had, not dollars.

At the time, Libya had 144 tons of gold. The UK had double that amount of gold but 10 times the population. Crucially, how much gold did the federal reserve in America have?...

In their own words; "The federal reserve does not own any gold at all. We have not owned gold since 1934."

At the time, a political analyst said the following regarding the federal reserve's little gold problem; "... any move like that [the Dinar] would certainly not be welcome by the power elite today who are responsible for controlling the world's central banks... that would certainly be something that would cause his [Gaddafi's] immediate dismissal... and the need for other reasons to be brought forth for removing him from power..."

"Other reasons"? Does this sound familiar? It should do. In 2000, Saddam Hussein announced that Iraqi oil would be traded in euros, not dollars. What followed? Sanctions plus an invasion to boot, based on the lies (other reasons) about WMDs. The real reason why was because America was desperately trying to prevent OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) from changing the currency of oil trading in all it's member countries to the euro.

America, quite literally, can't afford to let the petrodollar become obsolete.

So it began... First, Obama started the propaganda train with rumblings that Gaddafi was only maintaining power by use of mass violence on his people. He had lost his legitimacy, he should leave, NOW,etc... Then came the first wave of sanctions; Bank accounts and assets were frozen that belonged to Libya itself, Gaddafi, his family and senior regime officials.

Standard puppet master pressure techniques.

Then came the possibility of a no-fly zone over Libya, with David Cameron saying he would work with his allies with regards to this; he also refused to rule out the use of "military assets".

They were basically saying that Gaddafi was killing his own people and WE needed to help them. Nothing to do with the potential economic shift with regards to paying for Libyan and OPEC oil. Gaddafi was suddenly deemed to be a brutal tyrant, it was truly cosmic timing...

Does this ring a bell again? It's the same bell; this was the exact same pretext for Saddam Hussein and the invasion of Iraq. The New World Order were fooling us all over again.

Getting back to Gaddafi, the mainstream media told us how sanctions would increase the financial pressure on him and MSM also told us that 80% of Libya's oil fields were in rebel hands.

The BBC cranked up the propaganda by telling us how most of Libya had been taken over by anti-Gaddafi rebels. At the same time, Gaddafi was stating facts when he said the West only wanted to take action so it could seize control of Libya's oil.

He also warned of a power vacuum if he was removed which would be filled by Al-Qaeda, not Libyan rebels as we were told. It has been proved since that Al-Qaeda were indeed attempting to take parts of Libya at the time, the only thing stopping them dragging the region into chaos was Gaddafi and the support of his nation.

In March of 2011, Gaddafi gave a joint interview with "journalists" from the BBC, ABC news and The Sunday Times. They claimed they understood the region, to which Gaddafi scoffed. He even answers in English when asked about the so-called "rebels" by repeatedly telling them "it is Al-Qaeda".

It's clear America were backing Al-Qaeda... AGAIN. Bin Laden himself was not part of any formal group, until the Americans invented one for him. Al-Qaeda translates as "The Database", a network of controllable extremist "assets" used by the CIA to destabilise countries. It was initially created by the CIA (not Bin Laden) during the Russian-Afghan war in order to make sure Russia did not win. It worked, and it still does.

There is no evidence that Bin Laden ever referred to his or any other group as "Al-Qaeda" until after the 9/11 attacks; this was when he realised it was the term the Americans had given it.

In August 2011, around 600 prisoners were broken out of jail in Libya. They had been imprisoned by Gaddafi; they were all part of Al-Qaeda and they were now free.

And who did Obama and the UN support once fighting broke out between the escapees and Libyan forces?... Al-Qaeda and the rebels who joined them.

Obama, along with the UN and NATO, offered humanitarian aid and "support" to these so-called rebels and actually called for Libyan forces to lay down arms, for the sake of Libya... Direct support for Al-Qaeda.

Observers noticed that the "rebels" carried modern FN FAL rifles and that they appeared to be in new condition. These rifles had never been used by Libyan forces, at this time they were still using old AK-47's. There was no way the rebels could have got the weapons they did from Libyan military storage depots, so where did they come from?... The same question applies to the ammunition.

The answer? Western and Arab leaders met in Abu Dhabi to pledge financial support for the "rebels" to the tune of $1 Billion in order to depose Gaddafi. These countries included Italy, France, Qatar, Kuwait and Turkey. All this while Britain and America were running the show when it came to the bombing campaign and the training of rebels on the ground.

The New World Order had provided the people, money and equipment.

Regarding this, US senator at-the-time Ron Paul said the following on Fox News; "Nobody even knows who the rebels represent. And, there's good evidence that Al-Qaeda is there. So we may be delivering Al-Qaeda another prize; they'll be in Libya, they weren't there before... these unintended consequences of our foreign policy are so overwhelming, logic tells us we shouldn't be dealing with our foreign policy in this manner... pretending that we can pick the dictators around the world. It's been very unsuccessful and American people are waking up to this."

So far, we can see that the Deep State forces had said they needed Gaddafi out because he was using the military against his own people. The same argument used to justify the invasion of Iraq.

All the evidence presented so far demonstrates that he was in fact using military force against rebels associated with Al-Qaeda. Rebels which were being backed by America et al to overthrow a leader who had transformed his country into one of the greatest in Africa.

Vladimir Putin had this to say on the subject; "The coalition said destroying Gaddafi was not their goal. Then why bomb his palaces? Now some officials have claimed that eliminating him was in fact their goal. Who gave them that right? Did he have a fair trial?... the bombings are destroying the country's entire infrastructure. When the so-called civilised world uses all it's military power against a small country... I don't know if that's good."

One US airstrike on a house of Gaddafi's killed his 18-month old daughter.

Gaddafi had figured America out when he spoke at a meeting of Arab leaders; "America fought alongside Saddam Hussein against Khomeini. He [Hussein] was their friend. Cheney was a friend of Saddam Hussein. Rumsfeld, at the time Iraq was destroyed was a close friend of Saddam Hussein. Ultimately, they sold him out and hanged him... one of these days America may hang us."

The CIA - Facilitators of everything

A former CIA counter-terrorism analyst was interviewed by CNN. They asked him what he made of reports that the CIA were in Libya, making contact with and vetting the rebels.

When asked if this was setting the stage to arm them, he replied; "I don't think there's any other possible reason for it. The president [Obama] has clearly sent the agency in to find out who he [Gaddafi] is supporting... and to see what kind of human material we would have to work with if the president decided to arm and train these people over the longer term."

"Human material"? This alone sums up what the CIA and the rest of the Deep State think about people.

The rest of the interview basically concluded that the CIA were going to decide who was the "most palatable" group to take over from Gaddafi. Most palatable meaning most obedient.

He did however suggest that the best solution was to have not got involved in the first place, "this was none of our business". First-class distraction; once CIA always CIA, he knew that America could not afford to stay out of Libya. He also knew that Gaddafi was fighting the New world Order.

He finished with a telling comment; "In the Muslim world, this is Americans killing Muslims AGAIN. And it looks like it's for oil."

Libya just a piece of the jigsaw

General Wesley Clark [retired] was interviewed on March 2nd 2007 and gave a deeper insight into the plans of the puppet masters through a leak he received;

"I'v just got this [document] off him [unknown] down from the secretary of defence's office today. This is a memo that describes how we're going to take out 7 countries in 5 years. Starting with Iraq, then Syria and Lebanon; Libya, Somalia and Sudan, finishing off with Iran."

The achievements of Gaddafi

Whatever you think of Gadaffi, crazy dictator or man of the people, I have trawled the internet message boards and comment sections and have seen nothing but love for him from Libyans and those from many other countries who knew the truth; they all have an equally strong resentment towards America and it's allies about what happened.

Why was he so respected by his people? Let's look at what he actually did for them.

In 1951, Libya was the poorest country in the WORLD. Before this invasion by America for the oil, Libya had the highest standard of living in Africa; higher than that of Russia, Brazil and Saudi Arabia also.

Below I will list some facts, all of which were implemented by Gaddafi; (figures in US dollars)

- Electricity was free for all Libyan citizens.
- There was no interest on loans; banks in Libya were state-owned and loans were taken at 0% interest by law.
- Having a home was considered a human right.
- All newly married couples received $50,000 off the government to help buy their first home.
- Education and medical treatment was free.
- If Libya could not provide appropriate medical care for someone, the government paid for them to get it abroad.
- If you bought a car, the government subsidised 50% of the price.
- The price of petrol in Libya was 14 cents per litre. That's about 60 cents a gallon in US money.
- Women received $5000 when they had a child.
- Gaddafi carried out the world's largest irrigation project, the "Great Man-Made River" (GMR). It supplied fresh water across Libya (The US and UK, among others, were quick to get a piece of this action at the time too, investing heavily).

He did many more good things; he did some bad things too, my intent has not been to portray him as an angel. But on balance, are these the actions of an evil dictator that the Deep State, via their media, made him out to be?

The overthrowing of Gaddafi left behind a huge mess, just as he predicted. What happened in Libya is a classic example of "The Establishment" in action.

I believe, much like Gaddafi himself did, that the Deep State are in fact the evil dictators; controlling who and what they want at any cost, by all means necessary.

Contact me by email: [email protected]
https://www.davidicke.com/article/50...te-tactics-101
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-10-2018, 08:35 AM   #360
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,277
Likes: 13,099 (7,511 Posts)
Default

Squalid London – Our Own Swamp
21st October 2018 / United Kingdom
By True Republica

As HMS BrexitBrittania looks ever more likely to head in the same southerly direction as mothership Titanic, there is one backstop where all parliamentarians can agree – The City of London, often referred to as Britain’s second empire, must be saved at all costs.

The somewhat right-leaning Economist magazine even ran an article amongst the many that litter the financial pages of those that care to look just a week ago, that roundly aimed its cross-hairs at Britain’s own swamp of bottom feeders – the bankers and their armies of facilitators that inhabit The City of London – all supported by Her Majesties own territories of tax havens.

In the same week that, according to a British report, 18 of the 20 leading European banks, including four French ones, have already been sanctioned for money laundering offences we also find out that – “almost every big cross-border corruption case in recent years has had a connection to Britain or its palm-fringed overseas territories.”

For instance, it appears that British limited-liability partnerships were the vehicle of choice for suspicious clients of Danske Bank, which is embroiled in the laundering of as much as €200bn ($230bn).”

The reason why London is so important is that it is the centre of the world’s money laundering operations. But you knew that. The trouble is, so does everyone else.

With all the Russian money sloshing around London, you would think that Theresa May, who has made such an effort to deflect all of her problems by blaming new convenient bogeyman Russia that seizing their assets in London including property, cars, art, wine and cash would, far from inflicting any damage to the economy, be useful to the treasury who is about to clobber the taxpayer to pay for the end of austerity. Or fund the NHS shortfall. Or social services, housing crisis, elderly care crisis or indeed, just a general end to the crisis of daily life that the banks bought to one-third of the entire population in the first place.

In 2016, Britain became the very first G20 country to launch a public register of companies’ beneficial owners. Hooray, I hear you say, some proper action of accountability at last. It was designed to shed light on the shell companies behind which wrongdoers often hide – like the aforementioned Danske case. But hang on a minute – the system relies on self-reporting. And, if Mr Oligarchovich does get caught red-handed by shopping himself in a rare fit of morality, the fines are, wait for it, drumroll ……… about £1,000. Mr Oligarchovich can be fined that for forgetting to pay for a TV licence. Fines like that, as The Economist says “makes the British Virgin Islands look robust.” Inevitably, therefore, the honest comply and criminals lie.

Should it be any surprise that under Theresa May’s watch as Home Secretary that we let in so many of these corrupt Russians in the first place? In fact, today the second highest number of visas given for what they call ‘tier 1’ investors – those that can pump £2m into government bonds or other UK invested assets, are Russians. So after laundering billions of ill-gotten gains through the London banks, they can then get visas for their entire family and buy homes in London to protect them from just as or even more corrupt characters in their homeland.

In the meantime, The National Crime Agency, whose responsibility it is to collar these guys has a budget that shrinks every year and leaves them with about a dozen qualified senior investigators – in other words – none. Not forgetting it can take years to bring a single case and even if they do, they face Mr Oligarchovich’s lawyers in the Old Bailey. He’s hired the best that laundered money can buy – unsurprisingly, lawyers from London.

In 2015, the Treasury and Home office admitted that money laundering was so serious that it was, even then a strategic threat to the stability of the nation. The boss of the NCA said that “hundreds of billions of dollars are laundered through UK banks and their subsidiaries each year.” Terror finance is just one of a long list of heinous crimes that The City of London facilitates.

So where is the risk, other than a few oligarchs, terrorists, traffickers or gun runners on the loose in the watches gallery of Harrods? The City of London generates a trade surplus of 3% of GDP and pays roughly ten per cent of the country’s taxes. Britain could lose any part of that if laws elsewhere are changed, which they are slowly doing, especially in the EU and America.

In the meantime, Craig Murray has a word or two about a case of a money launderer, his wife and the City of London.





By Craig Murray: On the face of it, the Unexplained Wealth Order against Zamira Hajiyeva shows the UK cracking down on the torrent of corrupt money that gushes into the City of London every single second. But dig deeper.

Hajiyev’s husband had fallen out of favour with the appallingly kleptocratic Aliev regime in Azerbaijan – a dictatorship whose corruption can be measured by the infallible indicator that Tony Blair is currently working for it. Hundreds of billions have been plundered from Azerbaijan’s oil revenue by the Azeri oligarchs.

So is the British government going after the very substantial assets in the UK of the ruling Aliev family? No. Is it going after the very substantial assets in the UK of the oligarchs surrounding the Aliev family? No. It is only going after almost the only Azeri oligarch who fell foul of the regime, and is taking an action which the Baku dictator will applaud rather than decry.

While her father was still dictator of Uzbekistan, Gulnara Karimova was subject to seizure of looted wealth and investigation in Switzerland, France and Sweden, among others. In the UK, where she had a home and very substantial assets, no action whatsoever.

What are we to make of Theresa May’s huffing and puffing about the Skripal affair, when the UK’s richest resident is Alisher Usmanov, who is Vladimir Putin’s old flatmate, right hand man in the media and business world and chairman of Gazprominvestholdings? There is no chance whatsoever any action will be taken against Usmanov, who acquired his assets in the most dubious manner imaginable. Usmanov is far too entrenched in the City.

These people interact with the British “elite” in any number of surprising ways. Claudia Winkleman’s husband made big money from producing a vanity film project for the Azeri dictator’s daughter. Former Foreign Secretary Dr David Owen is Usmanov’s factotum in the UK. Just two of many thousands of links that tie the UK’s gilded elite in with the looted wealth.

The Conservative Party has directly received donations totaling over £3 million from Russian oligarchs. That buys a lot of influence. But more important still is the influence of the City of London, where wideboy bankers grow rich on the World’s most sophisticated and “respectable” money laundering operation. While the Tories are determined to bluster us into a new cold war to benefit the military, industrial and security complex, none of the sanctions taken to date and none that will be taken have had any serious deleterious effect on the holders of the hundreds of billions of money looted from the Russian people during the Western mandated and organised privatisation of Russia’s mineral and industrial assets. Even as false rage over Salisbury fills the airwaves, the oligarchs are privately being reassured their money and lifestyles are safe.

And of course, the appalling Saudi Regime can imprison and execute as many dissidents and feminists as it wishes, and western governments and media will still applaud its “modernisation programme”. Western governments will still lust after lucrative arms deals to supply the bombs that blow apart Yemeni schoolchildren. And the Saudi regime can gruesomely murder as many journalists as they wish abroad, with no fear whatsoever of any action against them by the UK.

In a United Kingdom dominated by the cesspit that is the City of London, it is not just that money talks. It is that nobody else is heard.
https://truepublica.org.uk/united-ki...our-own-swamp/

Last edited by iamawaveofthesea; 22-10-2018 at 08:36 AM.
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18 PM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.