Sunday, 13 September 2015

British Government officially on ISIS's side - #knowyourenemy


 George Osbourne says that the British Parliament's refusal to support US-led air strikes on the Syrian Government in 2013 was "one of the worst decisions the House of Commons has ever made" when voting 'Yes' would have put the RAF on the same side as ISIS!

I’m confused, can anyone help me? Part 5

Neil Clark
                 
I’m confused about quite a lot of things going on in the world. The West is supposed to be fighting ISIS, yet seems keener on toppling a government which is fighting ISIS. A refugee crisis caused by Western interventions is being used as a pretext for more Western wars.
Elite media commentators keen to stress their humanitarianism, cry ‘something must be done’ about Syria, yet appear not to notice the on-going humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen.
There are violent anti-government protests again in Ukraine, but the reaction from the US is very different to when there were violent anti-government protests in Ukraine eighteen months ago. What on earth is going on? Perhaps you can help me sort out my confusion…
The first thing I’m confused about is the refugee crisis currently affecting Europe.
The vast majority of refugees are coming from countries e.g. Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, which were targeted by the West for ‘regime change’ and which experienced bombing/invasion or destabilization by NATO powers and their regional allies.
We’re told by the West’s political elite and much of the media that in order to stop the influx of refugees to Europe we need to do more bombing.
But if bombing solves the problem of refugees, why are people fleeing from countries, such as Iraq and Afghanistan and Libya that the West has already bombed?
How can more bombs and intervention solve a problem caused by bombs and intervention? And how can the imposition of a no-fly zone in Syria stop ISIS, which doesn’t have an air force?
I’m confused. Can anyone help me?
On the subject of Syria I’m confused about the West’s obsession with toppling President Assad and his government. The secular Syrian government does not and did not threaten the West, and its sworn enemies are the groups- such as Al-Qaeda and its affiliates, which we are supposed to have been fighting ‘a war on terror’ against. If radical Islamist terror groups such as Al-Qaeda and ISIS are such a danger, why are we still trying to topple a government which has been fighting them? Why does UK Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne say that the British Parliament’s refusal to support US-led air-strikes on the Syrian government in 2013 was “one of the worst decisions the House of Commons has ever made” when voting 'Yes' would have put the RAF on the same side as ISIS - a group which claimed responsibility for the killing of 30 British tourists on a beach in Tunisia earlier this summer? Surely if our leaders really wanted to defeat ISIS, they would be working with countries in the region that have a vested interest in defeating ISIS - like the government in Syria - and not working to overthrow them, which would only help ISIS.
I’m confused. Can anyone help me?
I’m confused about the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).
It’s the proposed free trade deal between the free, open democracies of Europe, and that bastion of democracy the US, but the deal itself is shrouded in secrecy and can only be read by politicians in a secure reading room in Brussels.
If TTIP is so great- as its supporters claim, why can't we see its terms and provisions? Why in ‘democratic’ Europe, where our leaders all claim to support public participation in the political process, are we being kept in the dark over a deal which is likely to have a major impact on our daily lives? I’m confused. Can anyone help me?
I’m confused too about events in Yemen, and the lack of concern from Western ’humanitarian interventionists’ over what is happening in the country.
A Saudi-Arabian led alliance has been bombing Yemen since March - yet despite Amnesty International reporting that the bombing campaign has left a “bloody trail of civilian death and destruction paved with evidence of war crimes”- the West‘s “Something Must Be Done” brigade have been strangely silent.
“The civilian population is bearing the brunt of the conflict: a shocking four out of five Yemenis require humanitarian assistance and nearly 1.5 million people are internally displaced,” says Stephen O’Brien, the UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and UN Emergency Relief Coordinator.
In Libya in 2011 we had a no-fly zone imposed to prevent massacres that might happen- in Yemen, we're seeing large scale casualties as a result of airstrikes but this time there’s no calls for NFZs from Western leaders or ‘liberal interventionists’ in the media.
Why was there a ‘Responsibility to Protect’ civilians in Libya in 2011, but not a ‘Responsibility to Protect’ civilians who are being killed in Yemen in 2015?
I'm confused. Can anyone help me?
I’m confused about US policy towards anti-government protests in Ukraine which involve violence from ultra-nationalists.
In early 2014, there were violent protests against the democratically elected government of Viktor Yanukovich, protests in which ultra-nationalists played a prominent role. The US and its allies told the Ukrainian government that it was not allowed to use force against protestors, even though some of them smashed into government buildings and threw Molotov cocktails at police.
“We unequivocally condemn the use of force against civilians by security forces and urge that those forces be withdrawn immediately,” said Secretary of State Kerry.
But last week, when there were fresh anti-government protests involving ultra-nationalists in Kiev which also involved violence, the US’s line was rather different. “Law enforcement agencies need to exercise restraint, but there’s an obligation on the protestors to behave in a peaceful manner”- a State Department spokesman said. Why was there criticism of violent ultra-nationalist protestors in August 2015, but not criticism of violent ultra-nationalist protestors in February 2014? And why was the Ukrainian government given a fierce warning in 2014, but not one this time?
I’m confused. Can anyone help me?
I’m also confused about the continuation of the sanctions war between the US and its allies and Russia. The OSCE report that things are calming down in eastern Ukraine.
Its Special Monitoring Mission report of 5th September said there were “few ceasefire violations in the Donetsk region and none in Lugansk.”
But despite this, the US and Britain are not talking about the easing of sanctions. On the contrary, there have been calls for sanctions to be extended. The economic damage of the sanctions war to EU economies has been put at $100 billion-with 2 million jobs at risk. Surely, seeing how things have calmed down in the Donbass region, and the damage that the sanctions war is doing to Europe, the sensible thing is for the sanctions to be eased or lifted altogether?
Or is there another agenda at work here, that has nothing to do with events in eastern Ukraine and which we’re not being told about?
I’m confused. Can anyone help me?
I’m confused about photographs of dead children and why some seem to affect the Western elites more than others. The photograph of poor little Aylan Kurdi, the three-year-old Syrian refugee washed up on the shore in Turkey, has been used to drum up support for bombing Syria.
Yet photographs of dead Palestinian children, killed in the Israeli offensive against Gaza last year, brought no such response. On the contrary, this week the Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu is visiting Britain and can expect to receive the red carpet treatment. Among the 539 killed by Israeli forces in Gaza were four children, aged between 9 and 11, who were killed while playing on the beach. Why did their deaths not lead to a political/media campaign for ‘action’ to be taken, as the death of Aylan Kurdi has?
The general public certainly cares: a petition calling for Netanyahu to be arrested for Israeli war crimes when he visits Britain received over 100,000 signatures, meaning that it has to be debated in Parliament. But government minister Eric Pickles dismissed the petition as ‘completely absurd’. Why is it ‘completely absurd’ to care about dead Palestinian children as well as dead Syrian ones?
I’m confused. Can anyone help me?
You can read I’m Confused Parts One, Two, Three and Four.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
3.7K
people reading
(28)
Comments
  • All
  • New
  • Popular


Norma Brown 7 hours ago
welcome to the club of the confused. There is no sense in US foreign policy, and it is appalling to see how quickly the European "powers" fall into lock-step. Does nobody in our governments have a brain, not to mention vision? All your points are well taken. Thanks for making them. They lessen the vacuum of intelligent commentary in today's "news coverage" (aka propaganda) from the so-called mainstream media.
Colin Lonie yesterday at 13:25
Read the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Everything will become clear.
Red Tick Alert at 15:08 the day before yesterday
Julie Applegate
The U.S wants to get rid of Assad because Syria doesn't have a Rothschild Central bank controlling the country.The U.S is financing and providing weapons to ISIS to help them fight and overthrow Assad. The U.S involvement in Syria is all about installing a Rothschild Central banking system in that country. It's one of the reasons why we invaded Iraq and overthrew Sadam Hussain, Central Banks want to control the world.more...
Yes and NO - all about Qatar vs Russian gas pipelines PLUS Syria wanted to dump the petrodollar
Red Tick Alert at 15:07 the day before yesterday
I'm confused. Can anyone help me?
The only thing I can do is to give you a web based hug and whilst tearing tell you that I'm confused. Can anyone help me?
Max JJ at 07:27 the day before yesterday
ISIS is a catalyst for WW3. If they are not defeated quickly, and through ground invasion, it's likely going to look even much much more bleaker with unforeseen and unpredictable consequences.

Bombing just kills civilians, destroys the economies of the locals , and feeds ISIS propaganda. This is festering, either intentionally or through incompetence.
Orest Zazulak at 00:26 the day before yesterday
Wowzy Wowwow
@Orest Zazulak you said:> "I'm confused that Clark, as a journalist, is so naïve." How is he naïve? What didhe say that wasn't factual and verifiable via multiple and diverse sources? You sir, should try and be more "Fair and Balanced" Pun intended!!!!!more...
Wake up. It's called power and money.
Wowzy Wowwow 3 days ago 23:25
Message deleted
@Orest Zazulak you said:> "I'm confused that Clark, as a journalist, is so naïve." How is he naïve? What did he say that wasn't factual and verifiable via multiple and diverse sources? You sir, should try and be more "Fair and Balanced" Pun intended!!!!!
Julie Applegate 3 days ago 20:14
The U.S wants to get rid of Assad because Syria doesn't have a Rothschild Central bank controlling the country. The U.S is financing and providing weapons to ISIS to help them fight and overthrow Assad. The U.S involvement in Syria is all about installing a Rothschild Central banking system in that country. It's one of the reasons why we invaded Iraq and overthrew Sadam Hussain, Central Banks want to control the world.
Hyper Commentz II 3 days ago 17:00
The answer to all your questions is "Israel".
Charles Hagberg 3 days ago 16:44
Petrov
If this man is confused, it may be because he is ignorant and uninformed. However more likely he is justcynically enriching himself from the Kremlin propaganda budget.more...
He is a guest columnist you ignorant ftard
emelio1 3 days ago 14:48
Very good article.Well, I'm not confused at all and the writer of this article is not confused as well. What happens is the result of forcefully imposing the Zionist globalism on people all over the world. All the Western governments are under globalist control. Just look at the Eastern countries where their regimes were changed back in the 90's. What kind of economies do they have and what's their debt to the international banksters? We all know that ISIS appeared out of nowhere and it is a western creation financed by the globalists in order to take out Assad. If it was not so then why the US warned Russia not to enter the fight against ISIS?
Catherine Pillar 3 days ago 14:40
You're confused because you didn't put on your "US Interests" glasses?
Loo Tc 3 days ago 13:43
simple jz compare those country that currently in war and back 5 years ago before west put a foot in than u know 5 years ago better or now is better. The west keep telling how bad it is before they help but after they help even worst or no hope at all.
ted dolan 3 days ago 11:37
Syria will be the GAS route that the US wants! Simple as that! they get to bypass Russia gas lines !
Enrrique Costas 3 days ago 08:38
Lybia was in fact a rich country with over $ 100 bn. currency reserves and one million immigrants before becoming again a colony after the Anglo-American-French invasion
mind biz 3 days ago 07:45
I can understand why he's confused....because he didn't once mention Israel's pathological hatred of Syria & Iran's ally in Lebanon, Hezbollah, who dare to defend Lebanon against Israeli attacks.
He didn't mention Saudi Arabia's pathological hatred of Iran for daring to resist Sunni hegemony in the middle east. He ignored the USA's pathological hatred of Syria for daring to be independent, an ally of Iran and a friend of Russia too.
As for Yemen, of course, there isn't a peep of condemnation because when Western ''allies'' such as the theocratic loons of Arabia (loaded with petro-dollars) bomb civilians in Yemen, that's alright.....because those bombs are allied bombs. And as we all know, allied bombs are made of candy-floss and marsh-mallows.
Robert Mathews 3 days ago 05:10
What about the dead kids in east of ukraine?usa r 2 faced.
David Gracia 3 days ago 04:53
Democratic Spain has many of its citizens looking for a living outside its borders but it will be accepting 15 thousand refugees with money and lodging but not to the Spaniards. I am confused.
Petrov 3 days ago 04:47
If this man is confused, it may be because he is ignorant and uninformed. However more likely he is just cynically enriching himself from the Kremlin propaganda budget.
Julie Elizabeth 3 days ago 02:29
great article. well done for some decent reporting!
More  8






No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.