The Salisbury and Douma attacks are illustrative of just what happens when a government is prepared to dissimulate or even lie to go the extra mile to make a case to justify preemptive action that otherwise might be challenged. Theresa May is, unfortunately, still in power and so is Donald Trump. In a better world an outraged public would demand that they be thrown out of office and even possibly subjected to the tender ministrations of the International Criminal Court in The Hague.
False Flag Terrorism
Despite the good will of some of the participants, the Paris conference for Libya did not have the desired effects. For Thierry Meyssan, this can be explained by the double language of NATO and the United Nations, who are pretending to want to stabilise the country while their actions in fact continue the Cebrowski plan for the destruction of state structures. The spectacle in Paris was steeped in a profound ignorance of the particularities of Libyan society.
Major questions have been raised about the actions of the Syrian Civil Defence, AKA the “White Helmets.”
BSN co-editor Mike Raddie discusses funding of the White Helmets and how British citizens could be on the wrong side of anti terrorism legislation by paying taxes which the UK government is providing to this terrorist group in Syria.
Seven short films showing the brutality and depravity of life under terrorist occupied Eastern Ghouta. These heartbreaking testimonies also expose the White Helmets’ true colours – not just a propaganda construct, but a psycological black op deeply embedded with western backed terrorist groups and contriving to escalate the crisis by concocting a pretext for full UK / US invasion.
Scott Ritter is arguably the most experienced American weapons inspector and in this interview with Dennis J. Bernstein he levels a frank assessment of U.S. government assertions about chemical weapons use.
In an atmosphere of mass hysteria and paranoia (like the one we’re living in at the moment), the authorities’ narratives do not have to make sense, or stand up to any type of real scrutiny. Their primary purpose is not to deceive, but rather, to demarcate an ideological territory of acceptable belief, expression, and emotion to which “normal” people are expected to conform.
The more time passes since the allied attack against Syria on 14 April 2018, the more the available information reveals the amplitude of the disaster. While the United States still mange to prevent leaks from their armies, those from France are irrevocable. Washington, Paris and London clearly demonstrated that they still intend to rule the world, but they also showed that they no longer have the means to do so.
The first strange thing to note is that the US, UK and France boycotted the meeting, denouncing Russia for producing the witnesses and calling the event an “obscene masquerade” and “theatre”. It suggests that this trio, behaving like the proverbial three monkeys, think the testimony will disappear if they simply ignore it.
How can other governments accept the US, UK, and French governments that intentionally lied about a Russian chemical attack on the Skripals and about a Syrian chemical attack on Douma, risking a third world war, and then themselves attacking Syria on the basis of a transparent lie unsupported by any evidence? How exactly do you conduct diplomatic relations with war criminals?
In the light of history, the 14th of April 2018 will be seen as the day that everything changed. Without the missile strike on Syria, the previous actions of the criminals responsible may have gone unnoticed for longer and their activities gone unpunished. But now their supreme confidence in their ability to conduct “provocations” with impunity will be their downfall, if there is any justice in the world, and those who can enforce it.
Here’s how a free press, one owned by a handful of corporations, uses its freedom. It simply tells you what it is good for its business interests, or more generally for the political and business environment it operates in. It’s not interested in truth or airing all sides, or even necessarily basic facts.