(UPDATE at foot of article)
In two previous articles (here and here), I pointed out how the US/israel/NATO advance on the rest of the world has been stopped by Russia declaring it will not allow a foreign country to intervene militarily in Syria. In other words, Russia is saying if the US (or anyone else) attacks Syria, Russia will retaliate in kind. And Russia has the missile technology to defeat the US forces and these missiles are in place both on land in Syria and on their naval vessels off the coast of Syria. This fundamental fact that Russia will fight back and that it will, in all likelihood, be victorious is being totally ignored (publicly) by western officials and their brothers and sisters in the news media.
It is essential to bear this fact in mind when considering what is being said and reported in the news. In spite of all the noise about the US attacking Syria, it is simply not going to happen. The US cannot chance coming off second best in a conflict with Russia.
It is also essential to bear in mind that the 'news' is propaganda from start to finish. The media works hand-in-hand with the government creating the cause for war. So this 'hand-in-hand' behaviour calls for planning in advance which means that what we receive via the teevee is scripted . . . . including the 'opposition'. The situation requires it to be scripted. It's a show no different to any other teevee show. The major 'news' outlets including the wire services are all controlled by jews and, of course, they are all major supporters of israel and it's various genocidal programs. Everything that is reported will have some level of deceit embedded in it because its purpose is to shape our thinking. So the question that needs to asked of oneself all the time is, "Why am I reading this in the news?"
To show how scripted it all is, take for instance Jordan's reported refusal to allow the US to launch an attack on Syria using Jordan's airfields. Jordan is a vassal state. It is totally dependent on the US and its allies. So why is it apparently defying the US? If it was genuinely against it and the US was seriously for it, then you would expect the Jordanian govt to approach the US privately. There would be dealing going on. Jordan would not dare to openly defy the US in public because this would require the US to retaliate publicly. You just don't do that sort of thing if you are a country like Jordan and your power (and protection) rests on being associated with the biggest tough in town. The only explanation that makes sense of Jordan's open refusal of airfield facilities is that it was done with US approval. The exact same thing applies to talk of Egypt closing of the Suez canal to American warships. It's scripted.
If anyone would doubt that the media are not complicit in all this, they need to ask themselves why no one in the media is asking, “What would be Al-Assad's motivation for killing his own citizens with chemical weapons?” It takes an op-ed in the China Daily to ask that obvious and fundamental question. In any murder investigation, the first question that is asked about any suspect is, “What's their motivation?” The China Daily article concludes after a moments reflection that it would be suicidal for Al-Assad to do so.
“Even those who are no fans of the Bashar al-Assad regime must question why the regime would use chemical weapons as government forces have just won the upper hand in the fight against the opposition, and it is clear such a move would be tantamount to suicide.”
So if the US has been stopped from attacking Syria by Russia, why is it talking as if an attack is imminent? And why is it scripting these impediments to attacking Syria from its allies? The talk, like any show, is for the audience. Part of this audience is the American public. The fear and loathing creates a suitable backdrop to advance the police state in the US. It allows for the militarisation of police forces and gets them to believe they are in a war zone and not amongst their fellow citizens.
Another crucial audience sector is the 'Syrian rebels' aka mercenaries. Either way, they are the proxy troops for NATO. The Syrian government have these NATO proxies on the run now and NATO are trying to prevent a rout; trying to prevent a wholesale retreat by these terrorists. So the US govt is making all these noises about attacks coming against Syria which would help the position of the proxies. But it is all bullshit. Israel, the US and the rest of NATO want the destruction of Syria if it can't take it over. This is Plan B. Destruction is always Plan B. To do this they need to keep the terrorist proxies fighting in Syria to the last man.
Another audience demographic is the Syrian population itself. All these threats of 'retaliatory' bombing (which would kill many Syrian civilians) because Al Assad supposedly killed many Syrian civilians, is designed to create panic and social disorder making it harder for the Syrian government to run the country while defending itself against armed invaders. The logic of killing people to protect them is straight out of “The Psychopathic Handbook”.
Yet another target for this nonsense spewing from the lips of various NATO government leaders and officials is Russia. It is always just possible they might be able to bluff Russia into backing down or at least making concessions to the US over their defence of Syria. It must be a wan hope, but hope springs eternal, especially when you are desperate.
The US is openly ignoring the roadblock that Russia has thrown up in front of it possibly in the hope that if the US doesn't seem to see it as a problem then maybe it will create doubt in the minds of the Russians (good luck with that one). But what it certainly does is draw the international public's attention away from this effective counter to the US Empire. The US does not want the world at large to understand the ramifications of what Russia has done; that it has put an end to the expansion and complete dominance of the US Empire. The American Century has not got out of its teens. It is vital for US commercial, corporate and government interests (same thing in the end) that the world continue to believe that the US is all powerful in spite of the countervailing reality. For one thing, the US would lose much of its influence over the Caucasus oil producing countries to the benefit of Russia and the current movement away from using the $US for international trade by a few countries could turn into a stampede and bring down the worlds biggest bully. Power is reliant on the perception of power.
It is for this same reason that the US dares not engage Russia militarily. It cannot afford to be fought to a standstill or stand-off with Russia, let alone be defeated by it. And that is why the US is scripting the impediments to it's attack on Syria from Egypt and Jordan. It can't afford to tangle with Russia but it can't afford to be seen to not want to tangle with Russia, either.
The vote in Britain preventing Cameron going to war with Syria can be seen in the same light. It's like the dog that barks at you from behind the fence safe in the knowledge that the gate is firmly closed.
It seems the American administration is going to take the same way out as did the British by putting the question of attacking Syria to Congress and have the Congress bar the way to war to save face for the US administration with none other than John (bomb, bomb Iran) McCain and Lindsay (everything for israel) Graham leading the charge for the back door. From the ABC news article-
However, Republican senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham on Saturday said they could not support isolated military strikes on Syria that are not part of a bigger strategy.
"We cannot in good conscience (excuse me!? - ed) support isolated military strikes in Syria that are not part of an overall strategy that can change the momentum on the battlefield, achieve the president's stated goal of [Syrian President Bashar al-] Assad's removal from power, and bring an end to this conflict, which is a growing threat to our national security interests," they said in a statement.
Meanwhile, US secretary of state John Kerry spoke to the Syrian opposition leader on Saturday to underscore the determination of the US to hold the Syrian government accountable, a State Department official said.
Mr Kerry spoke with Syrian opposition coalition president Ahmed Assi al-Jarba to underscore Mr Obama's "commitment to holding the Assad regime accountable for its chemical weapons attack against its own people on August 21st," the official said.
It seems the American administration is going to take the same way out as did the British by putting the question of attacking Syria to Congress and have the Congress bar the way to war to save face for the US administration with none other than John (bomb, bomb Iran) McCain and Lindsay (everything for israel) Graham leading the charge for the back door.
From the ABC news article-
No doubt Kerry was hoping the 'Syrian opposition' would interpret the "commitment to holding the Assad regime accountable for its chemical weapons attack against its own people on August 21st," as meaning that the US still intended to attack Syria with missiles etc. when in fact they have no intention of doing so. It certainly is grand to have the US right behind you . . . if not exactly right beside you!
|(Google translation) IRIB-"No American war ship or British or else is allowed to pass through the Suez Canal ship," ordered the Egyptian Minister of Defense.
According Farsnews, citing Reuters, General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi insisted that no authorization is given to warships that would hear attack Syria. The decision was taken as part of the Egyptian government to respect the joint defense agreement signed between Egypt and Syria, announced Reuters, making it difficult for the United States and Great Britain an attack against Syria, according to the same agency.
Gosh, the poor United States is going to be hamstrung in its righteous strike against the Syrian govt (and killing Syrian people in the process) because their allies have no moral backbone and won't support them.
(How's that gate going? Still closed? Yep?
Good! Can we put another lock on it just to be sure?)