26 Aug 2013

SYRIA: Hague regime gets UN visit to chemical weapons site, Washington regime says “not credible”

haigkidIt’s that zero-support Special Relationship again
Hague….surprisingly mature for his age
The Slog: This is what the BBC says about the chemical weapons atrocities with which Bashar Assad is credited: ‘Attacks using chemical weapons have killed hundreds of people near the Syrian capital, Damascus, the opposition alliance says’. The Opposition alliance, folks, is a polite way of saying “Those nice guys in the Muslim Brotherhood what America backs, like”. So we can trust them, right?
In a classic clanger of a quote in the Telegraph last Wednesday, William ‘Mekon’ Hague told the Party’s house magazine, “Evidence of the attack is deteriorating every day”. And he dismissed claims that the Brotherhood may have staged or even committed the atrocity themselves. Given they have form in this area, it is baffling me as to why Willy is so sure….given that he presented no evidence at the time – or since.
He did say he wanted the UN to go in and check the veracity of the story. But yesterday, Camerlot was gung-ho for a joint US/UK action against Assad. I wonder why the UN inspection route has been abruptly dropped, but not Mr Hague: he dismissed suggestions that the attack could have been faked by rebels fighting against Assad’s regime. “I think the chances of that are vanishingly small,” he concluded.

Why? Hague went on to add, “This is our priority at the moment: to make sure that a UN team can investigate on the ground and establish the facts.”If this does not happen, Mr Hague said Britain would return to the UN Security Council to “get a stronger mandate and for the world to speak together more forcefully about this so that there can be access.”
But yesterday, um, that didn’t seem to be on the agenda any more. Guess why…
Overnight,  ABC news in Australia reports that the the Assad regime has approved the UN demand to visit the chemical weapons site. 
But a United States official said the development was “too late to be credible” and Washington was all but certain the government had gassed its own people.
What will little lapdog Willy say now, we ask ourselves? The whole thing is a sick joke.
Three days after the Coalition came to power, I posted to say that William Hague, the new Foreign Secretary, had flown to Washington when he should’ve flown to Berlin and Paris, followed by Brussels. Since then, the bloke has been falling – at first steadily, and latterly right off a cliff – in my estimation. Now we are seeing the results of Hague and his idiot-run FCO in the shape of a planned attack on Syria.
Our self-styled élite will never learn. But anyway, these are the real facts surrounding this lunacy:
1. Neither the US nor the UK has presented one shred of evidence to pin chemical weapons attacks on the regime.
2. We are going to war in support of an Islamist organisation – the Muslim Brotherhood – because that’s who America is backing. They are trying (and failing) to wrest power from a non-Islamist (but equally repugnant) Assad regime run by minority Alawhites.
3. For eighteen months now, the agents of US/UK “policy” in Syria have been calling the imminent demise of Bashar Assad. ‘Atrocities’, ‘Attacks on Turkey’ and so forth were all false flag stunts to justify later actions…..as are the chemical weapons accusations. They were all wrong, so now we are furthering policy to oust Assad by the illegal use of force.
4. Both Britain and America are hugely dependent on oil as a resource, and some degree of stability in the Middle East. This is now their “strategy” for achieving it….ie, the usual one: invent a crime and a danger, and then punish it militarily. (See Iraq, Libya, Gulf War etc etc).
5. The US backs the Muslim Brotherhood because they are an anti-Iran schism inside Islam. Both the US & the UK want Iran taken out because of its bomb building process….and because Israel is our ally. I’d like to know which clown came up with the idea of backing terrorists in order to get rid of terrorists: should we therefore have backed Protestant Militia in Northern Ireland against the IRA in the 1980s?
6. We can only gape in wonder at the US/UK hypocrisy in condemning the Egyptian military ‘coup’, while preparing to launch one against Assad themselves. The military in Egypt are being demonised because….guess who, the Muslim Brotherhood, are opposing the military. 
Ten years after the start of the War on Terror bollocks, we are backing the US in a kack-handed Middle East policy promising war on two fronts….and one invasion immediately. Like  every US foreign venture since Korea, it involves ludicrously optimistic war aims, naive policy strategies, and cynical agendas.
There is only one thing Britain needs to get here: out of the Special Relationship, once and for all.

Edited by WD

No comments:

Post a Comment