Having sat through 25 minutes of intensive propaganda for bombing Syria called the BBC Ten O’clock News – which did not feature a single interviewee against bombing – it was delightful to see them have to report at the end that the Commons has now rejected the Government’s motion to authorise military action.
It will, Nick Robinson quickly assured us, take a few days to work out what this vote means. He means it will take a few days for those who profit from war to work out how to spin the vote against military action as a vote for military action. That process will start in the next few minutes.
I never thought I’d say it, but God bless Ed Miliband, (even though his amendment was shite too)
It’s likely the government will try and get Murdoch media to work in overdrive now. Some older people on traditional right wing papers may also need be called to order.
Good to see you back Craig – you’ve been missed
Milibland will find the proof offered sufficient to proceed with military action.
Craig, it’s great to see your back blogging. been waiting to hear your comments on Syria.
Good news, indeed. Sense has prevailed – for now.
Nick Robinson?
“Bear from Bo’ Selecta! Bear from Bo’Selecta!”
Craig,
Doesn’t everyone on this blog know about the hegemonic agenda?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha1rEhovONU
So we have a policy failure in the UK and the US is clueless about its own foreign policy.
1. What – another Egypt to remove the secularist Assad then put in fundamentalist Muslims so that they then attack the minority Christian minority in Syria. But, on the BBC these days the CIA funded “rebels” are termed in Orwellian double-speak “moderates”.
2. Listen carefully to General Wesley Clarke.
It is imperialism and modern colonialism ( where Britain left off – the US has picked up).
There is no rationality and even less morality.
CB
Hollande is now talking about a political solution,
Obama claims to have no smoking gun.
Looks like cold feet all round.
We may just see Obama proceed with some new fig leaf for British involvement… like use of bases. To stand in for the token cruise missiles.
Well Milliband and Alexander better not go mountain climbing or for a walk in the woods any time soon would be my advice.
Or is this where the NSA/GCHQ Total Information Awareness comes into its own and many of the 282 MP’s who voted against the Govt. may start getting strange little calls and dark actor memos reminding them of some adolescent or otherwise indiscretion they thought nobody knew about suddenly comes back to haunt/persuade a change of position?
I can see how this whole NSA/GCHQ mass data trawl could be used very effectively for the worst reasons by the worst of people/agencies.
This whole idea that if we don’t bomb syria tomorrow Assad has ‘got away with using chemical weapons’ is so childish.
As if bombing a few military bases is the only way you can damage a leader on the international stage.
How about a joint statement from all willing UN members to never recognise Assad or his regime ever again. How about putting out an ICC warrant on him personally for war crimes and basically implying that, even if he does win the civil war, he will never be able to travel freely again, nor engage with the UN or any other self-respecting international body, and his act of barbarity will haunt him for the rest of his life? How about implementing permanent sanctions on anyone who sells his regime weapons from here on? I could go on, I won’t. Basically, bombing is shite. It kills innocents, stokes hatred, wastes money, and is, at best, tokenistic. All the above responses are better.
Good to see Tory MPs like Richard Sheppherd and Edward Leigh speak out.
A great result tonight but eternal vigilance is the price of freedom. Milibland, Hague-Ron need to be kept on a very tight leash and under constant suveillance to stop further spin and proxy attacks
@Misc fool – Very much agree, Edward Leigh spoke amazingly tonight
Quite right Misc Fool. Some other Tories were excellent too. On the other hand the Labour warmongers: Meg Munn, Pat McFadden, Mike Gapes etc were appalling.
Glad to hear you craig.
Is it just me or is world war 3 about to start?
MPs were faced with a great choice. Bomb Syria on Cameron’s terms or bomb Syria on Milliband’s terms. Milliband , as ever , missed an opportunity to reflect what the electorate wanted and decided to play some sort of post Blair role which meant that he was in favour of bombing but only if everyone else was too. The Lib Dems , typically , voted overwhelmingly for war ; presumably on the basis that dead Syrians are much to be preferred to the threat of a general election
Welcome back threat host, and phew! The reckless foaming at the mouth from the war-party was truly disturbing. And that idiot Gove calling his reluctant backbenchers a disgrace was a hoot. Milliband, curiously, has made 2 very big calls, on Murdoch and war, and showed at least a little spine, so well done.
Tragically, the US doesn’t have a democracy, so it’ll be bombs away soon.
Now that the NATO bloc is backing away from their purported evidence, this would be an opportune time for Russia and the temporary members to draft a resolution referring the Syrian situation to the International Criminal Court for investigation under Rome Statute Article 13(b).
If, as alleged, available information provides a reasonable basis to believe that Article 8.2.b.xvii has been breached in Syria, the Prosecutor can collect and examine evidence; request the presence of and question persons being investigated, victims and witnesses; seek the cooperation of any State or intergovernmental organization or arrangement in accordance with its respective competence and/or mandate; enter into such arrangements or agreements, not inconsistent with the Statute, as may be necessary to facilitate the cooperation of a State, intergovernmental organization or person.
Based on impartial investigation by the ICC Prosecutor, the Pre-Trial Chamber can then issue arrest warrants for the person responsible for CW use and determine whether that person is a Syrian official, an armed irregular sent by the Saudi government, or an Israeli agent in the Syrian armed forces.
Such a resolution will surely win a majority vote of the P-5 and current temporary members Argentina, Australia, Azerbaijan, Guatemala, Luxembourg, Morocco, Pakistan, Republic of Korea, Rwanda, and Togo. The UNSC must do its duty, Right?
Hullo Craig,
You’re almost there mate. The only expression missing, as it always is, is ‘false flag’. Did you not ever catch this headline from the Daily Mail? U.S. ‘backed plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria and blame it on Assad’s regime’ It’s possible you missed it since it was promptly disappeared and now only exists as a cache. Like I said, ‘false flag’ is a verboten term.
As such, we will have every discussion imaginable, from absurdities pivoting on Assad using chemical weapons on the very day that weapons inspectors that he himself invited arrive, to soft discussions of whether we have the legal right to punish him for it. And yet on the topic of us as the far more likely perpetrators there’s nothing. And, yeah yeah, proxies. How clever we are.
This is the Big Lie. No need to look to Hitler. We, the states of modern Western democracy (marching to the hallowed strains of ‘Jerusalem’), make Hitler look like a boy scout. As Big Lies go we out-Hitler Hitler.
And then there’s Assad. Between him, his cannabalistic, priest-slaughtering opposition, and us as hell-bent supporters of those cannibals, Assad’s the only sane man in the room. As always our accusations of the villainy of others is merely projection, and a second-hand one at that. If anyone deserves missile strikes, no-fly zones, and invasion it’s us, the mindless golem of the Middle East. We are the bad guys.
And until false-flag Big Lies are acknowledged as at least being possible (never mind the easily arguable ‘as likely as any other thing’) then I’m sorry but we will get fooled again. That’s us – a deluded Sisyphus climbing that foreign mountain all the better to aim the boulder at the undeserving bastards below. God rot us.
Go on Craig. Roll it around in your mouth: ‘…as likely as any other thing’.
“He means it will take a few days for those who profit from war to work out how to spin the vote against military action as a vote for military action. That process will start in the next few minutes.”
Nevertheless, a failed motion needs to be seen for exactly what it is — a failed motion and a failure of the mischievous minds behind it. The evidence will now be ever more closely examined. The time for hustling is through, the debate becomes more rigorous and alive.
___________
Barkbat: “This whole idea that if we don’t bomb syria tomorrow Assad has ‘got away with using chemical weapons’ is so childish.”
Couldn’t agree with you more. Add to that this extract from wikipedia on Cameron: ” When commenting in 2006 on his former pupil’s ideas about a “Bill of Rights” to replace the Human Rights Act, however, Professor Bogdanor, himself a Liberal Democrat, said, “I think he is very confused. I’ve read his speech and it’s filled with contradictions. There are one or two good things in it but one glimpses them, as it were, through a mist of misunderstanding”.[36]
It speaks for itself that this lot, including Clegg, are hardly likely to grow a few inches taller anytime soon.
I hope he’s having as restless a night as I am. As an aside, I sometimes wonder do these guys get natural sleep or are all these humanitarians on drugs?
Haward – this wasn’t “typical” Lib Dem. They voted overwhelmingly against the Iraq war – but now they are in government, their own careers crawls are at stake. Just like Labour government ministers in 2003 thought thousands of lives were not as important as theirs.
The 80%+ MPs who are members of Friends of Israel party (the Tories) are generally in favour of wars to defend Israel. Cameron goofed. Miliband wasn’t against involvement. Insulting someone isn’t exactly the way to get them on side.
Questioning continues over administration’s case for Syrian intervention
By BILL ROGGIO AND LISA LUNDQUISTAugust 29, 2013 11:39 AM
Read more: http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/archives/2013/08/others_also_question_administr.php#ixzz2dQZy0O2n
Extracts:
“Now an article by Kimberly Dozier and Matt Apuzzo at the Associated Press about the US intelligence report issued today ostensibly justifying a US intervention appears to confirm the soundness of our questions. According to the article, US intelligence officials familiar with the contents of the report say that “the intelligence linking Syrian President Bashar Assad or his inner circle to an alleged chemical weapons attack is no ‘slam dunk,’ with questions remaining about who actually controls some of Syria’s chemical weapons stores and doubts about whether Assad himself ordered the strike.”
Several key paragraphs of their article are excerpted below:
Intelligence officials say they could not pinpoint the exact locations of Assad’s supplies of chemical weapons, and Assad could have moved them in recent days as U.S. rhetoric builds. That lack of certainty means a possible series of U.S. cruise missile strikes aimed at crippling Assad’s military infrastructure could hit newly hidden supplies of chemical weapons, accidentally triggering a deadly chemical…
…..US policymakers are also questioning the administration’s case and plan. As the New York Times reported, “Speaker John A. Boehner wrote a letter on Wednesday to Mr. Obama asking the president to provide a ‘clear, unambiguous explanation of how military action — which is a means, not a policy — will secure U.S. objectives and how it fits into your overall policy.” His question is similar to one we posed in the previous Threat Matrix report: “What is the US’s endgame in Syria? Reports are emerging that the Obama administration seeks to ‘punish’ Assad for using chemical weapons. Is this sound strategy, or a tactic that can potentially backfire?”
And if the US believes that an immediate intervention is justified due to the threat that terrorist elements may have used or have access to Syria’s chemical weapons, as President Obama’s comments to PBS yesterday possibly implied, it should say so, not cloak an intervention with vague and possibly erroneous assumptions. Regarding that interview, the Wall Street Journal reported:
Should Syria lose control of its stockpile of chemical weapons, the U.S. might be at risk, he said. Terrorists, in turn, could get hold of such weapons and possibly direct them against the U.S., he said.
“And we want to make sure that does not happen,” he said.”
The Goves (closet I could get to the G word, excuse the typo) and the “Friends” have an alliance (made even easier by ubiquitous smart phone twerking pics). Practically speaking it may be known as the Rantzen/Saville Alliance,and we know how well each protects the others interest at the Beeb. Across all parties they have enough votes to pass any Commons motion, this was a clever ploy to smooth over the “Iraq” debacle, the real war motion will be passed for Israel and the goves in turn will have a Gay Pride National Holiday legislated in time, Cameron has already delivered on gay marriage. There is only a slight problem of the upcoming 2014 Scottish referendum, but Rifkind & dual loyalty Co can forego Pentlands for Pardessiya in the blink of an eye!
If, after the UN inspectors return, the Americans strike Syria without British involvement, hopefully that will serve as a deterrent on the use of chemical weapons.
Nobody spot on. I missed that Daily Mail article which forecast exactly how the false flag was spun. Here again, for others who may have missed it, is the Mail link.
http://web.archive.org/web/20130129213824/http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2270219/U-S-planned-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-Syria-blame-Assad.html
And this is how it panned out if the reports are correct. They certainly seem to have more authentic information than the silly dossier presented to parliament by the intelligence services. So I’ll say it again: there is no intelligence in intelligence.
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_08_25/Syrian-rebels-manufactured-chemical-weapons-outside-Damascus-8968/
Nobody,
I think there are two distinct possibilities:
a) False flag, to try to provoke Western intervention
b) Pro-Assad forces but acting without command authority
On other possibilities, I think it most improbable Assad would be so daft, but still possible. Israeli involvement in a false flag is also possible, as the “intercept evidence” comes from Mossad.
But which of these it actually is I don’t know,
nobody, 30 Aug, 2013 – 3:43 am.
Quite.
Funny how the tone of the board changes when the resident gate-keeper types are away licking their wounds. A couple of days ago you would have been howled down for mentioning that Mail article (like me was).
Crikey – at this rate we might even be able to critices the Israeli lobby and apportion their fair share of blame to the misery and mess being created by thoughtless military adventurism in the region.
Israel is facing a unique situation in it’s history, how will it react? That’s what’s occupying the minds of our security services now.
Ashdown on R4 – what’s wrong with these people? I thought he was realatively anti-war… hang on on… former SBS right?
What two British Army regiments are in Syria? Yes, the SAS and SBS. Regimental loyalties are more important to Ashdown than facts, public opinion and the democratic prosesses of parliament it would seem.
@Nobody. 3 43am
”As Big Lies go we out-Hitler Hitler.
Thanks.
@Snowden+. 2 53am
Now that the NATO bloc is backing away from their purported evidence, this would be an opportune time for Russia and the temporary members to draft a resolution referring the Syrian situation to the International Criminal Court for investigation under Rome Statute Article 13(b).
YES!
So, another misty morning, half expecting to hear the missiles are already raining down, but, wait a moment, it seems there’s new set of things that “everybody knows”.
The BBC has clearly outed itself as a propaganda organ.
Rare MSM articles that mention “false lags” are widely known to have disappeared from the internet.
Bliar and his lying old cronies are being wheeled out to cheer-lead what almost everyone else cannot avoid recognising as another murderous Nato blunder being committed ( low poll nos in favour for bombing).
The Commons votes against the wishes of it’s masters.
The international community gets increasingly critical of the Nato axis,
and that’s only a short part of the list that springs into this rather bleary morning mind.
Am I being naively optimistic or is this worm beginning to turn?
It seems this conversation has already broken out of the backwaters of the internet and the propagandists have run out of ways to herd it back out of sight.
The “fear model” of social control seems to be breaking down. Are sheep morphing into goats?
Let’s keep the conversation leaking out into the world and get the criminals before the ICC.