For the benefit of Israel.

Rogue Zionist regime still hoping to reap rewards of Syrian chaos.

Despite vast areas of the country being in government hands, the Syrian pain will continue. The recent public announcement of an SDF – ISIS ceasefire merely confirms what many people have suspected.  Whilst building bases in Eastern parts of Syria, without doubt illegally, the American military have been training and supplying the SDF. When Kurdish forces moved south alongside the Euphrates, ISIS simply disappeared, meanwhile Syrian government forces and their allies were met with furious resistance. Apparently it would seem that the US can influence both Kurdish and ISIS forces and clearly they are intent on maintaining control of the assets East of the Euphrates, the question is why?

The hydrocarbon reserves that Syria possess is insignificant to the US. Obviously, the Kurds survived without the revenue from it prior to the war for many years. ISIS were allowed to transport it to Turkey during the period they had access to the oil that was until the Russians attacked one of its tanker convoys. For numerous years Syria has been without an estimated 40% of its oil revenue east of the Euphrates. This income is vital for domestic power and to finance the rebuilding of a devastated country. Another important point to consider is that, compared to the rest of Syria, Kurd controlled areas were relatively untouched by the fighting. This is in stark contrast to Raqqa, which was the home for an Arab population. A rough guide to the expansionist agenda of the Kurds are these two maps. The first is showing Kurd regions in 1957 (but the area of control hadn’t changed much until after the Syrian war began.)


Compare this with the map below and we can see the vast amount of land that the Kurds have acquired.


This cynical conquest has happened during the time many parts of Syria have been reduced to smouldering, wrecked buildings and when the remnants of terrorists have been finally removed from other parts of the country, the focus will shift to the treacherous behaviour of their so called fellow countrymen, the Kurds.

Israel has a good relationship with the Kurds and have been buying cheap oil from them, presumably using Turkish associates to transport it. However, this isn’t the only reason Israel supports the Kurds. The aim of Israel is to weaken Syria so much that they are unable to defend themselves. The political problems in Lebanon have been created by the Saudis, in collusion with their new found friends, the Israelis. The Iraq war, if not inspired by Israel, they were certainly a leading advocate. Gaddafi, before his horrendous murder was also sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. Resistance to the Greater Israel project is very dangerous, even if other nations are used to carry out the dirty work for them.

Frequently we are told the complex web of the Middle East is unfathomable but a glance at history and the connivance of the state of Israel provides ample evidence of their need for weak and divided neighbours. The foot soldiers of the IDF, educated to despise Palestinians from an early age, are only trained in how to control unarmed civilians. The war that the US, UK and others imposed on Syria does have a silver lining, albeit at a terrible price for the civilians. The Syrian Arab Army, Hezbollah and Iranian forces have had to contend with a brutal, callous and devious enemy in ISIS. If the next war is with Israel, they will be well prepared to deal with the check-point charlies that currently make Palestinian lives a misery with their bogus ‘security measures’.


Terrorists won’t change our way of life.

The headline of this article is a term we’ve heard many times, notably after every alleged terrorist attack. High profile politicians rattle out the well used phrase in defiance of any carnage on our streets, whilst neglecting to tell us what they base their theory on. Did ISIS or some other group of murderous criminals make a public announcement to confirm these aims? No, it’s simply the default phrase used following an act of terrorism and they cannot support the claim with any credible evidence.

Never mentioned is the the elephant in the room. We ignore the devastating violence inflicted on Muslim dominated nations and subsequently, the bogus reasons used to justify those attacks. Afghanistan never had nuclear weapons but hiding in the Tora Bora mountains was a villain worthy of a 007 plot, Bin Laden. Luckily, Tony Blair said they did have nuclear weapons in Iraq, we just never found any. Gadaffi couldn’t be allowed to murder his own people but we were. Bashar al Assad, the gentle looking qualified opthalmist didn’t quite look the part but when you’ve got a dedicated team like the White helmets on your side, it doesn’t matter if your target looks as innocent as Mother Theresa.

These partially destroyed countries have one common theme, Muslims. Not exclusively but if you were to drop a bomb at random in any of the four nations, the most likely outcome would be dead Muslims.

Even more surprising is that ‘we’ aren’t being (literally) invaded by armed soldiers of the aforementioned regions. After all, they are within their rights to defend themselves against our aggression under the Geneva Conventions. The fraudulent claim that it is to help them or rid them of a tyrant is pure fiction. I suggest the true primary reason for these illegal slaughters is to remove barriers for Israeli domination of the Middle East. Only by compartmentalising the surrounding neighbours of Israel can they hope to keep them in check. Apparently, splitting up the various groups is the job of the US and it’s lackeys.

So, now we know why there are groups of Muslim fanatics attacking the West.

..Actually, we don’t. What is certain is that our Western lifestyle is NOT the problem. Many of these terrorist plots have been initiated by security services, enticing gullible young men into attempting a slaughter and the ones that are real killers are just that – killers. News agencies don’t mention that ‘white’ criminals are Christian. Even worse than that, ‘terrorism’ is only mentioned if the perpetrators are suspected to be Muslim.

For instance, if we are to believe that Stephen Paddock was the lone gunman in Las Vegas (which I don’t), were the victims ‘terrorised’? The media says not,  purely because he wasn’t a Muslim. How ridiculous and indeed bizarre is that? I think there could be fewer situations that are more terrorising than being amongst that crowd a few months ago.

The acts of terrorism the West is exposed to are a meagre response to the crimes inflicted on other nations and the perpetrators have nothing to do with any religion. It is an obscene list of events that has nothing to do with Islam. However, we do need to look at how we allow our politicians to commit these crimes. In the wider world, we are constantly encouraged to be accountable for our actions, so why are our politicians virtually exempt from (not just) moral condemnation but also the full force of the law for the state terrorism inflicted on people that aren’t a threat to us?

The politicians who direct our military and create crippling economic sanctions on their victims appear to be immune to the blowback felt by the rest of us.

The recent scare at Oxford Circus which resulted in pandemonium in central London appears to be a dispute between two travellers. The event is proof that ‘our’ lives have been changed by the threat of terrorism. We have become scared of our own shadow. The reality that gangs of criminals around the inner cities are an everyday threat is made much worse because thousands of police have been removed from our streets. Meanwhile, the money poured into the ‘security’ industry is mind blowing, despite statistics pointing toward a miniscule threat.

Either way, the people governing us are even less likely to become a victim of the exaggerated terrorism and they know it.