David Craig, on July 23rd, 2015We now know that Blair lied and lied and lied and lied to get us involved in the overthrow of the nasty dictator Saddam Hussein. And our propagandist media kept telling us that “nothing could be worse than Saddam”. We now know better.
Then came Syria. We were told that Bashar Al Assad was a thoroughly nasty dictator and therefore we should help overthrow him. After all, our rulers and their tame media informed us “nothing could be worse than Assad”. We now know better.
After that came Libya. We were told that Qaddafi was a thoroughly nasty dictator and therefore we should help overthrow him. After all, our rulers and their tame media informed us “nothing could be worse than Qaddafi”. We now know better.
Is there anyone else who can see a pattern here?
There’s a recent article in the highly respected Foreign Affairs magazine suggesting that we were lied to over Libya in just the same was as we were lied to over Iraq and Syria.
Here’s a brief extract:
“Moreover, by the time NATO intervened, Libya’s violence was on the verge of ending. Qaddafi’s well-armed forces had routed the ragtag rebels, who were retreating home. By mid-March 2011, government forces were poised to recapture the last rebel stronghold of Benghazi, thereby ending the one-month conflict at a total cost of just over 1,000 lives. Just then, however, Libyan expatriates in Switzerland affiliated with the rebels issued warnings of an impending “bloodbath” in Benghazi, which Western media duly reported but which in retrospect appear to have been propaganda.
In reality, on March 17, Qaddafi pledged to protect the civilians of Benghazi, as he had those of other recaptured cities, adding that his forces had “left the way open” for the rebels to retreat to Egypt. Simply put, the militants were about to lose the war, and so their overseas agents raised the specter of genocide to attract a NATO intervention—which worked like a charm. There is no evidence or reason to believe that Qaddafi had planned or intended to perpetrate a killing campaign.
The full article is here:
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/libya/2015-02-16/obamas-libya-debacle
If the article is accurate, it makes chilling reading in the way it exposes the lies and incompetence of our leaders and their supinely obedient, propagandist press.
The dictators in Iraq, Syria and Libya may not have been the kind of people you would invite home to meet your mother. But they did keep their ungovernable countries under control. By removing them we have created utter chaos and appalling suffering. And as this chaos spreads to Europe, we will be the people to suffer from our rulers’ mistakes and lies.
Category: 
Ukraine, Russia….
If it had only happened once it could be viewed as a miscalculation. But its happened three times. A despot rules a secular state multi ethnic mix Shia /Sunni /Christian . Under false pretext two despots are deposed Iraq and Libya . They tried to do the same in Syria.Do not be sure Cameron is still not trying to have ISIS takeover Syria.
Look at what has happened in Libya in state of semi-chaos with ISIS running parts such as camp where Tunisia gunmen trained.
Tens of thousands of African migrants so far have crossed into Italy.Gaddafi had deal with Italian government to stop.
These same people are now biting off a much bigger chunk of fat called Vladimir Putin, but they are scared s**tless of what this crook is capable of, so they are using more subtle methods.
The reality is that if someone does not fall into their communitarian view of the world… The one world government (NWO) view, they are the enemy.
As far as I am concerned, distasteful though Putin might be, he is a an honest crook, and he is fiercely pro-Russia.
I would much rather be ruled by a fiercely pro-English crook, than this never-ending stream of clones that we have had since WW2, with the single exception of Thatcher, who fooled them for a while.
Relevant perhaps? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw
Do we still believe what the media pushes out? You only have to follow a few online (real) news sites to see that the main stream media is used (by who?) to promote various messages/issues and ignore others. This used to be called propaganda.
I have long wondered who it is that is setting these apparently idiotic agendas, all of which appear deliberately designed to make the world less safe. Is the military establishment really so powerful that it can simply demand another war whenever it wants one whilst simultaneously being powerless to prevent cuts in their own budgets? It seems unlikely.
Whoever it is obviously has no democratic mandate as we don’t even know their identity. Not that it would confer any sort of ethical legitimacy even if people explicitly voted for it.
Also trying to understand who pulls the politicians strings on this. They are clearly bought and paid for as is the media.
Following the lobby money suggests corporate interests that benefit including defence, banking, commodities and big oil. The US military also has a lot at stake given its size and budgets need to be justified. And the israel lobby is a factor no doubt via the US.
Are the endless wars really just a confluence of corporate greed, career or in israels case national self preservation. The monies on offer are so vast though that no individual unless they are exceedingly moral or fearless can resist the rewards. A few million in a Caymen account is pocket change to these groups but is life changing for most indiviudals. If that doesnt work sure there are other ways to persuade.
The swamping Europe with African economic refugeees and our governments actions to encourage endless more to make the crossing seems to support they are not the ones in charge.
STUZ GRAZ
Put the name Peter Sutherland into google see what comes up on Mainstream sites. He has vast sums to buy influence a member of all the key decision making groups. He seeks the destruction of the nation state. Superseded by what HG Wells called The New World Order.