The West will benefit from WWIII – David Shayler
Syria
Photo: RIA Novosti
The whistleblower who outed an MI6 plan to assassinate late Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi spoke to the Voice of Russia about what is going on behind the scenes in Syria. Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad would never use chemical weapons as he knows the whole world is watching and he is winning the war. Former MI5 officer Michael Shayler also said the British foreign intelligence service MI6, is a law to itself and does not have to be held accountable to the British people. This is part 2 of a larger interview.
This is John Robles. You are listening to an interview with David Shayler, a former MI5 officer and a whistle blower in the UK. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com
Robles: They want to invade Syria. And it seems to me, they are trying to fabricate a pretext to go in there. What do you think about that?
Shayler: Yes, absolutely! This is a total pretext. When you study these world things, you realize that these people are made out to be madmen, like Gaddafi and Saddam, and Assad, and so on, are not actually madmen at all. And they often are much better in their behaviour because they know the West is watching.
In the recent years, I can tell you, there are two countries went abroad and killed two million people, from other countries, used things like phosphorus and used depleted uranium, i.e. chemical weapons which are banned, who’ve used cluster bombs – and that’s the UK and the US. They are your two terrorist organizations in the world who’ve got a record for using chemical warfare.
There is no way in a situation we have with Assad at the moment in Syria that he’d want to use chemical weapons because he is actually beating the rebels. He knows the US and the UK are spending a fortune on backing these rebels, and they’re getting nowhere basically. So, he wouldn’t use chemical weapons now. The Russians are saying they have no evidence of chemical weapon use here.
And we know, in the past going to wars they’ve used any kind of stuff they can as propaganda. Remember in 1991, when we had this girl who came on and addressed the US Congress and said “Oh yes, Iraqi soldiers have been taking babies out of incubators and killing them”, and all this kind of thing. And it turned out that she was somebody of the opposition or something, and it all just turned out to be setup.
So, I cannot believe that we have politicians who are perceiving this seriously at the moment. People like William Hague, he should be on trial for war crimes, I mean, hanging really is too good for him.
I’m a man of compassion and everything else, but a politician who comes out there and constantly campaigns for war and loss of innocent life that will lead to, and never seems to learn from it. He is just a psychopath, you know. And we’ve got to get rid of those people’s from our government. It’s as simple as that. In fact we’ve got to get away from Government altogether, let’s adopt the common law and stop paying our taxes to these people because it’s gone on long enough, it really has.
Robles: What do you think about the ridiculous hypocrisy of Barak Obama being awarded a Nobel Peace Prize?
Shayler: Yes, I mean, you couldn’t make it up, could you? You really couldn’t make it up. It was just, it was 1984 that it’s happening in reality. I say if it wasn’t, you know if it wasn’t so serious we’d be laughing at it like a Monty Python sketch.
You go to the UN, sorry you go for the Nobel Peace Prize, and you use that opportunity to announce you’re going to send troops, more troops into Afghanistan. I mean, these people are taking the piss, they really are, and what I can’t understand is why, you know, the public out there can’t see that.
It’s like with the banking system, they’ve just printed 400 billion new currency. It took 350 years for the National Debt to get to 300 billion in the first place, and we’ve created more debt than we’ve ever created in history and people are now being asked to pay that back, even though that money didn’t go to the wider economy. How can they do that?
Robles: You mentioned 1984 and sometimes it seems to me like they’re actually channelling this, or using 1984 as a blueprint.
Shayler: Yes, I agree. In terms of the way they are changing the meanings of words, and everything else, it is almost like they’ve seen Orwell and that’s the blueprint they’re following.
If it’s not that one it’s the … you know if people talk about the Protocols being a forgery, but I don’t know if anybody can dispute that they’re following the agenda this hour and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, basically. Talking about using recessions and depressions to deprive us of our wealth, and off-the-record of briefings to blacken the names of their opponents. It’s all there in the Protocols, what they’re doing now, whether that’s a forgery or not.
Robles: Yes, do you know anything about MI6’s involvement in Syria.
Shayler: Well yeah, basically MI6 is obviously our foreign service. I’m not any more; I’m not in the services any more so I don’t know exactly what they are doing, but what I will say is because of the “Hangover of Empire” and because of our close relations with the Americans, MI6 does have a very active role overseas.
MI6 is virtually a law unto itself, it’s not like the security services of say the US, like the FBI and CIA, who are subject to Freedom of Information, MI6 is completely exempt from that. In fact, MI6 is in effect exempt from all forms of oversight, a bit like Mossad is with the Israeli State, basically.
It’s go and get on with it and do what they’ve got to do to, to what they see reflects the world. Of course, it not reflects the world, it reflects to their power that they police, but that’s more or less what we’ve got with MI6 in the Middle East. It’s got enormous amounts of influence.
But I do hope in this situation, so I would hope that there’s people in MI6 now, telling William Hague and David Cameron that they’ve lost their marbles, that to go into Syria risks the start of the Third World War.
Now, obviously sane people don’t want that; the powers that be behind the scenes do: these evil bankers, and so on, and you can see exactly how the agenda is unfolding. But people like William Hague and David Cameron are not part of that agenda - they’re not signed up to it - they’re just idiotic dupes, that’s the problem.
Robles: In your opinion how will this ignite a wider conflict?
Shayler: Well, it will be like when the First World War, do you remember the First World War began with the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in Serbia, by a Serbian nationalist. And because there were various alliances between countries like Russia and Serbia, and so on, that they set off a whole sort of domino effect of people that had treaties with each other, and that started the First World War.
Now, the powers that be in Europe wanted the First World War, although they didn’t declare that at the time, particularly in Britain. Nevertheless, that was the excuse that was used when, to start this, you know, mindless conflict basically, and you can feel almost exactly the same thing happening with Syria: if the Americans attack Syria, then the Russians are going to have a problem, the Iranians are going to have a problem, the Chinese are going to have a problem.
Now, I don’t think any of those countries have any appetite for the Third World War in the same way that America does, so I think that that’s what works in our favour with all these things. But, given the fact the situation is all going wrong for them at the moment - more and more of their stuff is being exposed left, right and center - America is in a desperate situation, so you cannot rule out the fact that it will carry out that attack and it could escalate.
But I’m saying to anybody who is listening to this, they should be telling their MP, their Congressmen, or anyone who represents them, that if they are involved with this in any way they’re a war criminal, and if this does turn into a Third World War with millions of deaths, hundreds of millions possibly of deaths, they will have blood on their hands basically
Robles: I see. Now what happened in Libya with Muammar Gaddafi? Would you care to comment on what actually eventually happened and how he was killed in street?
Shayler: Gaddafi had been an enemy of the West since 1976, when he nationalized the Libyan oil industry at the expense of British Petroleum, and obviously you get on the wrong side of the oil industry, that’s the problem. That’s why they went after him, nothing else, not because he’s a dictator or anything else, it’s because he’d obviously, as they saw it, caused loss to British commercial interests.
There had been several attempts on his life, one of which one of them I’d blew the whistle on. So you can kind of see who wants to get control of Libya, it’s a key strategic point in North Africa, it’s a relatively rich country by African standards. And what I did in 2011, I just watched it on the mainstream. I thought what I want to do, I won’t go on the Internet, I’ll just watch this and see what happens, as all this Libya stuff was happening.
Because there’s no coherent explanations, why somebody who for years and years was our enemy, then became our friend, suddenly was our enemy again.
Also around the things now I realized that Gaddafi was trying to sell his oil in gold-backed Libyan Dinars, and therefore the same fate awaited him as awaited Saddam, because once you start selling your oil in anything other than Dollars that would immediately provoke an almost overnight collapse of the American economy because you need Dollars to buy oil, and if you don’t need Dollars to buy oil, there is no need to have Dollars at all, so nobody would use them. And so, again, they had to take Gaddafi out, in the same way they took Saddam out, nothing to do with anything other than his threat to finance and the American economy.
Robles: I thought it was a strange coincidence that, I think it was like 18 hours before they invaded Iraq, Saddam Hussein had decided to change the oil trade into Euros, and in Libya the same thing happened.
Shayler: Yes, exactly, well yeah yeah, no you’ve got to realize, I mean people say this is all about oil, and it is about oil in one sense because oil is part of the control mechanism, you need fuel. It also is to do with the fact that we now live in this crazy world economy, in which nothing is really worth anything apart from the faith behind it. But once you take away that faith, the whole thing collapses, it’s not backed by gold, or silver, or anything else basically.
So we are going to see more and more wars like this if people threaten the economies of the West. I say the economies of the West are extremely weak at the moment, they really really are.
Robles: In your opinion what is the real goal in Syria, is it resources, or …?
Shayler: Well, I think it is a part of this wider agenda, in terms of creating a Third World War, and obviously there are reasons about it, it’s all part of the control mechanism, they can take control, even the way in which the society can handle it, taking even more rights away. They realize, I say, their whole system is teetering at the moment, many people have woken up, and so on.
If they can create the Third World War, then put all those people in prison camps, then they won’t be there to influence other people again, basically, and that I think is part of their agenda. It’s part of the wider, and again I am going to use the word Zionist - I’m not talking about Jews here, clearly Judaism is a religion - Zionism is a political idea, and to me it’s all what’s set out in terms of the Zionist agenda. They want to create a United States of Europe, with a Zionist king on the throne, and then as stated a Greater Israel from the Nile to the Euphrates, basically, and obviously if you look at that geography Syria is one of the countries in the way, basically.
Robles: I see, I see.
Shayler: Oh I can tell you something very interesting as well, is that, when I was in MI5 I once saw the European Intelligence Assessment Report that had been circulated. Under the bottom of it, it had writing in Hebrew on it. So I asked someone: “why has it got Hebrew on it?” And this guy told me, he said, and this was when there was only something like 15 nations in Europe, he said: “The Israelis consider themselves as part of the European Union”. They get all the directives. They’ve got no representation there, but the government gets all the European Directives, and stuff like that, so that they can implement them so they can be like Europe basically.
Robles: Wow!
Shayler: Yeah. Can you believe it? I had no inkling of that at all at the time, and I’ve not seen any more about it anywhere else since. But that was in MI5, they were one of the people copied in on European Assessments, because they considered themselves to be a kind of de facto member of the European Union basically.
Robles: I see, and a lot of people were saying Israel is behind all of the conflicts in the Middle East, and directing things behind the scenes. I mean, they’re buying Iranian oil. Is it realistic, I mean, if they cause all this instability, if they destroy all these countries basically, and send them into chaos like Libya right now, Iraq - is that in any way going to help Israel? Or do you think that’s going to put Israel as a state at further risk?
Shayler: Well, you see, it depends on your view of the world, doesn’t it? Obviously, if they weren’t running the world then they would be in genuine risk through all this stuff, of Israel coming under attack from Al-Qaeda basically, who are represented in various countries around Israel.
But the fact that that doesn’t seem to be part of their plan, that risk isn’t in there, it rather suggests to me that this is neither control or conflict, and actually the people who are back in places like Syria, and Lebanon and so on, and that they’ve got them under control, and that’s why they know there’s no at risk of those people then going into Israel, because they’ll then just take them out.
So, to me, this is all evidence to the fact that they could unroll this program without any risk to Israel because they’re backing all of the rebels that have appeared in countries like Egypt and Syria, and so on, in the last few years.
Robles: I see, so what can you tell us about Al-Qaeda’s link to the West, to the CIA, to MI6? I know they were …
Shayler: Can I tell you something about MI5, certainly is that what people don’t realize, something else I was blowing the whistle on was, in the mid-1990s they had declared Al-Qaeda to be the new flavour of the month after the collapse of Communism. But what they were doing, even though they were saying this was a new terrorist threat, they were letting lots and lots of veterans of things like Afghanistan, and so on, who were what they would think of as Islamic extremists, and actually tens of thousands into the country.
Now, these people were there to look at what was going on now basically. So it’s like they let all these people in to create the new terrorist threat to the West, basically, and allowed these people to live in Britain, and the CIA has called us Londonistan basically. But I was one of the first people to blow the whistle on that, and again people in the government didn’t take my evidence at the time, and I’m saying to them: “I was going to tell you that in terms of effectively, at the very least turning a blind eye to allowing these people in to create the new terrorist threat, basically, if not obviously actively encouraging it”.
You are listening to an interview in progress with David Shayler, a former MI5 officer and a whistle blower in the UK.
John RoblesRead more: http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_08_30/The-West-will-benefit-from-WWIII-David-Shayler-9972/
'I don't need to apologise to Obama over Syria defeat' - David Cameron
David Cameron
Photo: EPA
Prime Minister David Cameron said on Friday he regretted the failure of the British parliament to support military action in Syria but that he hoped President Barack Obama would understand the need to listen to the wishes of the people.
"I think the American public, the American people and President Obama will understand," Cameron said just hours after parliament voted against a government motion to authorise the principle of military action in Syria.
"I haven't spoken to him (Obama) since the debate and the vote but I would expect to speak to him over the next day or so. I don't think it's a question of having to apologise," Cameron said in an interview aired on British television channels.
David Cameron says he'll continue to argue for "robust response" to Syria's use of chemical weapons even though UK military action ruled out.
Vocie of Russia, Reuters
Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_08_30/I-dont-need-to-apologise-to-Obama-over-Syria-defeat-David-Cameron-7057/
Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_08_30/I-dont-need-to-apologise-to-Obama-over-Syria-defeat-David-Cameron-7057/
No comments:
Post a Comment