Syria - What happens next?

[BoneDog]

Why report what's in the news?! I thought they were a bunch of lying scumbags?

lol Ok El Emptyhead I won't bother wasting my time if it's so far past my level of intellect and intelligence. One day you'll realise you've wasted your life on this pap.

Not everybody in the news is a lying scumbag but the overall message of mainstream media editors seems to be supporting untruth. We all know that. I did write that line to say that exact point.

Wasted my life on this pap? What pap exactly? What do you think I do, walk around town with a megaphone preaching? I do most things you do everyday and drink in pubs with normal lads when I go out. I don't live in a monastry or owt you know.

Have you actually got any proper arguement or opinion on any issues I mention or do you just like to talk drivvle to me? I wouldn't mind an arguement with you but you're not really giving me much to get excited about.

[Captain...]

Not everybody in the news is a lying scumbag but the overall message of mainstream media editors seems to be supporting untruth. We all know that. I did write that line to say that exact point.

Wasted my life on this pap? What pap exactly? What do you think I do, walk around town with a megaphone preaching? I do most things you do everyday and drink in pubs with normal lads when I go out. I don't live in a monastry or owt you know.

Have you actually got any proper arguement or opinion on any issues I mention or do you just like to talk drivvle to me? I wouldn't mind an arguement with you but you're not really giving me much to get excited about.

Yes but you wear a tin foil hat when you do,

[BoneDog]

Update!

[BoneDog]

"if an armed insurgency or a seperatist movement knows they can count on the political, and ultimately the military support of the United States and of NATO, they are emboldened both to begin and to continue an armed insurgency...."

[BoneDog]

For those who are interested. Two good discussions covering Syria with lots of info to ponder on.

"...Some would say this is a situation made to order for a wag-the-dog event. Some kind of provocation, some stunt or false flag event that will be blamed on the Assad government despite the fact that it comes from circles much closer to NATO, and use that as the excuse for the armed intervention...." Tarpley (who some claim is a KGB spy!) with some background on the death squads in this video. One of the other guys also points out why the Syrian army is well within it's rights to fight against the terrorists, as would our own army if the same thing was happening on our shores.

Lizzie knows what's crackin, just as she did in Libya.

[Smudge]

Interesting to me how we all look back with fondness at how 'we' saved the world from Nazism, yet nobody's really keen to aid Syria and Libya was met with very mixed responses.

Surely WW2 was just as much about humanitarian causes as it was maintaining our own safety and sovereignty?

Poland had huge reserves of coal; industry, home heating, railways and ships depended on it. War was declared before the humanitarian issues became known after the invasion of Western Europe which, by and large, was during 1940.

[BoneDog]

How much fakeness can the media get away with? Especially the state media that we are forced to finance. The Houla massacre bears all the hallmarks of the sick terrorists. Most of the world knows this, but unfortunately the media over here is reporting it as if Assad is responsible in order to push for more death and destruction. All with the objective of isolating Iran. And all for the benefit of a small group of psychos who have no love for anyone but themselves.

This is the report of the BBC using a photo from Iraq to illustrate the Syrian terrorist massacre. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9293620/BBC-News-uses-Iraq-photo-to-illustrate-Syrian-massacre.html#

Anybody remember the Libya gaff by the BBC? They showed a video that said "Live in Triploi", and said that it was Libyan people protesting in Green Square in Triploi. The video clip was actually of Indian people waving an Indian flag and yet not one of the presenters said a word.

"As you can see, there's a mass, a huge throng of people." (it wasn't even a 'mass', there were probably only three or four hundred people there, but it certainly wasn't in Libya).

We've had Al Qaeda and their friends dressing up in Syrian army uniforms making videos, kicking in doors and burying people alive, which western media claimed were made by the Syrian army, but were faked.

We've had fake reporters on UK and US news channels making fake reports - Danny et al. I even watched clips of these idiots being called brave heroes by our media!

There have been massive terrorist bombs going off in Syrian towns and cities killing hundreds and maiming many more, and yet we are supporting the perpetrators.(one example - http://www.rt.com/news/deadly-rocks-syrian-capital-849/ ). When actually did we start openly supporting terrorists by the way? There were massive demonstrations in support of the government in Syria and yet we didn't report them - just as we didn't report the massive demos in support of Ahmadinejad in Iran when we were trying to get that government toppled a couple of years ago.

For a year and a half terrorists have been crossing borders from all sides into Syria and killing civilians, soldiers and police.

On top of all the moral issues, these phony wars are costing us, the UK taxpayer, an absolute fortune. And we wonder why we're in financial turmoil.

At least we've still got Tarpley, who gets his news from more reliable sources and has been on the ground in Syria, Lebanon and Libya among others, doing some real research.

[I am Rod Hull]

I agree with your view of the media, its so bias you have to laugh.

Its all a big con, with the aim to secure the Middle East oil fields.

[Reynard Bleu]

How much fakeness can the media get away with? Especially the state media that we are forced to finance. The Houla massacre bears all the hallmarks of the sick terrorists. Most of the world knows this, but unfortunately the media over here is reporting it as if Assad is responsible in order to push for more death and destruction. All with the objective of isolating Iran. And all for the benefit of a small group of psychos who have no love for anyone but themselves.

This is the report of the BBC using a photo from Iraq to illustrate the Syrian terrorist massacre. http://www.telegraph...-massacre.html#

Anybody remember the Libya gaff by the BBC? They showed a video that said "Live in Triploi", and said that it was Libyan people protesting in Green Square in Triploi. The video clip was actually of Indian people waving an Indian flag and yet not one of the presenters said a word.

"As you can see, there's a mass, a huge throng of people." (it wasn't even a 'mass', there were probably only three or four hundred people there, but it certainly wasn't in Libya).

We've had Al Qaeda and their friends dressing up in Syrian army uniforms making videos, kicking in doors and burying people alive, which western media claimed were made by the Syrian army, but were faked.

We've had fake reporters on UK and US news channels making fake reports - Danny et al. I even watched clips of these idiots being called brave heroes by our media!

There have been massive terrorist bombs going off in Syrian towns and cities killing hundreds and maiming many more, and yet we are supporting the perpetrators.(one example - http://www.rt.com/ne...an-capital-849/ ). When actually did we start openly supporting terrorists by the way? There were massive demonstrations in support of the government in Syria and yet we didn't report them - just as we didn't report the massive demos in support of Ahmadinejad in Iran when we were trying to get that government toppled a couple of years ago.

For a year and a half terrorists have been crossing borders from all sides into Syria and killing civilians, soldiers and police.

On top of all the moral issues, these phony wars are costing us, the UK taxpayer, an absolute fortune. And we wonder why we're in financial turmoil.

At least we've still got Tarpley, who gets his news from more reliable sources and has been on the ground in Syria, Lebanon and Libya among others, doing some real research.

[media=]

So its only the Western Press we can't trust? The Russian press are OK are they? We are in financial turmoil because the banks overstepped the mark in financial risk, nothing to do with the wars we fight, and what's phony about them? From what I have seen the dead and wounded look pretty real to me.

[THEFATBASTARD]

we have sacrificed enough of our young people and money, they never thank us for it even when we do.. this is the playing out of history,as we all know mans history is very bloody.. it just highlights how usless the UN is..be assured though, those in power in syria will get their turn... it always amazes me these despots never see the writing on the wall. you cannot fight history.

[Daggers]

From what I.N.T.E.L.L.I.G.N.C.E has gathered, it would be 9/11 times 100.

[BoneDog]

I agree with your view of the media, its so bias you have to laugh.

Its all a big con, with the aim to secure the Middle East oil fields.

Although the oil is a big pull I think that there are more reasons for these wars lately. Like preparing the area for Israel to take over world power from the US!

So its only the Western Press we can't trust? The Russian press are OK are they? We are in financial turmoil because the banks overstepped the mark in financial risk, nothing to do with the wars we fight, and what's phony about them? From what I have seen the dead and wounded look pretty real to me.

I don't really trust any of them. But from what I've seen, RT and PressTV have better quality analysts on their shows than our media do. The likes of Tarpley, Escobar and quite a few more are very good. I look for the most likely stories and they certainly don't come from the BBC, Sky or CNN.

Have you seen some of the fake reporting on the BBC, Sky, CNN and other western media - Syrian Danny et al? It's despicable.

I don't mean the actual event of war is phony, I mean the reasons for going to war (in Libya, Syria, Iraq, Iran and many others) are phony. That much isn't in doubt surely.

Today we have this - http://www.rt.com/news/us-sanctions-syria-un-649/ - "US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice has said that if the council does not take swift action to pressure Syrian authorities to end their 14-month crackdown on the anti-government uprising, the Security Council members may have no choice but to consider acting outside the UN."

What the hell? Terrorists have been crossing borders for 14 months and killing civilians, soldiers and police. They have been planting massive bombs in cities (look at the size of the craters!). They have been kidnapping people and stealing their cars, valuables and cash. They have been slitting childrens throats. That is not an 'anti-government uprising', that is terrorism. And the Syrian authorities are not supposed to crack down? 'king hell, if this was happening here, our government would be at war too.

I think it's all sick, and now, because the Syrian authorities are not making it easy for these terrorists to take over, the US, Britain, France and others say we are going to bomb the shit out of the country and punish the people even more. Why do they want these Al Qaeda Salafi and Wahabi psychos in power so much?

As for the financial turmoil being only the bankers fault, I think that is untrue. It is the bankers and war. Nations are always fighting wars they can't afford and we have spent many billions on wars recently. Probably trillions. (of course, we the taxpayer, don't get any of the money back. The leaders who take us to war get many benefits though and become richer)

[Steven]

CIA, MI6 and Mossad stop supplying arms to the "rebels"?

[BoneDog]

'Just as rock star Freddy Mercury & Queen used to sing “we will, we will rock you!!”, today’s US/UK/EU/Israeli war cry mantra goes something like this: “We will, we will BOMB you!!”. And if they can’t do the bombing “officially” themselves or through NATO as they’ve done in Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Serbia or Pakistan, then they’ll do the bombing through suitable proxies, especially their present favorite errand-boy Al-Qaeda.'

http://www.rt.com/news/us-syria-west-bomb-388/

Not sure about this next report but putting it out there just incase it happens. It wouldn't surprise me.

'The armed Syrian opposition has got their hands on chemical weapons, which they acquired from Libya, a media report claims. They allegedly plan to use it against civilians and pin the atrocity on the Bashar al-Assad regime........The chemical framing plot allegations comes days after British journalist Alex Thomson from Channel 4 news accused a Syrian opposition group of trying to set him and his crew up to be killed by government forces. He said a western journalist death would give bad publicity for Damascus.'

http://www.rt.com/news/syria-chemical-weapons-plot-532/

Tarpley with big words. "Time to impeach Ban Ki Moon"

'The performance we've just seen, featured in particular, two of the greatest liars and imperialist tools of the age - Ban Ki Moon and Kofi Annan. I think it's high-time to look into the procedures for impeaching, for ousting the Secretary General of the UN. This is no longer an international civil servant, this is now the partisan of an aggressor coalition.......I think they both won the Ribbentrop award for combining hypocrisy with aggressive intent. They talk about unity in the Security Council. There is no unity in the Security Council. What planet are these two living on?'

He also talks about the massacres and how they are similar to other false flags such as 'Operation Himmler' where dead bodies are assembled to show to the press and create outrage.

An interesting piece here regarding Bilderberg and Syria from The Guardian, with parts of an interview with Tarpley. The 3rd picture down starts the Syria part.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-news-blog/2012/jun/05/bilderberg-2012-chantilly-occupy?newsfeed=true

As for other press, I buy The Times every day and this is the headline in one of the leading articles today :

'Balkan Ghosts

Hague rightly compares Assad's assault on Syria's people to the Bosnian war 20 years ago. A belief that the West will not intervene is encouraging an aggressor.'

There's so much wrong with this I don't know where to start, but can see why we in the West are being fooled so easily. Whoever wrote that headline surely knows they are lying and are just peddling propaganda. Scum.

[Webbo]

Unless you're actually there you can't know for sure what is actually going on and have rely on the news coverage. I can't see why RT or Press TV are any more trustworthy than the western media.

That said the opposition in Syria is probably as bad as the Assad regime.

[breadandcheese]

El Empty, another Western/Israeli plot?

The usual belief of the oil motivation doesn't apply here, so that can't be a motivation. In fact, if anything, it is risky to see the fall of Assad's regime as it would risk chemical weapons falling into terrorist hands which is a far more dangerous proposition. There is no question of Syria containing chemical weapons (as there was with Iraq), so I cannot see how the West or Israel would benefit from a salafist regime in Syria, that had stockpiles of chemical weapons.

I especially like your first link to rt.com where the writer makes this observation:

"Wasn’t it Tony Blair’s Foreign Secretary Robin Cook who told The Guardian newspaper in June 2005 that “Al Qaeda was created by the US and the name means ‘the file’” – the CIA file containing lists of all those cute Al-Qaeda operatives? Too bad for big-mouth Robin as he promptly “died of a heart attack” just two months later in rather dubious circumstances…"

How can you take an article seriously when the writer makes the throwaway suggestion that Robin Cook's death was possibly murder and a big cover-up, rather than a heart attack.

[BoneDog]

Unless you're actually there you can't know for sure what is actually going on and have rely on the news coverage. I can't see why RT or Press TV are any more trustworthy than the western media.

That said the opposition in Syria is probably as bad as the Assad regime.

You're right saying that unless you're there it's hard to say what's cracking. Tarpley has been there, and the people he mentions in some of his reports are there. Journalists from Norway and other countries. The opposition is doing far worse things than Assad. The opposition (they shouldn't even be called 'opposition', they're mercenaries and rebels who didn't run in the recent elections) started crossing into Syria over a year ago, killing civilians, soldiers and police. They have been on the rampage for the whole time and I hope they get crushed.

The Alex Thomson story is interesting too as he was there officially, allowed in by Assad. That black car that was waiting after Thompson and crew had been sent into the firing zone by the rebels, I'll bet was waiting with the intention of getting pictures of Thomson and crews bodies to show to the world.

El Empty, another Western/Israeli plot?

Of course.

Whose plot is it then, if not Western/Israeli? Assad's? The Syrian civilians? The Philippine government? Efan Ekoku?

The usual belief of the oil motivation doesn't apply here, so that can't be a motivation.

I've mentioned what I believe the motivation to be since the WW3 thread The shift of superpower status from one part of the world to another. Not oil.

If anything, it is risky to see the fall of Assad's regime as it would risk chemical weapons falling into terrorist hands which is a far more dangerous proposition. There is no question of Syria containing chemical weapons (as there was with Iraq), so I cannot see how the West or Israel would benefit from a salafist regime in Syria, that had stockpiles of chemical weapons.

I'm sure Gadaffi would have had some chemical weapons, so the rebels probably could get their hands on them already, if allowed to of course.

Are you saying that the West's leaders don't want Assad to go? Or that they aren't backing the Salafis? It seems to me that we are heavily backing Salafis (who we actually created along with the Wahabbis, but that's another story. Funny how the US also created Al Qaeda, and Israel created Hamas to fight Arafat, but again, that's another story). John McCain is calling for us to arm them more, which we will.

I'd say the main reason we are backing radical Islam all around the region is to create more tension around Israel that will call for radical measures to counter the threat. The aftermath will result in a new superpower. Time will tell.

How can you take an article seriously when the writer makes the throwaway suggestion that Robin Cook's death was possibly murder and a big cover-up, rather than a heart attack.

What the first article says is basically what Clinton et al are saying, so I think it's pretty accurate. We are going to bomb Syria unless they can pull off a coup.

As for Cook's death, it could easily have been murder. Heart attack weapons are not science fiction - poisons and 'ray guns' can do the job. We'll never know though, that's for sure, so it was a bit silly of them to mention it, I agree.

I'm going to flip your question and ask you, 'How can you take seriously Western media that says Assad is to blame for the massacre in Houla?'

What would Assad's motivation for this be? Did he wake up one morning, look in the mirror and say to himself, 'You know what mush, I fancy going to The Hague, let's send the boys out to slit some kids throats in front of their parents'? And then did he say, 'I know! I'll do it in a village where they all support me and refused to cooperate with rebels! I'll be a legend!'?

Doesn't sound plausible to me and most of the rest of the world.

[BoneDog]

It seems like big moves are soon to be made. This video has just popped up on Tarpley's site. IMPORTANT DOOM AND UPCOMING PROPAGANDA ALERT.

"Russia is reportedly preparing 2 divisions and a Spetsnaz brigade for deployment to Syria.....Mini-Goebbels Ben Rhodes of Obama White House runs colossal Black Propaganda Op to assist NATO coup.....Massacre of Alawites and Christians looms; Cass Sunstein destabilizes Vatican to muzzle protest."

'We are now on the verge of a "Great Power" controntation.'

Here's the Thierry Meyssan link that Tarpley mentions.

'The time is past to lament the expansion of combat into Lebanon, or to conjecture about the possible regionalization of conflict. Over the past sixteen months of the destabilization of Syria, NATO and the GCC have created a situation without exit that might well degenerate into global war.'

http://www.voltairenet.org/Russian-Warning-Shots

http://tarpley.net/

The usual belief of the oil motivation doesn't apply here, so that can't be a motivation.

I just found this article which I didn't know about earlier. If people don't believe the "shift of world power and fulfilling of prophecy" theory for motivation (which I do), then this would surely now have to be the motivation.

'The wars of the last century were fought for oil, but a new era has dawned, that of wars for gas.'

http://www.voltairenet.org/a173718

[breadandcheese]

Of course.

Whose plot is it then, if not Western/Israeli? Assad's? The Syrian civilians? The Philippine government? Efan Ekoku?

Whilst I've always had my suspicions about Efan Ekoku from his ability to pop up in any every Panini Premier League sticker pack that I bought (seriously, the amount of swapsies I had was obscene), I'm not sure I can pin any blame on him.

Maybe, the events in Syria are not a plot/conspiracy and that the rest of the world is reacting to events, rather than leading them.

I remember going to a talk about twelve years ago, looking at areas around the globe. The speaker (I forget his name) made a big point that in the developing world and the Arab world, the proportion of population in the under 30 category is very high. In some cases, it was 65%. The speaker made the case (which I found rather convincing, I must say) that many of these countries are run by dictators, where there is no free press, the countries are horribly corrupt and there is little ability to change events. Economically, these countries are not fantastic either. As a result, the next generation (the under 30s) become angry and can turn to opposition groups. The speaker believed this was the reason for the success of groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, which provided the only viable opposition group.

The speaker basically described a powderbox situation, which resulted in Tunisia, resulted in Egypt and we have seen in other parts of the Arab world from Bahrain to Syria.

To put it in context, if today's Tory governnment said that there would be no more elections and they were going to run Britain evermore, I, no doubt like you and virtually everybody on Foxestalk, would be protesting and potentially involved in civil disobedience. Why should other citizens around the world not feel the same as us?

I've mentioned what I believe the motivation to be since the WW3 thread The shift of superpower status from one part of the world to another. Not oil.

I remember. I mentioned why I thought your comments were straying into anti-semitic territory and you never did define a Zionist.

As for Cook's death, it could easily have been murder. Heart attack weapons are not science fiction - poisons and 'ray guns' can do the job. We'll never know though, that's for sure, so it was a bit silly of them to mention it, I agree.

I know a few people who have unfortunately suffered heart-attacks. I guess we'll never know whether it was murder.

I'm going to flip your question and ask you, 'How can you take seriously Western media that says Assad is to blame for the massacre in Houla?'

What would Assad's motivation for this be? Did he wake up one morning, look in the mirror and say to himself, 'You know what mush, I fancy going to The Hague, let's send the boys out to slit some kids throats in front of their parents'? And then did he say, 'I know! I'll do it in a village where they all support me and refused to cooperate with rebels! I'll be a legend!'?

Doesn't sound plausible to me and most of the rest of the world.

We don't know the facts, so you can't make that assumption. What we do know is that both sides seem to be committing some horrible acts. I have maintained that we shouldn't get involved militarily and should leave it to Russia (as it's their sphere of influence) and any blame for the outcome placed squarely at them. My guess is that the biggest movers in all this are the other Arab countries in the Middle East (Saudi Arabia, Qatar) as Syria are their neighbours.

What we can all agree on is that the scenes in Syria are horrific and in my opinion Russia needs to step up and offer a solution. To put the conflict in context, more Syrians have died in the last twelve months than Palestinians in the last twelve years. That shows how urgently a solution is needed, rather than the ever spiralling into civil war. In this case, I have no problem with Russia putting boots on the ground and doing something, rather than criticising and offering nothing. Maybe this is needed.

[Reynard Bleu]

Seems to me that there are more than '2 sides' in this conflict. I'm sure that there is a popular uprising and resistance from a significant proportion of the Syrian population and clearly the Assad regime is playing its part. I am also sure that there are other forces at work here, groups with their own agenda and not part of the main protaganists. These days there are few wars where armies wear distictive uniform or identification, the population and fighters are indistiguishable. War is a bloody, messy, confused fog, where reason and compassion lay dead aongside the human casualties. One mans freedom fighter is another mans terrorist. We judge these people by the standards of the West, the truth is these standards have no place in their world, they mean nothing. Its not that they do not value human life, but they value death in equal measure.

Any intervention by the West or Russia is going to increase the death and misery and whilst the mighty powers might be planning how they go in, I doubt if any are planning on how they get out.

We have plenty of War in the 20th and 21st Centuries, yet we have learned so little from them except how to kill more effeciently.

[BoneDog]

Unfortunately I've got another big job on for the next week so haven't got time to come here and talk about this. A quick reply now and then not sure if I'll get chance to come on FT for 9 days after tonight. Just as it's about to take a turn for the worse aswell. I'm sure there'll be plenty to talk about in the coming week.

Maybe, the events in Syria are not a plot/conspiracy and that the rest of the world is reacting to events, rather than leading them.

From what I've learned this is not a reaction to events from the West. The West, with the help of proxies such as Qatar and Saudi, seem to have been backing and creating the chaos. We've been arming and funding the terrorists who mostly aren't even Syrians. We've also been helping them get to Syria. The rebels in Syria just appeared with weapons and started killing civilians and security forces. Thay are not protestors.

I remember. I mentioned why I thought your comments were straying into anti-semitic territory and you never did define a Zionist.

There are more Zionist groups than I first thought and to quickly define them I would say that they are a people who have an obsession with The Holy Land. I think Zionists have only been officially around for just over 100 years, but in that short time they have already somehow managed to occupy that land that none of them had ever lived in before. That is organisation and power for you.

My guess is that the biggest movers in all this are the other Arab countries in the Middle East (Saudi Arabia, Qatar) as Syria are their neighbours.

I think that NATO are the biggest movers. Without NATO countries backing (such as France, the US and UK) the Saudis or Qataris couldn't make any moves on Syria.

Seems to me that there are more than '2 sides' in this conflict. I'm sure that there is a popular uprising and resistance from a significant proportion of the Syrian population and clearly the Assad regime is playing its part. I am also sure that there are other forces at work here, groups with their own agenda and not part of the main protaganists. These days there are few wars where armies wear distictive uniform or identification, the population and fighters are indistiguishable. War is a bloody, messy, confused fog, where reason and compassion lay dead aongside the human casualties. One mans freedom fighter is another mans terrorist. We judge these people by the standards of the West, the truth is these standards have no place in their world, they mean nothing. Its not that they do not value human life, but they value death in equal measure.

Any intervention by the West or Russia is going to increase the death and misery and whilst the mighty powers might be planning how they go in, I doubt if any are planning on how they get out.

We have plenty of War in the 20th and 21st Centuries, yet we have learned so little from them except how to kill more effeciently.

There are phoney Muslims at play, but I don't think it is an accident. I think that the powers running the show are counting on the radicals doing their worst. (My advice to Muslims supporting these boys is to read your Book again - all that you are supporting here is the destruction of the Arabs, but I suppose Mohammad did say that was coming)

There are already stories of Christians getting shafted. Christians have lived in peace in Syria for decades. Many even fled Iraq for Syria where they knew they'd be safe (before the terrorists were sent in). Even in Iraq Christians used to live in peace with Muslims before the wars.

http://www.rt.com/news/syria-christians-exodus-opposition-778/

The Meyssan piece I linked in my last post that I said Tarpley referred to is the wrong one. This is the correct one and is very important. It reminds me of the Venezuelan affair years ago that was documented in that film 'The Revolution Will Not Be Televised'.

"Member States of NATO and the GCC are preparing a coup d’état and a sectarian genocide in Syria. If you want to prevent these crimes, you should act now: circulate this article on the Internet and alert your elected officials."

http://www.voltairenet.org/NATO-preparing-vast-disinformation

[bluesbrothers]

[breadandcheese]

There are more Zionist groups than I first thought and to quickly define them I would say that they are a people who have an obsession with The Holy Land. I think Zionists have only been officially around for just over 100 years, but in that short time they have already somehow managed to occupy that land that none of them had ever lived in before. That is organisation and power for you.

I'm still none the wiser as to how Zionist does not equate to Jews. Whose holy book relates to the "Holy Land"? Jews. Who pray towards the "Holy Land"? Jews.

It's also factually inaccurate to say no Jews lived in Israel before. There has always been a presence, albeit varying in number over the last 3000 years. It is documented by historical documents from Assyrian times, Crusader times, Ottoman times, etc.

As I said on the WW3 thread, I think some of the websites you read have their own agenda and are just as hate filled as those of the far right who talk of a clash of civilisations. They may present it more intelligently than those on the far right, but they're two branches on the same tree.

"Member States of NATO and the GCC are preparing a coup d’état and a sectarian genocide in Syria. If you want to prevent these crimes, you should act now: circulate this article on the Internet and alert your elected officials."

http://www.voltairen...-disinformation

That article is hilarious. The CIA have a better broadcasting empire than Rupert Murdoch. Hang on, I've just had a thought. You don't think that Murdoch said no to the CIA and so Agent Leveson with the help of the Guard©IAn are now putting the kerbosh on Murdoch and his whole empire. It's all so clear now.

[BoneDog]

Good news Rams fans (just wanted to do a Robbie Savage impression), big job no start until 2pm tomorrow now.

I'm still none the wiser as to how Zionist does not equate to Jews. Whose holy book relates to the "Holy Land"? Jews.

Many Jews who follow the Torah don't believe that that Book allows the forced creation of the state of Israel. Don't Zionists follow the Talmud more than the Torah? The Torah was what Moses brought so I'd think that is the correct way (if you believe in that stuff like religious folk are supposed to). That said, I'm no expert on Zionism, but I'd say the statement that they 'have an obsession with The Holy Land' is very accurate.

Jews, Christians and Muslims Books all heavily relate to that land. Jerusalem is mentioned throughout the Quran. Jesus is mentioned in the Quran more than Mohammad is. There is a whole chapter called Mary in there and she is regarded as the greatest woman to have ever lived by Muslims, so The Holy Land is prevalent in all three religions.

Just to show that Zionists and Jews are not synonymous, here's a Jewish guy talking a little about it. I've seen this man on CNN and other news channels, including the BBC and Sky I believe.

This Jewish man says 'The whole existence of the state of Israel is a crime.' He's also wearing a badge that says 'A Jew, not a Zionist'. I've seen a few videos with this guy and others and they have big numbers, so surely there's more to this. There are also many secular and liberal Jews who are not Zionist, not just religious types such as this guy.

It's also factually inaccurate to say no Jews lived in Israel before. There has always been a presence, albeit varying in number over the last 3000 years.

I've not said that no Jewish people lived in Palestine or Israel before. I know that some Jews, or Judeans, have lived there for a long time. Most of those who have gone since the 40's though had no ties with Palestine. Nothing gave them the right to force people from their families land after WW2 up to the present. The Jews who lived in Palestine back in time usually had good relations with Muslims and Christians who lived there. I've seen many an old timer who was there in the early 1900's saying they used to sit and talk together all the time, and even babysit for eachother. I've even seen evidence of Jews who lived there already, opposing the creation of the state and influx of immigrants.

As I said on the WW3 thread, I think some of the websites you read have their own agenda and are just as hate filled as those of the far right who talk of a clash of civilisations. They may present it more intelligently than those on the far right, but they're two branches on the same tree.

I don't see any hate, or attempts at stirring up hate, on the websites I visit. I'm no fan of anarchists, the far left or the far right for many reasons.

I just take what I think is the most honest reporting and work with that. Tarpley and others (who for some reason only get asked to go on RT or Presstv and other less known stations) are the ones who seem to be doing the real journalism from all those I've seen attempt reporting on Syria, Libya etc.. Their analysis always seems more logical than anything we get from most of our MSM journos who seem to try to make a report based purely around propaganda.

Have any of you watched any Tarpley reports, or other channels for a few weeks aswell as your usual news? Or do you just watch news reports from our own country, and the US of course? It's like people think that SKY, BBC, CNN, ITV, MSNBC are all we should trust, because they are ours! Even though they are constantly caught out peddling propaganda and lies people just keep on supporting them and looking at them as examples of honesty for some strange reason.

That article is hilarious. The CIA have a better broadcasting empire than Rupert Murdoch.

The article is perfectly serious, from a perfectly serious and well respected writer.

Did you see what happened in Venezuela for example? Where Washington was putting out fake news reports on all major news stations saying that Chavez's snipers were killing civilians? Those same snipers who Washington knew were working for themselves [Washington]. Washington had military officers lining up making video congratulatory speeches to be shown to the nation after the coup but it all went a bit tits up and they got caught out. That was just the tip of the iceberg.

(anyone interested in the Venezuelan story could watch this - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5832390545689805144 - a great documentary film that shows a coup attempt in action, which I think is relevant to what is happening in Syria now. The US / Venezuelan situation is also likely to heat up again soon, so this is important)

On a side note, you may mock the CIA's broadcasting empire, but they have always had, since at least the 50's, high-tech film studios manned by personnel from intelligence and from MGM and other big film studios, and full broadcasting capabilities.

*This thread should really stick to Syria talk, else it'll end up another that gets way off topic. The WW3 thread should be the place for the zionist or religious debate - although that thread never meant to get into all that either.*

[Jordan]

U.S. and NATO vs. Russia, China et al. in a proxy war. Henry Kissinger must be feeling nostalgic.