So a tiny independent radio station in Ireland managed to interview Robert Fisk on the ground in Douma, but none of the British mainstream broadcast media today has him on, despite the political fallout from our Syria bombing attacks being the main news story everywhere? Meantime MSM propagandists including Richard Hall (BBC), Dan Hodges (Mail) and Brian Whitaker (Guardian) and many more queue up to denounce Fisk on twitter from their cosy armchairs.
It bears repeating that the information on the alleged gas attacks – which raises great doubt but which Fisk himself does not claim as definitive – is not the most important part of Fisk’s article. The Hell of rule under the jihadists that we in the West are arming, funding, training, “military advising” and giving air support, alongside Saudi Arabia and Israel, is the indisputable and much more important element of Fisk’s report, as is the clear evidence he provides that the White Helmets are part of the jihadist factions.
To return to Scotland, I am sorry I shocked many of those who wish me well with the vehemence of my attack on Ian Blackford and the SNP for accepting MI6′ version of events, together with a renewed expression of my outrage at Nicola Sturgeon for having instantly supported Boris Johnson’s anti-Russian rhetoric over Salisbury without waiting for evidence.
My anger is not synthetic and there is a fundamental point here.
The question is this: whether Scotland wishes to become truly a different kind of state to the UK, or whether it is simply a case of a management buyout of the local NATO franchise. As the UK enters enthusiastically into a new cold war, that question is now a much sharper one.
The UK security services are Scotland’s enemy. The next effort at Independence is not going to look like 2014 – the British Establishment only allowed that because at the outset they did not believe there was a hope in Hell we could win. Now they are rattled. Our next effort at Independence will look much more like Catalonia. All the signs are that the current leadership of the SNP, who are so comfy having little chats with MI6 in their career break from investment banking, or who want to be an inclusive, unionist-friendly “Queen Mum” figure rather than campaign for Independence, do not have the stomach for the fight. What they do have is comfy, very highly paid, billets as a pocket of token opposition and diversity within the United Kingdom.
Nicola buying into the Johnson story of the new cold war is not a small thing. It is huge, momentous, epoch-defining in Scotland. And a fundamental betrayal of her voters.
A Fully Paid Up Member of the British Establishment
In the next street to where I am writing was born the great James Connolly. He wrote:
When it is said that we ought to unite to protect our shores against the ‘foreign enemy’, I confess to be unable to follow that line of reasoning, as I know of no foreign enemy of this country except the British Government
Note the British government are the enemy – not in any way the people of England. Anybody who cannot repeat Connolly’s statement with conviction is only pretending to be part of the Scottish Independence movement, and will falter as soon as Westminster says no.
Craig is full of crap.
The Independence movement lost the vote. They lost it because the majority of Scottish voters want to remain a part of the UK.
Catalonia, indeed ?
“They lost it because the majority of Scottish voters want to remain a part of the UK.”
Wrong: The majority of voters in Scotland may well have voted NO – but a substantial majority of Scots – those born here and those who are Scots by choice or adoption – voted YES. A large majority of non-Scots people living in Scotland voted NO. This was enough to defeat the Scots.
So much for self-determination. Scotland is an occupied land.
And the evidence for that assertion is???
I’ve read the post-election studies, and do you know what lost the Yes campaign? Not enough SNP voted for independence. Why? Because they realised they’d be worse off.
Ironically, half of my family are Scottish. They were avidly anti-independence.
Personally, were I Scottish I’d have voted Yes, to get away from the neoliberal more that is the UK, and not because I’m stuck in the 1700s and think that Braveheart is a documentary.
Check out the (London) Times – no friend of Scotland.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/majority-of-scottish-born-voters-said-yes-z7v2mmhc8nt
“A majority of Scots-Born voters voted YES”.
I am not a nationalist – I am a socialist and a republican. I voted YES because I want to live in the kind of Scotland described by Craig.
Above all, I really don’t want to live in a neoliberal-driven polity where war is seen as an economic tool – and where a Prime Minister thinks its fine to give Johnie-Foreigner a jolly good thrashing (at the behest of the US of A) – with no democratic mandate to do so (or even to be PM) – using the Feudal absurdity that is the Royal Prerogative
Hold on, we have spent the last week or so claiming you cannot Trust the UK media particularly the likes of the Times yet you now think their reports are truth itself when it suits ? Make up your mind.
“I’ve read the post-election studies, and do you know what lost the Yes campaign? Not enough SNP voted for independence. Why? Because they realised they’d be worse off.”
Not so, the lies and scaremongering from Better Together and their mouthpiece the English media sealed the deal.
On things such as vote yes and you’ll lose your pension, or vote yes and you’ll not be allowed to share the currency even though Allistar Darling admitted later that, was not true.
Or vote yes and you’ll be out of the EU, that one still makes me laugh.
Or other scaremongering stories from the English media, you won’t receive the BBC if you become independent (a blessing in disguise really) we’d need to build a border wall, Scotland could be attacked from outerspace, or one of my favourites by Lord George Robertson, Scottish independence will lead to the Balkanisation of Western Europe.
What is your evidence for this? What figures do you have and how did you come by them ?
See:
http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/09/voted-yes-voted/
“According to YouGov only 26% of those who were born in England, Wales or Northern Ireland voted Yes, little more than half the equivalent figure (49%) amongst those born in Scotland. In contrast, the division of the vote amongst those who were born outside the UK (many of whom would have been Irish, Commonwealth or EU citizens) was much less distinctive, with 41% saying they voted Yes.
Meanwhile, people’s sense of national identity was also reflected in how they voted. In Ipsos MORI’s two final polls, no less than 88% of those who said they were Scottish and not British voted Yes, compared with 65% of those who said they were ‘More Scottish than British’ and 26% of those who felt ‘Equally British and Scottish’. Amongst the two remaining small groups, only 9% of those who said they were ‘More British than Scottish’ identified themselves as Yes voters, and just 13% of those who said they were British and not Scottish.”
”Wrong: The majority of voters in Scotland may well have voted NO – but a substantial majority of Scots – those born here and those who are Scots by choice or adoption – voted YES. A large majority of non-Scots people living in Scotland voted NO. This was enough to defeat the Scots.
So much for self-determination. Scotland is an occupied land.’
Hang on, let me get this straight.
Let me try and turn it around……Majority of English voted Leave EU. Substantial amount who live in England but are not English voted Remain.
Result reflects England is up for self determination.
We are therefore a racist, bigoted country who hates johnny foreigner.
Only if I am Scottish can I play the race card and victim card and not be called out for doing so.
You sir, are a charlatan.
Can you please support or withdraw your assertions that
foreign immigrants stabbed the Scottish volk in the back“a substantial majority of Scots – those born here and those who are Scots by choice or adoption – voted YES. A large majority of non-Scots people living in Scotland voted NO. This was enough to defeat the Scots.”Also please can you explain what you mean when you say that “Scotland is an occupied land”. Am i right to infer that you feel that the “occupiers” are the “non-Scots people living in Scotland” who you believe acted in the referendum to prevent the Scottish nation from achieving its destiny of independence?
Perhaps the other pro-independence contributors here might comment on John’s post?
See my post above citing data from “WhatScotlandThinks”
http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/09/voted-yes-voted/
Thank you for this. So your argument runs as follows.
Conclusion
“(A) substantial majority of Scots – those born here and those who are Scots by choice or adoption – voted YES. A large majority of non-Scots people living in Scotland voted NO. This was enough to defeat the Scots.”
Support
(YouGov) Voted Yes:
born in Scotland, 49%
born outside of Britain, 41%
born in EWNI, 26%
(MORI) Yes voters as proportions of following groups:
Scottish and not British, 88%;
more Scottish than British, 65%
equally British and Scottish, 26%
more British than Scottish, 9%
British and not Scottish, 13%
My Comments
If we assume those YouGov stats are reliable, they show that a majority of voters born in Scotland (51%) voted NO. So your contention that “a substantial majority of Scots – those born here and those who are Scots by choice or adoption – voted YES” seems to be false unless you can show that a very large majority of Scots who were not born here but who are Scottish by “choice or adoption” tipped the balance for Yes among the two groups taken as a whole. To change 49% into a “substantial majority”, which presumably means at least 60%, the majority would need to be very large.
Support for Yes among those born outside of Britain was 41%, and for those born in EWNI it was 26%. You may perhaps wish to say that it must have been the minorities of Yes voters among these two minorities who constitute those who are Scots by choice or adoption, but that would be to fiddle the figures. Your hidden premise in such an argument would be to say that those born in EWNI or outside of Britain who voted NO cannot have been Scots by “choice or adoption”, whereas those who voted YES were.
Note that while those stats give us an idea of the proportions among different groups of voters who voted Yes and No, they don’t tell us the relative sizes of those groups. According to the 2011 census, 16% of the Scottish population consider themselves to be other than Scottish; and as far as places of birth go, 83% were born in Scotland, 9% were born in England, 1% in Wales or Northern Ireland, and 7% elsewhere.
You sound very much as if you want to convey that you don’t mind Pakistani immigrants in Scotland because some of them speak with Scottish accents and voted for independence but you don’t like English immigrants because many support England against Scotland in sporting events and a substantial proportion voted to keep the union. I wonder who you think the millions of Scots living in England support in the same sporting events. Also before you show us your tattoos of the royalist Scottish lion you might consider the possibility that people who support different football teams and who have different ethnicities can be friends and neighbours with each other and show mutual respect.
It has to be said that never in my life have I come across an English person who supports “whoever’s playing against Scotland”, whereas I have had the misfortune to meet many Scots who support whoever is playing against England.
That’s the thing with nationalism: if it’s not fascist already, it always tends in that direction.
I don’t think I used the word ‘English’. It is perhaps instructive that you seem to interpret ‘Non-Scots’ as ‘English’.
What I said was ‘non-Scots’. My points were based in published statistics cited above.
Our occupation is by Westminster – now currently trying to undo even the pale devolution settlement under cover of Brexit.
My concern is about self-determination. How do we define ‘self’ in the term self-determination?
See:
http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/09/voted-yes-voted/
“In Ipsos MORI’s two final polls, no less than 88% of those who said they were Scottish and not British voted Yes, compared with 65% of those who said they were ‘More Scottish than British’ and 26% of those who felt ‘Equally British and Scottish’. Amongst the two remaining small groups, only 9% of those who said they were ‘More British than Scottish’ identified themselves as Yes voters, and just 13% of those who said they were British and not Scottish.”
I am struggling to see how the seriously flawed Scottish Referendum (where the No campaign was largely funded by foreign-based astroturf organisations) squares with any logical definition of “SELF-determination.
The Scots said YES
Actually there are plenty of unionists in Scotland who support whoever Scotland is playing.
Of course, it’s important to distinguish in these sorts of things between the wife beater and the wife. The wife beater assumes a sort of ownership over his wife so it probably makes sense that he would want her to have success in certain (meaningless) areas that don’t have any implications for his ownership.
Now before you start ranting and raving about what constitutes a colony, maybe you can demonstrate what you said about good neighbours respecting each other and do two things; 1) respect the opinion of Scots who regard the UK as a one-sided abusive relationship, one that has much in common with a neo-colonial relationship, and 2) fuck off.
strange that EU citizens were allowed to vote in the Scottish Indy vote, while the MSM was on to the slogan a vote to leave the UK is a vote to leave the EU, and the vote to quit the EU was forbidden to EU citizens
Strange and beneficial to the SNP I would have thought, given that they were selling the “be a real European – vote Yes” line.
The Scottish Independence movement, almost certainly won the vote, but it was bent, by The Scottish Labour Party, in the count (and by The British Intelligence Services – hijacking the postal ballots).
British Intelligence tried hard to do a repeat for BREXIT. They pulled off The Jo Cox affair, which resulted in a massive swing, but then they got complacent, thought they had already got their own way, and to be honest so did I.
But many people saw through it, and actually went to vote for BREXIT, some for the very first time, including my son.
I had been nagging him to vote for years, and finally he did.
A similar thing happened in America, which amazed me even more. I didn’t think Trump stood a cat in hells chance, but Americans went to vote for him cos, they could see through Hillary Clinton.
So maybe Democracy is not quite dead yet, which would be a good thing, cos then it means we don’t have to use The French method, which is far too messy.
Tony
Please say your first paragraph was tongue in cheek, Tony!
Not sure that many people at the time questioned whether Jo Cox died. I thought of abstaining for 24 hours but then thought I shouldn’t let if affect my No vote. BTW re your earlier post if Jo Cox survived but has since be killed by the secret services I think her parents and sister would be complaining.
Naomi Woolf at the Hope over Fear Rally George Square Glasgow 12 10 2014… https://youtu.be/SPhRmcOBuH4 via @YouTube
I shared your shock at Sturgeon’s response and I was even angrier with Blackford. Furthermore I was disgusted by some of the excuses made for their actions by some SNP supporters. The dismay I felt about the SNP choosing to be seen as backing May’s cabinet in their actions on Salisbury and Syria was shared by many.
Including me.
Does anyone remember the Yellow Rain Affair?
(Not the recent one in the Steele Dossier on Trump)
It has remarkable parallels with the current situation.
Reports in the 1970s of Yellow Rain, alleged chemical/toxin weapons attacks in Southeast Asia and Afghanistan, sparked the first large-scale investigation conducted by the United States into allegations of chemical and biological weapons (CBW) use.
In September 1981 Alexander Haig, the then US secretary of state, made a stunning allegation. He claimed to have evidence that Soviet-backed forces in Vietnam and Laos had been waging chemical warfare on villagers in those countries. A dossier, released shortly after, documented eye-witness accounts – dating back to 1977 – of aircraft spraying areas with a substance that left vegetation littered with small yellow spots. Far worse were reports of horrific symptoms in the exposed populations: people who suffered stomach cramps and vomiting, before dying. This, according to a lab the US government employed, was due to deadly trichothecene toxins present in the yellow material that rained down on the villagers.
Subsequently, a group of academic scientists led by Harvard molecular biologist Matthew Meselson questioned the validity of the evidence on which the U.S. government had based its allegations of toxin warfare. The skeptics argued that trichothecene mycotoxins occur naturally in Southeast Asia and that the alleged victims had confused chemical attacks with harmless showers of yellow feces released by swarms of giant Asian honeybees. The scientific critics also raised doubts about the reliability of the refugee testimony and the laboratory analyses.
There was a larger context to this story. When Alexander Haig claimed that the Soviets were using chemical weapons in Laos, the Reagan administration was also trying to ratchet up the Cold War. Specifically, they were trying to get the Europeans to accept stationing nuclear-tipped medium-range missiles in Germany, the Pershing II. The Soviets were threatening to put their own missiles, the SS-20, in Poland.
The whole chemical weapon story was another stick to beat the Soviets with.
It ended up being a huge embarrassment to the US. The official US line was a very serious charge about a war crime, and it turned out to be bee feces.
Credit goes to Prof. Matthew Meselson of Harvard, an entomologist who was able to out-analyze the entire US Army based on resources available in Cambridge.
If you read this US Propaganda piece from 1983, you will see exactly the same kind of language used, same kind of allegations, same scientific hoodwinking, same media hysteria, same Intelligence source “evidence”:
http://insidethecoldwar.org/sites/default/files/documents/Yellow%20Rain_1.pdf
Turned out it was all LIES, and the toxin came from BEE excrerment,
The “Yellow Rain” controversy: Are there lessons from the past?
By a scientist in Thailand, who I greatly admire, Henry Wilde:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279640502_The_Yellow_Rain_controversy_Are_there_lessons_from_the_past
The Yellow Rain Affair, Lessons from a Discredited Allegation
https://www.belfercenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/files/Meselsonchapter.pdf
Misperceptions in preparing for biological attack: an historical survey
http://www.oie.int/doc/ged/D3223.PDF
The American political, military and scientific establishment were eventually exposed as liars and frauds.
Nothing new there, but what makes me sick is how they used their dirty propaganda and “interview” tactics on starving Hmong refugees to concoct fake eyewitness accounts and then betrayed the Hmong guerrillas and left most of those brave soldiers to rot.
America, it is you who is rotten to the core, and as we can see now, you learned your dirty tricks breast feeding from your mother, Britain.
Thanks, I had forgotten about this. Interesting what Wikipedia has to say about the US acknowledgment of its “error”:
“The majority of the scientific literature on this topic now regards the hypothesis that yellow rain was a Soviet chemical weapon as disproved. However, the issue remains disputed and the U.S. government has not retracted these allegations,[6] arguing that the issue has not been fully resolved”
Yes, they are still trying to spin it, they realize it shows “form”, check the wiki talk page to see what I mean.
I posted also on the Douma post with some added information as maybe it is considered not so relevant here.
The Henry Wilde paper is good because he was actually working for the US in Laos and interviewed Hmong people and then resigned in disgust when he realized what the US Gov was up to. he discusses all that here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279640502_The_Yellow_Rain_controversy_Are_there_lessons_from_the_past
This differs from the Chemtrails nonsense how exactly?
Your comment is nonsensical. Can you clarify your meaning?
The SNP made a big mistake when they departed from the principle that a majority of Scottish MPs supporting Independence would be enough to dissolve the 1707 Union . Even Mrs Thatcher agreed with this . At the next general election this needs to be in our manifesto. We don’t need to lower ourselves to ask for permission for a referendum. We in Scotland just need to tell the other HALF of the Union that we are going to let them have their independence whether they want it or not.
So even if a majority of people in Scotland vote for Unionist parties you still think there should be independence without a referendum if separatist parties win a majority of Scottish seats in a British general election. How about if a majority of local councils in Scotland have majorities in favour of independence? Or whatever other criterion works for your case. Why on earth is it “lowering (yourselves)” to have a one-person one-vote ballot on the issue that is so important to you? Do it lawfully and then you’d have legitimacy. Never mind what Margaret Thatcher told you. Nobody’s asking you to lower yourself. Have you considered you might have a chip on your shoulder? You lost precisely such a one-person one-vote ballot only three years ago, and then less than a year ago nearly two thirds of Scottish voters voted in a British general election for Unionist candidates. In between those two votes, the SNP lost its majority in the Scottish parliament. The wind seems to be blowing away from both the SNP and the independence movement.
I could not agree more, Roderick. The Union was created by a Parliamentary vote; it can (only) be dissolved by a Parliamentary vote.
A majority of Scots parliamentarians (in both the Scottish and British parliaments) support an independent Scotland. The mandate exists and is current. There is no logical reason why they cannot reconvene in Edinburgh and repeal the Act of Union – and a strong democratic argument that they should .
As you say – such a partnership – as in any partnership, may be dissolved by either side. It seems from Brexit and other evidence that England ‘wants its country back’.
I think we should liberate them from their shackles!
If the entire situation was not so gravely dangerous then it would be hilarious.
On the one hand you have a manufactured story of an ex spy being poisoned along with an incredulous tale of mass poisonings in Syria. all naturally enough being blamed on Russia. Some people are clearly working overtime to provoke a major war with the Russians. Perhaps they will succeed.
On the other hand you have ideologically possessed Scottish nationalists leaping up and down because of emerging differences among the pure and the holy and the good. Try to understand that in a nuclear exchange with Russia Scotland (along with the rest of the UK) will cease to exist in short order.
How can someone devote their entire adult life to the cause of Scottish independence whilst more latterly agitating for the complete and utter destruction of Scotland and all of its inhabitants? Makes you think doesn’t it. Apparently not, if you are a Scottish Nationalist. Therein almost certainly lies the reason why Scottish independence is a joke – always has been and always will be.
You are clueless. There are good pragmatic reasons for independence such as the total lack of democracy .so that Scotland is effectively a colony. Anyway it is up to Scottish people. It is called self-determination and is one of the founding principles of the UN. Who are you to mock us?
If you’re clueful, come up with a good reason for independence.
The information is widely available but judging by your wording I would say you are just trying to wind me up. Such a superior attitude. Besides, I gave a rough outline of some of the problems with the fake union in my previous post so that should be enough for you to be going on with.
I’m not trying to wind you up at all. You think it’s “superior” of me to ask you to support your contention that “there are good pragmatic reasons” by actually citing some, and then you patronisingly tell me the “information” is widely available? Why don’t you tell me to “Google” it, as a 14-year-old gum-chewer picking on its mobile phone might?
You sound as though you just know you want independence and any argument you might come up with would be in support of what you already know you want. There is not “a total lack of democracy”, and in particular no impediments are put in the way of candidates who want to stand in any election in Scotland on a pro-independence platform. As for Scotland being a “colony”, I wonder what you mean by that word. I can guess whose colony you think Scotland is. It’s an “English” colony, right? Haha. Of course Scotland isn’t anything like a colony. An example of a real colony would be Gibraltar, where the majority, just as in Scotland which is not a colony, are opposed to independence. And self-determination? What, like in the independence referendum? What was that if it wasn’t self-determination?
Then one could ask what you feel should happen after independence with British citizens born outside of Scotland who live in Scotland, and with those born in Scotland who live in, ooh, let’s say England. Those are important issues for real people in Scotland and for real Scots living elsewhere – a total of millions of people – but fuck all that, right, because a bunch of manic shoulder-chippy raving chauvinists whose pork-barrel leaders want to trouser even more EU money than they already get want to encourage Scots to feel that non-Scots from “Westminster” have robbed them. Any serious observer knows that the SNP’s “Brexit argues for independence” line is nothing but a stirring up of the ugly “we support whoever’s playing against England” mentality.
Oh N_
You make our point for us. The venom and contempt of the colonial master! To blind to see it; and too contemptuous to care!
There are many; here’s one: to be rid of the perversion of democratic governance that is Westminster, an insult to the intelligence never mind democracy,
Do you have any idea what a Charlie you sound? You’re just dressing up your xenophobia with polysyllabic words you half-understand. So you couldn’t get a job south of the border, right?
My N_, you’re spewing out a lot of anti-Scottish independence tonight. I’ve never applied for a job South of the border. Are you suggesting it’s more difficult to get a job there or are you suggesting jobs are of a superior nature down there? It’s almost as if you have a chip on your shoulder.
November: Foxtrot Oscar
Easy. Money.
we are sitting on more Hydrocarbon potential than Norway with its sky high living standards and it’s $1 trillion Sovereign “for a rainy day” fund.
add into that with our potential renewal energy potential (something not lost on Iceland and Norway, see Arctic Circle Assembly) and also the next big resource of the future… fresh water.
with the tax receipts from above, we could rebuild other (non-primary) sectors of the economy, re-establish the Scottish Stock exchange along with an Investment bank to fund the economic growth without being held captive to LSE and other markets?
I have worked with many nationalities in my time and nearly 100% hold the opinion that Scotland would be a rich and successful country on it’s own, several also (without prompting by me by the way) hold the belief that we are being robbed blind.
Funnily enough quite a few of them are from commonwealth or former commonwealth countries, they also strongly hold the belief that Britain blindly robbed/robs it’s colonies and also during Indyref, they would say “that’s the same lies the de-colonisation committee used to tell us”
So N_, hows does the more money, and not being bent and screwed over argument? pass the good reason test?
I am not mocking you – you are mocking yourselves. What kind of person contemplates nuclear armageddon and seeks to calculate its likely effects on Scottish independence?
Try to understand that if you have been vaporized or if you are sitting a cave coughing up parts of your internal organs then democracy and self determination will not be of concern to you. Alternatively just carry on mocking yourself.
Well at least we wouldn’t have trident sitting in our most heavily populated area which is a huge hazard even if noone attacks us.
[MOD: Kindly choose a simple username, not a slogan]
—
I take it by us, you mean those who support the SNP as opposed the people of Scotland?
Are you nuts? Of course I meant everyone who lives here. We have’t got apartheid here. The SNP is the party of government and runs Scotland for the benefit of everyone. We have democracy you know.
Loony,
Although English. I was born in England as were both of my parents (the current interpretation of nationality by the current British administration is somewhat bizzare if you believe what is written in the Independent – you can be born in England of English parents, yet still not get a British passport), my genes are overwhelmingly Scottish, Welsh & French (North West), so I was wondering which side of the border I was on, when the Roman’s built Hadrians Wall, which someone mentioned today. My interest in history was not great at school, so I didn’t know. My Scottish relations insist I am Scottish. They told me when I was 7 years old. However, I really like the Northern English Lake District. Scotland maybe pretty (where I got married), but its rather a long way
The Romans built Hadrians Wall, to keep the Barbarians like me out of England, but since then, the border has been moved further North. I am not surprised if the the Scottish now feel threatened about England’s expansion, into what used to be part of Scotland.
Tony
(Incidentally, the Romans used Syrians and Belgiums to build Hadrians wall, so they weren’t that bad. The English would have used The Scottish, except they couldn’t control them)
http://blog.english-heritage.org.uk/30-surprising-facts-hadrians-wall/
“3. Soldiers from Syria were stationed there
Hadrian’s Wall was garrisoned by auxiliary soldiers from across the Roman Empire. These were non-citizens who were recruited into the army and often stationed far away from their homeland.
Although generally the soldiers manning Hadrian’s Wall came from northern Europe, there are also examples of units posted there from much further afield. Examples included Asturians (from northern Spain) at Chesters Roman Fort and Dacians (from Romania) at Birdoswald. Perhaps the furthest from home were the Syrians at Housesteads, who lived alongside the Tungrians from modern day Belgium.”
[MOD: Kindly choose a simple username, not a slogan]
—
Tony, Hadrian’s wall does not mark the border. If it did, half of Northumbria including the City of Newcastle would be in Scotland.
That was my point.
Hadrian’s Wall did mark the border, when The Romans got The Syrians to build it.
What Fisk reports cannot be true, the UK government have boots on the ground Jaish al islam who state without doubt Assad was responsible.
Yes, and the White Helmets have confirmed it together with the Syrian Organisation of Human Rights (who are always very close to the action).
Sorry, Syrian Observatory of Human Rights at Jodrell Bank.
Thanks. I stand corrected and will fly a vane for May, Macron and Trump.
Also, everything was confirmed by the BBC.
The warmongering PM, questioning why the Execute could bypass parliament and go to war, well once she thought that, certainly not now.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisMasonBBC/status/986260526543106048
quiteright
Media Lens so infuriate the Main Stream because David Cromwell and David Edwards are trained journalists themselves.
Syria has retracted its statement that its base near Homs was attacked last night with (presumed I__aeli) missiles which it shot down. They say it was a false alarm. No missiles.
Somebody may be messing with somebody else’s communications. There are so many possibilities as to who has been doing what to whom and I would not like to speculate.
This is a breaking story. Apparently the Russians have found the means and chemicals for producing chemical weapons at a rebel held stronghold in Douma.
http://theduran.com/breaking-russian-military-finds-chemical-weapons-storehouse-in-douma/
Superb, Craig. You’ve put the corporate media to shame over the last few weeks.
Just a thought as to why the PM was quick to attack Syria.
“Philip May, husband of the UK prime minister, works for a company that is the largest shareholder in arms manufacturer, BAE Systems, whose share price has soared since the recent airstrikes in Syria.”
https://www.rt.com/uk/424392-may-husbands-capital-group/
How convenient.
It would be much better that her husband is CEO of some yogurt company, then maybe only schools would be affected with some mandatory meal.
Better yet can someone get him a directorship at Donald Russell?
Republicofscotland,
So far as I am aware, that story was proven to be largely bollocks, when it first came out, which is also indicated in the link you gave.
“When asked at the time of the scandal about her husband’s role, a spokesperson for the UK PM told reporters: “Mr May is involved in the development of Capital Group’s retirement solutions. He is not an investor but consults with other Capital associates on retirement products and solutions for clients.”
However, I have no knowledge of the finacial affairs of either of The Mays.
All I am almost certain of is that Theresa May is Guilty of Gross Deception and War Crimes on an Appalling scale, even worse than Tony Blair. Tony Blair never threatened a Nuclear World War. She just did, and she is still in power. She has got to Resign, as does Boris Johnson and the other cretin Gavin Williamson.
Her husband may well be innocent.
Tony
Thanks RoS. Confirmed on this site. As if RT would publish untrue information.
Shareholders BAE Systems (BA. – London Stock Exchange)BAE Systems PLC (ADR) (BAESY – OTC Bulletin Board) Name Equities %
Capital Research & Management Co. (World Investors) 261,893,461 8.21%
Invesco Asset Management Ltd. 158,218,133 4.96%
Templeton Investment Counsel LLC 156,278,735 4.90%
Barclays Bank Plc (Private Banking) 126,420,603 3.96%
The Vanguard Group, Inc. 102,420,729 3.21%
Silchester International Investors LLP 95,609,551 3.00%
Templeton Global Advisors Ltd. 79,165,000 2.48%
Legal & General Investment Management Ltd. 74,397,661 2.33%
Capital Research & Management Co. (Global Investors) 58,468,000 1.83%
BlackRock Advisors (UK) Ltd. 58,067,266 1.82%
Company contact information
BAE Systems
6 Carlton Gardens
SW1Y 5AD London
United Kingdom
Internet : http://www.baesystems.com
http://www.4-traders.com/BAE-SYSTEMS-9583545/company/
From 561 to 601 March 26 to April 17
http://www.4-traders.com/BAE-SYSTEMS-9583545/charts-news-chart/
Sharp Ears,
So what does that prove with regards to Philip May?
I have no financial interest in any of these companies, except I do have a Barclaycard, which I very rarely use, and have only paid any interest on it once, when my bank put a block on the normal debit card I use, when I was on a little Greek island, and I had no other way, to pay for the bill.
It may well be that Phillip May owns half of BAE, and Tony Blair much of the rest – but where is the evidence? I am not saying they don’t but I have no evidence that they do.
Have you or Ros? I now know what btl means. I’ve been wondering for ages.
Tony
He works for Capital. Two entries there. I have said nothing about him working for BAE.
Capital Research & Management Co. (World Investors) 261,893,461 8.21%
Capital Research & Management Co. (Global Investors) 58,468,000 1.83%
I am sure the link below has already been posted today but if you have been following the events in Syria on this blog then please take the time to watch Ron Paul’s Liberty Report Talking with Vanessa Beeley in Damascus – published today.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6VzBfkQh5A
Remembering Julian. A prisoner of Mrs May. Pamela Anderson was on Good Morning Britain with Piers Morgan and Susannah Reid. The latter used to be a presenter on the BBC.
‘Julian Assange could die in Ecuadorian embassy’ – Pamela Anderson
Actress-turned-activist Pamela Anderson has again appeared on UK television to express her admiration for “political prisoner” and “hero” Julian Assange, saying she fears for his health and worries he could die in the embassy.
Apr 17, 2018 13:21
https://www.rt.com/news/424383-pamela-anderson-julian-assange-die/
Nearly all 34 comments btl are onside.
divide and conquer. Or in this case, keep in purgatory. While we have a rotten government, we all lose, and while Scotts are distracted, fighting amongst themselves over the referendum and splitting the left to middle vote so that the torries dominate, our powers to rid our government of rot or even change them at all is seriously weakened. After Blair I thought the rot was terminal across any party, until Corbyn came into contention. I would really like to see if he could straighten things out. Until things are straighten out though, I fear Scotts would not get an uncorrupted referendum anyway.
*Scots
ah I was in two minds, thanks for confirming the correct spelling
Here’s a US reporter supporting the discovery Robert Fisk made yesterday that there never was a chemical attack. It was staged. And the BBC, Guardian and other tools of government bullshit say nothing.
http://theduran.com/one-america-network-oan-broadcasts-from-douma-syria-reports/
Goebbels served just one day as Chancellor of Germany after succeeding Hitler, the UK would be better off if Theresa May’s government had lasted just one day too.
The Crimean authorities have relied on the well-known Kosovo precedent, a precedent our Western partners created themselves, with their own hands, so to speak. In a situation absolutely similar to the Crimean one, they deemed Kosovo’s secession from Serbia to be legitimate, arguing everywhere that no permission from the country’s central authorities was required for the unilateral declaration of independence. The UN’s international court, based on Paragraph 2 of Article 1 of the UN Charter, agreed with that, and in its decision of 22 July 2010 noted the following, and I quote verbatim: No general prohibition may be inferred from the practice of the Security Council with regard to unilateral declarations of independence.
UN’s Int. Court No prohibition may be inferred from the practice of the Security Council regarding unilateral declarations of independence.
«In a situation absolutely similar to the Crimean one, they deemed Kosovo’s secession from Serbia to be legitimate»
Not at all similar: Kosovo’s secession from Yugoslavia (and Serbia) happened after several months of bombing of the capital of Yugoslavia and a proper invasion and occupation by several foreign powers after the bombing, with tanks, infanty, helicopters, etc., and the surrender of Yugoslavia with conditions; but there was no bombing of Kiev by Russia, or an invasion of the Ukraine or Krimea, it was simply first a declaration of independence, and then a request from the independent Crimean state to become part of the Russian Federation. Obviously many russians supported both, and I can imagine that “volunteer” peacekeepers went to the Ukraine, but there was no bombing, no widespread fighting, massacres of departing ukrainians or crimean collaborators with the ukrainians (for which several kosovar leaders have been sentenced for war crimes), no ethnic cleansing, and minimal fighting between crimeans insurgents and ukrainian armed forces. It was a pretty much entirely political, civilized switch of membership.
great points Blissex!
Here’s a random thought. Consider the nonsensical attack on the Skripals and Mays speed of light push to blame Russia without proof or investigation. What if she was working against a deadline ?
Supposing the attack on Syria had been planed sometime time prior to the fake gas attack on Douma and May was in agreement with it, which BTW would explain why she went ahead without any debate.
We had already been conned into a disastrous war by Blair with his WMD lies. We would be naturally skeptical of the same thing happening again should May wish to cuddle up with Trump.
Good thing for her then that she managed to dirty up Russia, Assads best and strongest ally before attacking him.
Illegal ‘war of aggression’ is crime whether planned in advance or not. It makes no difference.
You seem to have missed my point, never mind.
I think I understood it. You’re saying they may have wanted to avoid another Iraq type situation with questions being asked beforehand etc.
I’m saying it’s breaking international law regardless, just as the attack on Iraq did.
I suppose your emphasis is on the politics rather than the law but that’s UK bubble stuff. In the real world nobody cares about UK politics, it’s embrassingly sewer-like at the best of times. The whole culture of the UK is really, in my opinion.
It would also explain why the TV series Strike Back: Retribution on Sky had Novichok as part of the plot, and why the 10 episode series that was supposed to end its run on Sky last year was split into 2, 5 episode halves, so the second half could end this year, much closer in time and memory to the Skripal affair.
Thankfully I threw the TV out years ago, there was something wrong with the colour adjustment, I kept seeing the BBC through a red mist.
Understand what you say though.
TJ
“It would also explain why the TV series Strike Back: Retribution on Sky had Novichok as part of the plot,”
Last Sundays Homeland on C4 TV Double agent Dante Allen while recovering in a hospital bed from being poisoned was told by Carrie Mathison CIA it was the Russians who did it.
RAC,
You are almost certainly correct. The evidence is very strong that she was on a deadline. The British controlled headchoppers/white helmets/ ISIS/ Al Quada Terrorists in East Ghouta who were doing the most appalling things to the civilians who lived there, and lobbing loads of missiles at Damascus, were being cleared out by the Syrian Government Army, much faster than anticipated by the US/UK/French Governments. They were desperate to do anything they could to launch a major attack to prevent this, but for PR purposes, needed to pull a False Flag to do so. The Skripal thing was the lead-up to it to Brainwash The British public. Chemical Weapons blah blah blah for the third time. By the time they were ready, they were too late, and nearly all The Terrorists gave up in defeat, and were bussed out by the Russians. The fakery since has been proven by real journalists in Syria. Craig Murray and a few others did a completely brilliant job of exposing the fakery in Salisbury. All the mainstream media, have been lying. Do not trust anything they say – even if it is on The TV news. They themselves are liars and war criminals, especially The BBC and The Guardian. They are even worse than the Daily Mail.
Tony
My guess is that though Trump was sincere in his wish to get out of Syria the CIA had other ideas and for the time being at least are calling the shots there. May is weak and would be eager to ingratiate herself with any strong economy.
Try this. It makes sense to me, but is only one analysis. I still can’t decide whether Trump is a moron or a genius
http://www.voltairenet.org/article200729.html
Extract
“Washington forces its allies to accept a bipolar world
by Thierry Meyssan
By firing missiles on Syria with its French and British allies, the strange President Donald Trump has managed to force the Western powers to accept the end of their unilateral domination of the world. The insignificant result of this demonstration of force drags NATO back to reality. Without having made use of its weapons, Russia now succeeds the Soviet Union in the balance of world power.”
You are right to be suspicious about Douma. The 7 April,2017 attack on the Shayrat Airbase in Syria by the US certainly appears to have been planned long before the Khan Shaykhun chemical attack occured 4th April, 2017. The two US Navy warships, USS Porter and USS Ross fired 59 cruise missiles between them. The number of missiles fired was far in excess of the normal compliment of operational ‘stores’ for this class of ship, meaning the ships had been loaded in port with additional cruise missiles several days, if not weeks, before the US action.
That last paragraph is nothing short of insulting, offensive, inaccurate & utter drivel. To talk of “enemies”, rather than “political opponents” and to assert, as Mr Murray does, that only his flavour of independence (and I remember well his misconceived & ludicrous notions of UDI some time ago) is legitimate is to display the same combination of arrogance & ignorance so prevalent in the unionist mind set. Makes me wonder, in these days, when we are all expected to be armchair statesmen, keyboard warriors and experts on everthing from chemical weapons to the history of salafi wahhabism, just what real motivation underpins this unrealistic & fanciful diatribe. There is one way & only one way to gain independence for this country. Further it is the only worthwhile way. That is to make a case for it. Convince people. Win votes. Any other notion is feeble, defeatist & is guaranteed to fail.
Roy, you are wilfully misunderstanding the point. Craig Murray isn’t as you suggest asking for anyone to vote for his “flavour of independence”. Craig isn’t a politician, he hasn’t made manifesto pledges and commitments, and nobody has invested their vote in him.
The SNP, on the other hand, are supposed to be championing the independence cause. That’s largely why people vote for them. Their manifesto couldn’t have been clearer on indyref2, so what are they doing towards that? Is now not the time?
Forget what Craig is saying and doing, what is the SNP saying and doing? Unlike Craig, they have a profound debt to the people who voted for them.
We are walking into a ‘no deal’ hard Brexit, another war in the Middle East, possibly World War III, alongside a UK government that couldn’t be more discredited, incompetent, and arrogant, and now is not the time for indyref2? I really don’t think the time could be any better.
These issues are like gifts from God to the Indy movement and we are going to come out of this with nothing. If this isn’t the time, when is the time? What would it take for the SNP to move?
“Note the British government are the enemy – not in any way the people of England. Anybody who cannot repeat Connolly’s statement with conviction is only pretending to be part of the Scottish Independence movement, and will falter as soon as Westminster says no.”
The above is the last paragraph and it was this I was reacting to. Let me subsitute some words to illustrate:-
Note the Scottish government are the enemy – not in any way the people of Scotland. Anybody who cannot repeat the May/Davidson/Mundell statement with conviction is only pretending to be part of the Unionist movement, and will falter as soon as Scotland says yes.
Now, worse things have been said, but I hope you see my point. Mr Murray is promoting his view of independence, which, it seems to me is based not on a wish for democratic self determination but rather on a viceral hatred of the British establishment. Which is why I question his motives, To gain independence a good number of “No” voters will have to be convinced of the case. Not told they are the “enemy”
I find your last point very unpleasant. War in the Middle East “like gifts from God to the Indy movement” 470000 people dead. 13.5 million people displaced. If that is a gift, then no thanks. Quite glad I don’t believe in your “God”
Well said Roy! A spirited defence of the democratic route to independence.
I accept that Nicola Sturgeon bowed to the advice of the intelligence service. She can hardly publicly denounce them.
She said that she based her support on the information she was given. If the intelligence service has lied about the facts then they have broken their oath to the people (OK the Queen in this case).
Unfortunately, this type of SNP Bad article brings out the worst kind of concern trolling. There is plenty of that in the MSM.
Fortunately, a good many commenteers have carried on discussing the more interesting cases of the Skripal poisoning and the Douma gassing. Craig’s perseverance in unmasking the mendacity of the Westminster regime is invaluable.
As I said, I don’t disagree with everything he says & he certainly had Kay Burley on the ropes in a recent Sky News interview. On this occasion though I do not like the tone of his “enemies” rhetoric. Reminds me too much of the right wing media. He is not going to convince many 2014 “No” voters to change their minds with this attitude.
Oh dear the Scottish independence debate is but a distraction which will do nothing but divide us. Stick to the issue please.
A distraction? Really? From what? Scottish independence is about democratic self determination. It is about dividing the British state. Gopd thing too. I do not agree with all that Mr Murray says & I’m not shy about saying so, but he is right, in that Scottish independence aspirations are highly relevent here.
Roy Moore,
The World was in very real danger last weekend of a nuclear war. It could easily have escalated very quickly. The fact that all UK political parties, including The SNP, not only appeared blind to this, but were actually supportive of the quite obvious British Government propaganda, was indicative, that there is No political Opposition to the British Government nor media whatsoever.
The lot of them, are either stupid, brainwashed or deeply complicit, and should all resign.
You are all a total disgrace, and have just seriously risked the future of the human race.
Tony
Scottish independence is a total irrelevance and an utter waste of everyone’s time.
The only independent states in the world are China, North Korea, Russia, Iran and Syria – all are in the sights of the hegemonic power. It is possible that some who are guiding the hegemonic ship of state would prefer planetary annihilation to allowing those states to remain independent.
Take a look at the physical location of Scotland and take a look at Scottish history. Scotland will do what it is told. If it does not recalcitrant Scots will literally be taken outside and shot.
So you can have an “independent” Scotland implementing the orders given to it – or a pile of dead Scots. Similar to the piles of dead people in the previously independent states of Iraq and Libya. Such an attractive proposition – little wonder that in aggregate Scots have not voted for a more direct form of enslavement or for mass death.
Or they could have a modern liberal democracy with generous welfare, a fabulous health service, free education, and prosperity like Norway.
It’s all within their grasp if only they’d believe the truth.
It would be very difficult politically for the U.S. to do anything violent against Scotland.
I’m a Brexiteer, but I don’t think its a coincidence Amber Rudd is facing political problems over immigration so soon after arguing for caution over the false flag. Perhaps Nicola Sturgeon fears the same fate!
The only circumstances in which I would vote for Jeremy Corbyn were if he was standing in my local constituency (somewhere in Scotland, snout firmly in trough Tory represented at Westmidden, I suspect election fraud), but he never has and is never likely to, so while I can admire Corbyn for his principled stand and his courage, there is no way on earth I would ever vote for the still Blairite/Atlanticist/Israel apologist/right of Thatcher dominated Labour Party or indeed any unionist party ever again, if no such alternative exists and I don’t think the SNP is that alternative, I’ll probably spoil my ballot paper or simply not vote. The last time I did vote for them it was for the late Gordon McMaster in Paisley South, but I haven’t lived in that part of Scotland for nearly twenty years.
It’s not quite like that now Tony M because Momentum is the grass roots of the party. That’s why I rejoined. Expect some of the career politicians to leave the party soon.
Me too John and there is a new plan to rid the party of the Woodcock/Austin/Bradshaw/et al reptiles
https://apple.news/ABLQ-NwVDR0qwvfvTbSZEsw
Apologies if the link fails – it was an article in the neo Corbynite Politics Home
The link works – after a while. The last sentence is key. Jeremy Corbyn has not yet endorsed this.
However, speaking from a personal point of view, I think many will leave of their own free will. They don’t belong. They belong to the days of Tony Blair and all secretly hoped they could get as rich as him off the backs of the poor. That is not what the old Labour Party stood for.
«I can admire Corbyn for his principled stand and his courage, there is no way on earth I would ever vote for the still Blairite/Atlanticist/Israel apologist/right of Thatcher dominated Labour Party»
The scottish branch of Labour seems indeed still dominated by “New Labour” right-wing opportunists. The english party has changed a lot, let’s hope the scottish branch hopefully will change too.
«or indeed any unionist party ever again, if no such alternative exists and I don’t think the SNP is that alternative»
If you feel for independence, voting SNP is right now the only way to express that, however flawed that is.
Do you think Leonards win might shake things up. I kmow he said something along the lines of being “too old to be a Corbinista” but I think he is on the same hymn sheet ( for want of a better phrase)
You have to wonder what the game is with the story about a mostly non-existent issue regarding immigrants to Britain a couple of generations ago from what were then British colonies in the Caribbean. The term “Windrush generation” has been made popular, when previously I had only heard the name of that vessel mentioned by racists who lacked the courage of their convictions and who considered it amusing to refer to a person as having “come over on the Windrush” in the same way that some racists refer to “western Oriental gentlemen”.
Most immigrants from Jamaica and other Caribbean islands did NOT travel on the Empire Windrush, although it is true that the arrival of several hundred passengers on that ship in Tilbury in 1948 marked the start of a wave of immigration from that part of the world.
Also note that those who use the word “Afro-Caribbean” to describe immigrants from the Caribbean to Britain as if they all had that ethnicity are mistaken because they were not all black and one wonders what the concentration on their skin colour is about anyway. You might as well refer to Irish immigration as “White-Irish”, disregarding the fact that not all Irish people are white.
What lies behind this story? Are government ministers looking for an excuse to soften their image by apologising about something? Or is it some kind of a pat on the head for leaders of Caribbean Commonwealth countries?
It’s apology time. They always do it decades after the event. It will be the same with these false-flags – the Skripals and alleged Syrian chemical attack in Gouta. Unless we can make the dirt stick now it will be another apology when it is too late to rectify the mistake. Theresa May and her creepy crawly sycophantic creeps have got to go. Get her out. Now.
I totally agree with your conclusion. The government’s problems regarding what’s going on now must be exacerbated, if we are to get somewhere. No after-the-event inquiry, run by “safe hands”, has ever achieved much. It won’t bring millions of nuclear-vaporised victims back to life again either. It’s also useful to be ahead of the curve.
The Empire Windrush story (to give the vessel its correct name) needs some explanation as to “why now?” I’m beginning to think this largely non-existent issue is being used as a lever to get Amber Rudd out – which may also mean she drops out of the running for the Tory leadership position and the prime ministership which is currently attached to it. With a Commonwealth angle too, but Rudd being the main thing.
Then there’s the Alfie Evans story. That’s not usually the kind of story I’d follow, but it’s playing to the “acceptability of involuntary death” and also may connect with Moggite machinations. Dunno whether you’re following it? I haven’t looked at it closely yet. Amd wondering whether there any rich “philanthropists” involved in paying for flights and so on.
Matters around the Syrian conflict continue to escalate dangerously. Israel seems to be enforcing some kind of internal press blackout, claiming Iran is preparing a major attack upon it via Hezbollah. That US carrier group continues to close upon Syrian waters, Russia is moving tanks and missile systems into position, and Syria has come under an electronic attack that simulates incoming missiles to trick the defences that were so effective a few days ago.
Please do whatever you can to mobilise protest. The Western powers are the aggressors, so we need to bring pressure to bear upon our governments. The established peace organisations like Stop the War have become complacent. Western conflict has proceeded by subterfuge and misrepresentation ever since the devastation of Iraq. This time it looks like it will be sprung upon us before protest has time to gain momentum.
One of the factions “managing” this story thinks they can get away with wiping out the russian and iranian presence in Syria, and after them the nasty baathist regime and Assad, as now ISIS has been defeated.
What can Russia do? If their small force in Syria is being wiped out, they can try to take with them a number of USA ships and planes. And then what? Either things stop there, or the USA glasses Moscow, or a poroshenko style coup in Moscow is ready to take out Putin and “give peace a chance”.
Whatever happens the goal seems to undo Trump’s strategy of normalizing relationships with Russia by creating a confrontation. Is Trump really in control of the USA military? Traditionally the warmongers are the USAF (and not just in that movie), but what matters here is the Navy.
The question is not what Russia can do, but what can WE do, to dissuade Western governments from yielding to Neocon pressure? And it appears we could have as little as a day to do it.
Trump may be a worthwhile pressure-point; he is no strategist, and agrees with whoever last spoke to him. Two weeks earlier he was for withdrawing from Syria. One fake gas attack later and he’s firing missiles and sending an aircraft carrier. He needs pressure from his alt-right voter base.
May’s eyes are on an election. At present she assumes conflict will make her a hero, and so far there has been too little public pressure to change her mind. She needs reminding of the 2003 Peace March, and the débâcle of Iraq and Libya.
A Poroshenko style coup in Russia is impossible. If Russia were going to be “colour revolutioned” or “Arab Springed”, it would have happened by now. Moscow has decent air defences too. The US may start a war with Russia but they won’t win it.
Mr Murray how well you say it. How clear your thought. A management buy out of a NATO franchise. It is only the poverty of choice for the scottish electorate that saves them from obliteration They think that humanely managing Tory austerity like throwing flower petals under a bulldozer will win the hearts of the Scottish people. It’s not how you stop a bulldozer.
Absolutely bang on the money. “ a management buy out of a NATO franchise” indeed. The leadership of the SNP either have no knowledge of the treachery and duplicity of the British state or they have decided not to confront it and collaborate with their fantasies to decieve the Scottish people for their own ends. Whatever their reasons it has nothing to do with the truth of the events surrounding us and almost as importantly it has nothing to do with creating the conditions for winning independence. We are living through a period of deception BY THE SNP GOVERNMENT.
the usual suspects – brits, frenchies, isr, hegemon – are clearly preparing the ground for something big. false flags being waved furiously. media fully prepped. dissenters being monstered like iraq, libya, afghan never happened. the smell of fresh horror to come is heavy in the air.
I’m beginning to wonder if there aren’t people in the USA government who want the inspectors to find no evidence of a chemical attack in Douma as that would undermine Trump. The same in Britain. It’s been Teresa not Boris shouting that Assad carried out an attack in Douma. It may be that the Windrush story has come out now because of the Commonwealth conference, which would have been arranged some time ago, but in any event the people damaged by it are Teresa and get possible Remain successor Amber Rudd.
Much of the US military don’t want this conflict. They’ve been advising Trump that the Syrian war is lost.