Part 11 By David Shayler - The West will benefit from WWIII

The West will benefit from WWIII – David Shayler

Syria

Photo: RIA Novosti

Download audio file

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.

PART 1

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 Robles
Read 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

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/

The Ugly Truth: US Claims Against Syria – There is no Evidence

CONFIRMED: US Claims Against Syria – There is no Evidence

8 Votes

landdestroyer.blogspot.co.uk

The Wall Street Journal has confirmed what many suspected, that the West’s so-called “evidence” of the latest alleged “chemical attacks” in Syria, pinned on the Syrian government are fabrications spun up from the West’s own dubious intelligence agencies.

The Wall Street Journal reveals that the US is citing claims from Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency fed to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), a repeat of the fabrications that led up to the Iraq War, the Libyan War, and have been used now for 3 years to justify continued support of extremists operating within and along Syria’s borders.

Wall Street Journal’s article, “U.S., Allies Prepare to Act as Syria Intelligence Mounts,” states: 

One crucial piece of the emerging case came from Israeli spy services, which provided the Central Intelligence Agency with intelligence from inside an elite special Syrian unit that oversees Mr. Assad’s chemical weapons, Arab diplomats said. The intelligence, which the CIA was able to verify, showed that certain types of chemical weapons were moved in advance to the same Damascus suburbs where the attack allegedly took place a week ago, Arab diplomats said.

Both Mossad and the CIA are clearly compromised in terms of objectivity and legitimacy. Neither exists nor is expected to provide impartial evidence, but rather to facilitate by all means necessary the self-serving agendas, interests, and objectives of their respective governments.

That both Israel and the United States, as far back as 2007 have openly conspired together to overthrow the government of Syria through a carefully engineered sectarian bloodbath, discredits entirely their respective intelligence agencies. This is precisely why an impartial, objective third-party investigation has been called for by the international community and agreed upon by the Syrian government – a third-party investigation the US has now urged to be canceled ahead of its planned military strikes.

The Wall Street Journal reports: 

In an email on Sunday, White House National Security Adviser Susan Rice told U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power and other top officials that the U.N. mission was pointless because the chemical weapons evidence already was conclusive, officials said. The U.S. privately urged the U.N. to pull the inspectors out, setting the stage for President Barack Obama to possibly move forward with a military response, officials said.

The US then, not Syria, is attempting a coverup, with fabrications in place from discredited, compromised intelligence sources and the threat of impending military strikes that would endanger the UN inspection team’s safety should they fail to end their investigation and withdraw.

The Wall Street Journal also reiterated that the US is planning to fully sidestep the UN Security Council and proceed with its partners unilaterally:

…if the U.S. chose to strike, it would do so with allies and without the U.N., in order to sidestep an expected Russian veto.

The US proceeds now with absolute disregard for international law, all but declaring it has no intention of providing credible evidence of its accusations against the Syrian government. It is a rush to war with all the hallmarks of dangerous desperation as the West’s proxy forces collapse before the Syrian military. Western military leaders must consider the strategic tenants and historical examples regarding the dangers and folly of haste and imprudence in war – especially war fought to protect special interests and political agendas rather than to defend territory.

The populations of the West must likewise consider what benefits they have garnered from the last decade of military conquest their leaders have indulged in. Crumbling economies gutted to feed the preservation of special interests and the growing domestic security apparatuses to keep these interests safe from both domestic and foreign dissent are problems that will only grow more acute.

Outside of the West, in Moscow, Beijing, and Tehran, leaders must consider a future where Western special interests can invade with impunity, without public support, or even the tenuous semblance of justification being necessary.

US’ war plan for Syria is part of Greater Israel Project: O’Keefe

Press TV has talked with Ken O’Keefe, a former US marine and war veteran in London, to shed more light on the Western-Arab war rhetoric on Syria following claims by the Syrian opposition and militants that the Damascus government used chemical weapons against civilians.

What follows is a rough transcription of the interview.

Press TV: Ken O’Keefe do you agree with that (Lawrence Korb’s remarks)? I mean some are saying, even the US lawmakers, that what Lawrence Korb there said, that it amounts to somewhat of a symbolic type of strike, if anything?

O’Keefe: Well, I do not agree at all. First off, how is it possible that anybody with any kind of sanity would consider the United States or Britain or the West in general to be in any kind of position to be punishing anyone for any illegalities?

If we want to take a look at Iraq, there is at least one million, probably even close to two million dead. We invaded that country, destroyed it, created millions of orphans, millions of refugees and never even so much was apologized for that.

Let us go back to Vietnam where we dropped 20 million bombs, more than all of World War II combined. We have destroyed so many countries. We have tortured and killed and maimed and raped around this planet, who in the hell in their right mind would consider the United States or the West in general to be in any position to punish anybody?

Never mind the obvious facts that this is a false-flag attack in a long list of false-flag attacks, which let us get into that please!

Press TV: Ken O’Keefe, it is kind of ironic that you have the UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon and the UN Special Envoy Lakhdar Brahimi, practically if we really look at it, almost begging for the US and its allies including France and the UK to go to the Security Council in order to get backing for this, but of course you are saying let the chemical investigation by the UN inspectors to take place and for the results come out.

I mean what does that mean in terms of international law, what the US, UK and France in particular are pursuing here?

O’Keefe: Well, we do not operate under international law. What we have is the color of law, the law of the jungle in which the rich and the powerful, basically, determine what goes and what does not go. Iraq is a perfect example of that.

Why is not Tony Blair and George Bush rotting away in prison cell for the rest of their lives? Because the law is not being applied.

These are war criminals and they should be in prison for the rest of their lives, if not executed, if their own rules were adhered to, for their own crimes.

Not only that, but we need to really understand the truth here. First off, all of these players, these politicians are nothing more than puppets. They do not serve the people, there is no real democracy, they really serve the rich and powerful who run the world and that would be the bankers who control the money supply.

The bankers, of course, make huge amounts of money, whether they have made bad investments or not wars are great for them and ultimately they control the politicians and that is why we see these policies.

Obama and Cameron are nothing more than puppets who read the script and the script is: We need another war.

And the reason why we need another war, according to the psychopaths who are running the world, is because more and more people, despite the clueless masses who continue to be entranced by things so ridiculous as the X Factor and the American Idol, there are larger numbers of people around the world who are realizing the truth and beginning to recapture the capacity to think for themselves and they can see that these people who have been put in positions of public trust, are defying that trust and representing an agenda, which they could never speak about openly, because they are nothing more than ... and nothing more than minions for the powers that be.

Press TV: It is very interesting Ken O’Keefe. I do not know if you caught the presser that Bashar al-Jafari, Syria’s envoy to the UN had earlier, a couple of hours back, and he said that this is all because of Israel, Israel is actually responsible behind the uprisings from North Africa throughout the Middle East; and this is a push by Israel onto US to, basically, go and attack Syria.

What is Israel’s role in this, Ken O’Keefe?

O’Keefe: Well, the greater Israel Project is all about destabilizing, surrounding nations, ultimately in pursuit of this dream of greater Israel from the Euphrates down to the Nile, all the way over to the Eastern Mediterranean. This is the dream of these psychopaths and so destabilizing governments, creating sectarian strife, is all part of that menu and all part of the design to create a greater Israel. So that goes ..., it is self-evident.

I have to go back to what this gentleman was saying in Washington D.C. about the Americans not wanting to get involved or Obama not getting involved.

What are you talking about? We have been arming people, directly, who are al-Qaeda! Al-Nusrah Front is al-Qaeda! These people are psychopath to the worst order; they are conducting suicide attacks, they are gassing people, we know Carla Del Ponte said in May that it was the so-called rebels in Syria that were using the Sarin gas not the Bashar al-Assad regime. No it was not!

We know that the United States’ president is arming people who are on the US terrorist list. He should be convicted of aiding and abetting, giving material support to a terrorist organization but then again, you know, what we are ..., we the West, the United States and in particular Israel and Britain, are the biggest terrorists on the planet.

So our little junior partners and al-Qaeda, which is nothing more than a CIA database, thus the name al-Qaeda, this is nothing more than a group of terrorists working together each playing one different role but all of them working together for the same goal which is to maintain this hideous and sick and twisted unjust world that we have, which is a perpetual state of war. Always one illusion, one bogyman after another but the fact is that Obama is nothing more than a puppet war criminal just like his predecessors and every other US president before him.

So please do not tell people out there that the US is not involved. It is directly involved and it is arming people who are absolute psychopaths.

Press TV: Ken O’Keefe yesterday Walid al-Muallem and then we had Bashar al-Jaafari today talk about how they have allowed the inspectors to go in, but it seems and why is that ..., and I am thinking do not they have intelligence? Does not the United States already know who is behind this? It is obvious it is not the Syrian government.

An analyst has said two possibilities: One, obviously being the insurgents who have this and at a very low scale perhaps, maybe some low-ranking soldiers of the Syrian army not carrying through orders of not using chemical weapons but going out on their own which he has said there is a very small possibility of that.

Why does not the US want to wait along with its allies for the inspectors to analyze what has come out and then make an announcement based on that before they move in or attack?

O’Keefe: Because the United States has never been interested in anything other than war. The United States is in a perpetual state of war because the bankers control the politicians and they read the script as given to them by the banksters and they make huge amounts of money off of this.

What this gentleman is saying about the United States not wanting war and not wanting to get involved in this like Iraq 2.0. It is a repeat of the same rubbish that was said: Oh! We do not want war! War is the last resort. That is absolutely untrue, it is a lie.

Those that are in the government are nothing more than ... who would carry out the orders of those who are in charge of them and those that are in charge want another war and part of that is what we discussed earlier, the Greater Israel Project, to destabilize any Arab regime which might have any kind of autonomy and self-determination.

Any regime in the Arab world that is not an absolute puppet cannot be tolerated and who are the nations that we target? Those that are not puppets. We do not target those like the Saudi regime, which is the biggest human rights violator in that region. It is cutting off peoples’ heads in public, cutting off hands, it is the most grotesque regime on the planet and yet we give that regime weapons and it is no problem whatsoever.

The duplicity and hypocrisy of the United States and the West cannot even be measured, it is so enormous and these mouthpieces such as this gentleman in Washington is only doing the disservice to himself and his country and the fact is that the American sons and daughters will get involved in this yet again and these chicken hawks who are pretending to care about the Syrian people are going to be sacrificing not their own sons and daughters, I would like this man to send his sons and daughters and his grandchildren off to Syria when this turns into a greater conflict because this is what we are flirting with, [it] is a world war, a third world war, this is not a joke.

We are flirting with the Third World War on the basis that apparently we care so much about the Syrian people, just like we cared so much about the Iraqi people and the Afghani people. The only people that by this sort of stuff are either bought off ... or the dumbest of the dumb!

And we are also led to believe that Assad is the dumbest idiot dictator on the planet. Now, is not he? Because he invited the UN inspectors to come in and he brought them in; [and] on the very day that they come in, he decides to attack his own people ten miles away from where the inspectors arrived! This is beyond ridiculous and the only people to buy this, again, are bought off ... or the dumbest of the dumb!

Press TV: Ken O’Keefe we have alluded to this throughout this conversation and debate but there are many who are not buying the US’ viewpoints, they are not buying what the UK and France are doing along with the US. Because they are saying that what US is saying limited in scope is not going to hardly cripple Assad’s sizable military infrastructure and forces unless this is a wider-scale war.

Do you think that is what we are looking at?

O’Keefe: Well, there is no question that they do not intend for limited strikes and that is not going to do anything. They want to go in full-scale, that is the plan. Of course they will use a pretext to justify the initial attack and then they will concoct more things to justify a greater involvement.

The Daily Mail reported here in the UK, and it is commonly understood to those who are paying attention that defense contractors, leaked emails from defense contractors, proved that there was already an approved plan from Obama ..., to give these psychopath terrorist al-Nusrah Front, chemical weapons!

We know that al-Nusrah Front, 12 individuals in Turkey were caught with two kilos of Sarin gas, where did they get that from? And this is, you know, clearly a false flag. We understand this to be true and it is the only way that they could justify an attack at all.

And I have to say that I am happy that the gentleman in Washington mentioned [General Martin E.] Dempsey, General Dempsey of the Joint Chiefs [of Staff], because I tell you what, more than anything else it is the true American patriots, those who were sick and tired of having given up their lives to, basically, serve the American dream, the American nation, the constitution that they swore to uphold.

It is those military men and women, it is you now, it is coming to you now! Are you a patriot or are you not? Are you going to let your nation to [be] sent even further into the chaos and corruption that has been so sick and so twisted, that is destroying the American lives, as well as the rest of the world, to the tune of 22 American servicemen a day, who are committing suicide.

Are you going to sacrifice more of your American sons and daughters for Israeli wars? For Zionist wars? Are you going to continue to do that because you are not a patriot?

You are in fact aiding and abetting the terrorists [that] you supposedly think you are fighting against! And those Americans who are waking up to this, I hope to God, in the military in particular, that refuse your orders and this is why the people of America who were refusing to buy this nonsense, their overwhelming majority, do not support any kind of attack on Syria and those in the military, I know that the powers that be are very, very frightened that higher-ups within the military will refuse the orders and I hope that this is exactly what happens if an attack on Syria occurs.

MY/NN

Thu Aug 29, 2013 10:16AM

Interview with Ken O’Keefe

Those that are in the government would carry out the orders of those who are in charge of them and those that are in charge want another war and part of that is what we discussed earlier, the Greater Israel Project, to destabilize any Arab regime which might have any kind of autonomy and self-determination..., Any regime in the Arab world that is not an absolute puppet cannot be tolerated and who are the nations that we target? Those that are not puppets.”

Related Viewpoints:

• US stance on Syria based on lies

The Voice Of Russia: Syria Conflict

There is no way Assad would use chemical weapons – David Shayler

Photo: EPA

Download audio file

The war on whistleblowers and the illegality that they have exposed as well as the pretext to war in Syria were discussed with the Voice of Russia’s John Robles by Former MI5 officer David Shayler, the whistleblower who exposed the organization of an assassination plot on Muammar Gaddafi by MI6. Mr. Shayler discussed the situation in Syria as well and gave his opinion on the current Syrian crisis.

Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking with David Shayler, a former MI5 officer who’s turned truth campaigner.

Robles: Hello David! How are you this evening?

Shayler: I’m very well, thank you John. How are you?

Robles: I’m very well as well, and it’s a pleasure to be speaking with you. Can you tell our listeners a little bit briefly about your history and what happened with you in MI5? And then, I’d like to ask you about Gaddafi a little bit.

Shayler: Sixteen years ago I blew the whistle. I’d been an MI5 officer and I was workingthe Libyan desk, and MI6 had briefed me about an operation in which they had a source in Libyan military intelligence who they were funding to carry out a coup, which would involve the assassination of Colonel Gaddafi.

The People that MI6 were paying, would then seize power and they would hand over the two Lockerbie suspects. But unfortunately, this Libyan military intelligence officer was really a group of Islamic extremists, basically.

So even though this was 1996, the intelligence services had sort of highlighted Islamic terrorism as the new threat. So we were paying money, the British Government, to the enemies of the British people to bump off someone who was no longer an enemy – Colonel Gaddafi. So the whole thing didn’t make any sense, and innocent people died and that’s why I blew the whistle.

Robles: I see, and you’ve suffered quite a bit because of that, is that correct?

Shayler: That’s right, yeah! I mean, I’ve been put in prison twice. But more seriously than that, I’ve had countless attempts on my life. I’ve been in four very peculiar car accidents, any of which I could have been killed in, or maimed, and I walked out without a scratch each time.

One particular of interest was when I was heading to see Mohamed al-Fayed’s security people two months after the death of Princess Diana, and the driver, who had been sent down by Mohamed al-Fayed, fell asleep at the wheel and he hit thecentral reservation of the motorway.

Fortunately, because he hit the central reservation he woke up, and grabbed the car, and it got back under control a bit. But of course in the Diana death there was carbon monoxide, elevated levels of carbon monoxide in Henri Paul’s blood, he was driving the car that Diana died in.

So, I am inclined to think that because we were heading up to see Mohamed al-Fayed’s head of security to talk about the Diana death, that was an attempt on my life. And I’ve had many, many other situations like that. Obviously, that doesn’t stop me, but that shows the extent they’ll go to to shut up the critics who are really getting under their skin.

Robles: I see. There is so much I’d like to speak with you about. Maybe we could get your opinion, your views, on other whistleblowers. I’m sure Edward Snowden you know about, Bradley Manning. What’s your opinion, as a whistleblower yourself who’s suffered?

Shayler: It’s appalling, isn’t it? Because these people actually, essentially blow the whistle about the crimes of the states they were working for. It’s like me, you know, I wasn’t just speaking out about intelligence operations because I felt like it, I was actually describing very serious crimes in which people were murdered and in which our terrorist enemies were funded by people who are supposed to be protecting us.

Now, it’s exactly the same thing with Bradley Manning. He’s released, as far as I can gather data from the WikiLeaks stuff, is he’s released stuff of the US forces in places like Afghanistan and Iraq just gunning down civilians. That’s a war crime; this man is a witness to crimes, he shouldn’t be going to prison.

The same with Edward Snowden as well, honestly, when I first saw him giving an interview in a hotel room, obviously my mind flashed back to 16 years ago when I was doing exactly the same thing.

You know, and I hope he’s learnt, he has learnt in fact, learnt his lessons from my experience, because I didn’t take the documents. I took documents and I left them in the safe-keeping of the newspaper to hand them back to the authorities, because I actually believed the authorities would give me a fair hearing, which shows in a parallel sense how naïve and stupid I was, really. But of course, Ed Snowden hasn’t done that, he’s got his documents off to WikiLeaks or whatever, and he can use those as a bargaining chip, and we can then really see what America has really been up to, basically.

But these people are heroes. There is no way these people are criminals at all. You know, I say everybody who brands them as a criminal, you know people in the US and people in the UK. If you’d lost your children in attacks carried out by a foreign army, you’d want to know about it, you wouldn’t be saying to the guy who has just blown the whistle “he’s a criminal”, you’d be going in and saying “thank you”. And because I’ve had that in my situation, because I actually gave evidence to the “Bloody Sunday Inquiry”.

You probably don’t know, many years ago, 40 years ago, 30 unarmed Catholics were gunned down in Londonderry, in a civil rights march, and for many years they had an inquiry in which the British Government said “Oh yeah, the IRA have caused this and everything else”.

But gradually, over the years the families campaigned, and they realized that that evidence wasn’t the case, the IRA hadn’t started it, there was no evidence of that. But then what did the British authorities do? They tried to blame Martin McGuinness for firing the shot that started Bloody Sunday.

Fortunately, now I was out of the service, when I saw the agents that they were using to back this up, with the agent report, I knew the agent was what is called a bullshitter, basically. And I gave the evidence to the inquiry, and when I came out members of the families was coming up to me saying that they were just so glad that somebody with the authority had actually stood up for the truth and actually bothered to tell the truth, rather than the kind of officialdom they had come up against for years and years and years.

And let’s face it. This is a form of psychological torture, it really is, to be telling the truth,to have lost loved ones, and have a monolithic state telling you the people that you lost were “terrorists” and you should go away and shut up!

The people we are opposing are psychopaths. They are absolute psychopaths! In each case I say to them “where are the principles of things you would be done by, (unintelligible). In those circumstances you would want the truth, so why do you deny that truth to other people?”

Robles: I see. Now, you were working at the Libya desk, right?

Shayler: That’s right, yeah!

Robles: Do you know anything about what was going on in Syria? Can you comment on these chemical weapons claims? I mean, there are a lot of discrepancies in what the US is trying to push. And I know, I think and you know, 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 behavior because they know the West is watching.

In the recent years, I can tell you, there are two countries went abroad andkilled 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.

That was the end of part one of an interview with David Shayler.

John Robles
Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_08_28/There-is-no-way-Assad-would-use-chemical-weapons-David-Shayler-5394/

China urges restraint over Syria tensions, calls for calm

Syria

Photo: RIA Novosti

China's foreign minister urged restraint on Thursday in the growing tensions over Syria, saying any military intervention in the crisis would only worsen turmoil in the Middle East.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said military action would not help, but also repeated that Chinaopposed anyone using chemical weapons.

"A political resolution has, from the very beginning, been the only way out for the Syrian issue," Wang said in a statement on the ministry's website.

There should be no rush to prejudge the findings of a UN team currently in Syria to investigate the claims chemical weapons were used. "China calls on all sides to exercise restraint and remain calm," Wang said.

Voice of Russia, Reuters

UN inspectors need 'four days' in Syria - Ban Ki-moon

Photo: EPA

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Wednesday that UN inspectors needed four days in total to conclude a probe into chemical weapons use in Syria.

"My mandate and my responsibility at this time is to conduct a thorough and complete investigation," Ban told reporters in The Hague.

"Let them (inspectors) conclude their work for four days," he said, speaking at the centenary anniversary of the Peace Palace, seat of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the United Nations' highest court.

The UN chief added that the team's findings would then be analysed and the result sent to the UN Security Council for "any action they would deem to take".

UN spokesman Martin Nesirky said later that Ban was referring to a total of four days. This suggests that the inspectors, who began their probe of the alleged chemical weapons site on Monday but whose work was suspended on Tuesday, needed at least until Friday to complete their work.

Ban's comments came as the United States and its allies were building their case for military action against the Syrian regime over the alleged chemical weapons attacks, despite stern warnings from Russia.

The UN chief earlier called on a divided Security Council to unite and find a diplomatic solution to the escalating Syrian conflict.

"Syria is the biggest challenge of war and peace in the world today. The body entrusted with maintaining international peace and security cannot be missing in action," Ban said, referring to the Security Council.

"The Council must at last find the unity to act. It must use its authority for peace," Ban said.

"The Syrian people deserve solutions, not silence," Ban said.

"We must pursue all avenues to get the parties to the negotiating table," he said.

He also warned that any move to supply weapons to either side would only worsen the situation.

"To those providing weapons to either side, we must ask: what have those arms achieved but more bloodshed?

"The military logic has given us a country on the verge of total destruction, a region in chaos and a global threat. Why add more fuel to the fire?"

Ban said however that all perpetrators of chemical attacks would be brought to justice, but that the facts had to established first.

The UN inspectors have "collected valuable samples" and have conducted interviews with victims and witnesses since arriving in the strive-torn country.

"They need time to do their jobs," Ban said.

Chemical 'substance' used in Syria, intervention needs UN approval - Brahimi

The UN-Arab League special envoy for Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, said Wednesday it was clear a chemical substance had been used in an August 21 attack in the war-torn country, killing hundreds of people.

Speaking to reporters in Geneva about the suspected chemical attack, Brahimi said "it does seem some kind of substance was used that killed a lot of people. Hundreds. Definitely more than 100, some people say 300, some people say 600, maybe 1,000, maybe more than 1,000 people."

Lakhdar Brahimi added that any US military action taken in response to apprent chemical weapons attacks in Syria would need to be approved by the UN Security Council.

"I think international law is clear on this. International law says that military action must be taken after a decision by the Security Council. That is what international law says," he told a press conference in Geneva.

"I must say that I do know that President Obama and the American administration are not known to be trigger-happy. What they will decide I don't know. But certainly internationl law is very clear."

His comments came as the United States and its allies were building their case for likely military action against the regime in war-torn Syria over alleged chemical weapons attacks.

Syrian rebels used chemical weapons - Carla del Ponte

Testimony from victims strongly suggests it was the rebels, not the Syrian government, that used Sarin nerve gas during a recent incident in the revolution-wracked nation, a senior UN diplomat said Monday.

Carla del Ponte, a member of the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria, told Swiss TV there were "strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof," that rebels seeking to oust Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad had used the nerve agent.

But she said her panel had not yet seen any evidence of Syrian government forces using chemical weapons, according to the BBC, but she added that more investigation was needed.

Voice of Russia, AFP, BBC, Reuters
Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_08_28/UN-inspectors-need-four-days-in-Syria-Ban-Ki-moon-7544/

Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_08_29/China-urges-restraint-over-Syria-tensions-calls-for-calm-3090/