Image and video hosting by TinyPic














Thursday, November 05, 2015

"The Opposition"

A lot has been happening vis-a-vis Metrojet Flight 9268. Cable teevee news is trying so hard to push the "on-board bomb" scenario that I feel an instinctive urge to look for some other explanation.

I'll soon devote a larger post to the "whodunnit" part of this story, but right now I'd like to focus on a Fox News report that I happened to catch earlier today. This segment was presented as reporter-in-the-field journalism, not punditry or analysis. I don't recall the newsman's name, but he discussed the idea that ISIS managed to secrete an explosive in the aircraft's luggage. The report ended with these words -- and although I'm going on memory here, I'm reasonably sure of this quote's accuracy:
"The administration will have to step up efforts against ISIS while providing more aid to the opposition."
By "the opposition," he meant the opposition to Bashar Assad. I can't think of any other way to interpret that phrase.

WHAT...THE...HELL?

In the first place: What does the Assad government in Syria have to do with the downing of a Russian airliner in Egypt?

In the second place: How can you aid "the opposition" while taking down ISIS? In Syria, ISIS is "the opposition."

The great goal of ISIS is to topple Assad's government. If Assad goes, ISIS and/or Al Qaeda will take power in Damascus. Despite all the propaganda we've heard, there is no "moderate" force to speak of. (In our previous posts, we've seen that all of those "vetted" moderate fighters have been winnowed down to a mere five.)

How the hell is the battle against ISIS going to be won if the American government puts ISIS in charge of the whole damned country?

It just doesn't make sense.

Once again, the newsfakers are capitalizing on the ignorance of the American people, most of whom still don't know that, in the Syrian civil war, ISIS and "the opposition" are one and the same. Our mainstream media never misses an opportunity to confuse Mr. and Ms. Average Doofus. I doubt that even Pravda in the Stalin era would have dared to lie quite so brazenly.

In 2003, Mr. and Ms. Average Doofus became convinced that Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attacks. The Doofuses sneered at well-informed people like you and me when we said that Hussein was innocent of that charge.

Eventually, after about ten years -- after the loss of many lives and much treasure -- the Doofuses understood that we were right all along.

It's happening again. The Doofuses are being lied to again. How can we make them understand what's really going on?

On an unrelated note: Even by Breitbart standards, this has to be the Doofiest story on the internet right now....
War On Christmas: Starbucks Red Cups Are Emblematic Of The Christian Culture Cleansing Of The West
Not a joke. The writer really believes that plain red seasonal cups constitute proof that Starbucks hates Jesus.

I can visualize Ben Carson's reaction to this story: "Could be...could be..."
Comments:
The folks who are providing the intel on that downed Russian flight could be the very same ones who advised us on Saddam's WMD. We don't have any evidence yet, but hey, why not speculate anyway?
 
I'm pretty sure the National Security States purpose in assuring Mr Putin that it was a bomb with satellite imagery, [which, BTW, they would have of MH-17], is to make clear, "we will kill your citizens unless you kowtow to our demands for "regime change". The rest is just chafe, to confuse, not "dumb Americans", but to continue to overwhelm decent, law abiding citizens with wave after wave of ceaseless propaganda "that even Pravda in the Stalin era would have dared to [be so] brazen [about]".
 
The Turks are fighting ISIS, Assad and the Kurds. The Kurds are fighting the Turks, Assad and ISIS. Syria is fighting the Sunnis, ISIS, the Turks and the Kurds. Iran is fighting the Kurds,, ISIS, Turkey, and the Sunnis. Iraq is fighting the ou Kurds, Turkey, and the Sunnis or the Shiites, depending which side you're on. And that doesn't begin to explain the tribal divisions that are rampant in that part of the world. Do you seriously think we ought to get involved in this six way fight? Further, if Assad leaves, as Russia has apparently repeatedly and for a long time acknowledged, neither you nor I nor anyone else knows who will then be in charge. And by the way, though Chechnyan officials have said they want to fight ISIS, I'm not convinced that Russia trusts them to do that nor do they trust the Chechnyan citizenry to not be influenced by ISIS.
 
There are a huge number of TOW videos from the current SAA offensive in Syria, in which SAA vehicles and groups are destroyed by opposition groups. Those TOWs are American and are provided by the Saudis and suchlike. They can only be reexported with American approval.
 
Why is Britain playing such a strong move in the post-crash propaganda?

What has British intelligence and security been doing at Sharm el-Sheikh airport, both at their permanent security facility and during a special visit earlier this year?

What did British intelligence know about the downing of the Russian plane and when did they know it?
 
The Russian government is pulling its punches in the propaganda about this crash. Russia Today is even referring in an almost neutral way to Fox News.

This will soon change. They have outplayed the shit out of the west in psychological warfare in recent years and months, and I am expecting a powerful move soon. They will not allow the West (fronted by Britain) to continue to determine the propaganda terrain in respect of this crash for much longer.
 
Since the purpose of this plane crash may be to help shuffle us towards WW3, I hope it's OK to direct people to my comments on a recent post here, Follow up: Did ISIS shoot down that Russian Airbus?.

British and US propaganda is missing the element of "This was an appalling slaughter of innocents. We stand with Russia, and we will help Russia in any way we can in our collective fight against terrorism".

BTW I do not think Russia itself had a big hand in this crash. If they had, they wouldn't have been on their back foot in the first few days of propaganda afterwards. They appear to have been taken by surprise.
 
From the BBC, about an hour ago:

"UK investigators looking into why a Russian airliner crashed in Egypt say a bomb was put in the hold before take-off. The BBC understands they have received intelligence based on intercepted communications between militants in the Sinai Peninsula."

Please read that carefully.

If the Brits got that intelligence and drew their conclusion before the crash, why didn't they tell the Russians?

Who got the raw intercepts and "based" their "intelligence" on those intercepts before passing it to the Brits?

If the Brits only found out afterwards, what exactly is the role of MI6 - oops! I mean "UK" investigators, i.e. investigators loyal to the Kingdom - in Sinai right now?

The Brits are not saying that they intercepted the communications. They're not even saying that they received the intercepts from some other power and then analysed them and formed their own conclusion.

They're saying they received "intelligence based on" the intercepts.

That sounds very much as though they're doing some other state's work for it. A state that sounds very much like Israel.

There are also British stories (e.g. here) that Egypt is "hampering" British efforts to repatriate British nationals, innocent holidaymakers, pure as the driven snow every last one of them, could have been you or me, etc.

As I asked before: could one or more of the individuals involved in putting the bomb on the plane have been a British national who arrived as a "British holidaymaker", or perhaps someone with a connection with the British security presence at the airport?

What's the fucking big issue with the British passengers' luggage?

From the Guardian:

Egypt’s civil aviation ministry denied it was blocking any flights but said the numbers were limited by airport capacity.

In extraordinary scenes, Britain’s ambassador to Cairo, John Casson, was heckled by irate passengers who shouted: “What is the problem and when can we go home?”

Casson was challenged by Carla Dublin, travelling with her two teenage daughters.

She said: “We were told we were leaving today. Now we are being told that the Egyptian government is arguing with David Cameron about allowing in flights.”

“Why are you stuttering?” she demanded, as the ambassador attempted to respond.

Egypt’s minster for civil aviation said flights were limited by the airport’s capacity.

“The British airline [easyJet] wants to schedule 18 flights at the same time and wants to transport British passengers from Sharm el-Sheikh without their luggage, which we would have to transport later,” Hossam Kamal said.

“This constitutes a huge burden on the airport because its capacity does not allow for that. We have asked them to organise eight flights only and one plane will transport luggage.”

See also the Torygraph.

Earlier it was reported that the British airforce ("RAF") was on "standby" to evacuate Brits from Sharm. Sure, that may have only been said in the Sun, but where such matters as these are concerned that toilet rag only prints what it's told. If this was true, how come it didn't come to pass? Did someone tell Britain "no"?

The fuckers who run Britain don't care about most of those tourists. They can be evacuated over the next fortnight. That won't bother the ruling families. Sharm isn't Gstaad.

Might there be someone in particular they want to evacuate?
 
There is no six-sided war in Syria. Assad and the Kurds have a formal agreement, and Iran and Russia are supporting Assad. They all constitute one side, along with the Iraqi government, SDF and so on. On the other side are the Islamic State, their unofficial backers in Turkey, Saudi, the Gulf States, and so on. Also the Americans and their supplies, and the Israelis who have launched air strikes only on Assad and his allies in Hezbollah, thereby providing air support to ISIS and al Qaeda.

The idea that there are more than two sides in this war is nothing more than a convenient fiction for those who wish to support one side but don't want to admit it.
 
This comment has been removed by the author.
 
"Further, if Assad leaves, as Russia has apparently repeatedly and for a long time acknowledged, neither you nor I nor anyone else knows who will then be in charge."

Oh, joseph. Sometimes you are so cute I just want to pinch your cheeks and buy you an ice cream cone.

In Syria, it's a fight between Assad and jihad. Those are your choices. Assad or jihad.
 
Again small-J joseph has shown himself to be nothing more than an agent of prevarication who dissembles as naturally as he breathes; much like the rest of his kind.

Israel is responsible for the horrors being visited on the people of Syria as the toppling of the secular Assad regime falls under the aegis of the so-called "Greater Israel" plan. Add the Leviathan natural gas field off the coast of Lebanon and the recently discovered oil field in the illegally-occupied Golan Heights and you can begin to understand exactly how many shekels our "friends" in Israel are looking to steal from their neighbors.

In addition, replacing secular Arab governments with fractured states occupied by warring religious factions increases Israel's ability to continue to dominate their neighbors.

American goes along for the ride because we're currently under capture by a zionist fifth column.
 
Interesting how the Zionists (Rita Katz at SITE) - and oh look, Google too, through Youtube - do a lot of PR for Daesh. Makes you wonder what other kinds of support they give them.

I call them "Daesh" because the use of "Islamic State" is Islamophobic propaganda which distracts from the fact that most Muslims despise this vile group - and I don't like either "Syria" (in "ISIS") or "Levant" (in "ISIL") as translations for "al-Sham". "ISIS" was chosen for its "ancient ever-present foreign powerful religions" connotations; "ISIL" to convey the message that the group wants to conquer Palestine as well as Iraq and Syria. (They probably do, but I doubt that's their main aim.) "Saudi cultural ambassadors" is also a useful term.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home


This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?


























Image and video hosting by TinyPic


FeedWind



FeedWind




FeedWind