Crying wolf again.

Persistent warnings of ‘this’ danger or ‘that’ danger are designed to persuade the general population of a verifiable threat to their existence. For instance, ‘Kim Jong-un and his huge nuclear arsenal are an imminent threat to our very survival.’ I’m not knowledgeable about Korean issues but from what I have seen he’s far more danger to his own people and the South Koreans if they continue to deliberately provoke him and even if they have got nuclear arms technology, it’s not perfected. The drip-drip effect of stories are capable of two outcomes. There is the possibility that people will in effect be brainwashed into believing a story that has absolutely no credibility, as in the case of Saddam’s none existent WMD’s. Alternatively there is the boy that cried wolf, a good example of this would be Netanyahu’s claims of imminent Iranian nuclear weapon capability going back over 20 years.
A former UN inspector has recently warned of Iran’s nuclear weapons building capabilities, claiming that “there are a lot of things we don’t know”. Indeed there are, so his warnings, by his own admission are pure speculation. In the interview he goes on to say Iran has an “unfortunate history of misleading and not disclosing all its nuclear material.”
The former inspectors name is Olli Heinonen and he warns that there could be a Middle East nuclear arms race because of the uncertainty Iran create with it’s suspected nuclear ambitions. I’ve never heard of Mr Heinonen but it appears he was former deputy director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency. I’ve never been anywhere near Iran or the Middle East and wouldn’t know a nuclear warhead if I tripped over one but I can correct Mr Heinonen on several points without too much trouble.
A man of his previous experience should know that the nuclear arm’s race has already been run in that part of the world and Israel were the only ones that finished the race. They are rumoured to have finished it several hundred times. Actually, unlike the speculation surrounding Iran there is more than circumstantial evidence to support this statement.
Does Mr Heinonen believe that Israel do not have a history of misleading and not disclosing it’s nuclear material? These types of hit pieces are amateurish smears and are so bad I hope people like Mr Heinonen carry on repeating them. Mentioning the words ‘nuclear’ and ‘Middle East’ without mentioning ‘Israel’ indicates gross stupidity or devious intent…. And you don’t get to be a high ranking IAEA official by being stupid.

Advertisements

Motor car murderers.

The recent (apparent) attack by an Arab motorist targeting Jews got me thinking. I recall several attacks by Jewish settlers seemingly driving straight at Arabs but hadn’t counted them up because I thought they were very rare.

08 Oct 2010 – Hit and run on two Palestinian boys in Silwan.
23 Sep 2011 – Settler Hit and Run Incident Injures 8 Year Old Child.
12 Jan 2012 – Disabled girl in a wheelchair hit by settler car in Hebron on her way to school.
26 May 2013 – Bayan Kamel Shatat, 7, was hit by an Israeli settler south of Hebron.
26 Dec 2013 – Israeli runs over child near Salfit.
19 Oct 2014 – Israeli settler runs over two Palestinian girls in Singel, killing one and seriously injuring the other one.
20 Oct 2014 – Near the Gush Etzion Junction. Jewish driver hits an Arab woman standing on the road.

These examples are from the top of the Google returns when I entered ‘settler hit and run Arab’. To my knowledge none of the Jewish drivers were shot dead. Either Israeli’s are piss poor drivers or they think they can kill Arabs without repercussions. Probably the latter and they are almost certainly right. Despite Israeli politicians claiming the law treats everyone the same, this is just one example that they lie through their teeth.

Charlie Skelton joins the Syrian opposition dots.

I said I would provide evidence about the Syrian opposition and it’s friends in high places. Well, it’s not my research that exposes the anti-Assad groups, it’s Charlie Skelton, in a piece he wrote a couple of years ago. This is well worth reading and clarifies the devious tactics the so called Syrian opposition uses and who is really pulling all the strings.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jul/12/syrian-opposition-doing-the-talking

The BBC are at it again……

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-29660029

This is an unconfirmed story from Reuters and thus far has absolutely no credibility, all the same the BBC decide to give it publicity as if it is verified. If Iraqi pilots have defected to ISIS, why would they need to train others? More to the point, where were the Iraqi pilots when ISIS waltzed into Iraq unopposed?

BBC quote:

Rami Abdul Rahman, head of the SOHR, said IS was using Iraqi officers who were pilots under ex-Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to train fighters in Syria.

Rami Abdul Rahman is a fierce critic of Assad and approves of military intervention to bring about his removal. The SOHR is not independent and cannot be trusted. Just the same as the several think tanks in UK and US who fund these anti Assad groups. The finances ultimately come from the two respective governments. This is a proven fact, not speculation.

Rahman and numerous others purporting to be the official opposition have been trying to get the West to remove Assad for years with their bogus claims. It’s Western government job to highlight the stories they produce to convince Westerners to believe and approve of intervention. The poison gas fraud was one of their productions. I’ll be producing evidence of these charlatans’ lies in the near future.

One gun and some bullets equates to a Mumbai type slaughter.

In my opinion, prosecution evidence and statements used in terrorist cases in the UK tend to be as sensationalist and unbelievable as any conspiracy theorist could concoct. The latest one involves a character called Erol Incedal. Mr Incedal is accused of various terrorism offences, seemingly from bugged conversations he had with his accomplices. It’s extremely debatable whether these types of conversations can be used as evidence considering the lively imaginations of humans. Everyone has encountered the kind of people I’m referring to, the man (or woman) who has done it all or about to do it. Anything you mention, they’ve already been there or they are about to do it. They can be described as dreamers or fantasisers, out of touch with reality and living in their own little perfect world in which they are able to do anything. Besides being slightly irritating at times, they are a danger only to themselves and trying to prove that they are a danger to wider society doesn’t convince me. Code words being used but not understood by other members of the group reveals the incompetence of these accused terrorists.

Worse than that are the claims of the prosecution lawyers who clearly have similar lively imaginations. The recent case has revealed that the group of men were trying to buy a gun. It’s illegal in the UK to have a gun unless you are explicitly authorised to posses one, such as a Police marksman. I could argue that most enforcement officers aren’t fit to have one but that is a different matter. So, these alleged terrorists are recorded discussing a gun and some bullets and if that’s the case , they should be found guilty of conspiring to obtain an illegal weapon. However, having virtually proving this to be the case the prosecution then go in to exaggeration mode. They claim that this one gun (if proven beyond reasonable doubt) could be part of a conspiracy to create an attack in the UK similar to the Mumbai attacks from a few years ago when 170 people were murdered. Mentioning Mumbai in respect of this court case is nothing short of pure fantasy and when such comparisons are used I have to question what real evidence they do have.

By turning the purchase of a gun from some low level career criminal into an arms shipment comparable to the huge amount of weapons required to commit the Mumbai atrocity reveals that this should be a prosecution of someone attempting to buy an illegal weapon, not a secretly held court case that supports a government agenda.

Alan Henning.

The murder of Mr Henning is as predictable as it was pointless. The cranks that have departed from the UK and other (mainly) European countries to join ISIS can only be described as gullible dreamers who were going to be led astray by one thing or another, it was just a matter of time. People like that aren’t in endless supply thankfully, so once ISIS have managed to tempt the initial ‘groupies’ to magically appear in Syria and Iraq, they will struggle to brainwash increasing numbers because friends and relatives of the vulnerable will be on alert. Obviously, killing a seemingly kind and decent man like Alan Henning isn’t going to get the average Muslim to join their ranks. The vast majority of Muslims just want to live their life in accordance with their religion and be successful in life, the same as everyone else. ISIS’ appeal has already peaked. Alan Henning’s death will be almost universally condemned amongst Muslims. If ever there was a major publicity blunder, this is it. If ISIS’ aim was to become despised amongst it’s potential friends, this was the way to do it. This murder has printed a very large target on anyone connected to this gang of cold hearted killers ….But what would be the point in that? There is none. No matter which way you look at it, it’s illogical. It served no purpose at all, neither as a recruiting ploy and certainly not  to win any friends. I thought that was the intention of groups or cults…To harvest more followers? These clowns are a fabrication from the top to bottom. Strike terror in to hearts? Give me a break, they are only brave when it comes to fighting people who can’t fight back.

There are some very odd things about the British hostages of ISIS. Henning had been in the country less than an hour before he was abducted and by all accounts, the group he was with had made numerous visits to Syria with aid from the UK. This means that at least some of them would have a reasonable idea about where they should and should not go. If that’s what they did and he was still abducted, he was set up. Either by one of his comrades or a group who would know they had just arrived, so would therefore know the flight they were going to be on and other details. I doubt ISIS have access to flight schedules and passenger lists.

People who have ignored the religious differences and gone to Muslim countries to try to help in difficult situations have usually been met with hospitality that is second to none. For instance in Gaza, where they have barely enough food and drink to survive on there are many stories of these people sharing their meagre supplies with total strangers. ISIS is about as far away from genuine Islam and the instinctive generosity of Muslims as you could get. It’s a scam, a fraud, a great big fat lie.

There could be many different reasons for the creation of ISIS. It might purely be to continue bombing Muslim countries to feed the weapons manufacturers and the ‘security’ industry. It could be Israel agitating and encouraging the Yinon plan which involves creating chaos in neighbour countries to keep them weak and fragmented so that they aren’t a threat. Netanyahu only recently tried to tar Hamas with the ISIS brush in his speech at the UN. If you want a good laugh, it’s worth watching. The man is a third rate actor (maybe all politicians are) and his efforts to associate Hamas and ISIS would be comical if so many people didn’t actually believe him. Hamas can only barely try to defend their tiny enclave in Gaza, never mind conquer vast areas of the Middle East.

John Cantrie is totally different to Mr Henning.  He’s been kidnapped before and then returned so we would have to say he was much more aware of the dangers than Alan. It appears his departure back to Syria also destroyed the prosecution of two British men who were accused of kidnapping him whilst he was previously in Syria. There doesn’t seem to be much information about why the terrorism case was dropped although we could conclude it was probably because Cantlie had already returned to the Middle East. If this is true, he was not only reckless about his own life but showed scant regard for anyone else’s by allowing two very dangerous criminals off the hook.

It was a very strange decision to return after such a close brush with death.

Anthony Charles Lynton Blair has recently been adding his voice to the loud chorus of ‘boots on the ground’ chants. He would though, wouldn’t he? I’ve no doubt he invests heavily in weapons manufacturers and war industry connected companies. If he feels that strongly about it, he should be the boots on the ground he talks of… Leading his talentless, sponging kids and ugly wife (who will no doubt scare the living daylights out of ISIS).