Is WW3 inevitable?

Confessions of Foreign Salafi Militants Captured in Syria

http://friendsofsyria.co/2013/09/13/confessions-of-foreign-salafi-militants-captured-in-syria/

Very interesting to listen to - English subtitles. Shows how they are indoctrinated and brain washed with Jihad. Plus the ways they get to Syria. Also the amounts of money etc. One guy is incredible about all the names he remembers of people he met even briefly.

You can see that they are relaxed in their confessions. I tend to believe them as Assad offered amnesty to prisoners captured if they wanted to join the Syrian Military.

A good lesson in the brainwashing recruitment war machine.
 
George is just brilliant on this 'talk/shout' show. So comical and hilarious. Shame such a serious discussion is highjacked (on purpose).

George Galloway vs Jo Coburn – Chemical Weapons

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Bbq30MlZNE
 
Turkey's current stance.
Syrian crisis not only about chemical weapons : Gul
Turkish President Gul has said that the Russian proposal that Syria hands over its chemical weapons is a significant development. He added, however, that the Syrian crisis in not only about removing chemical weapons.

“We already knew that there was a great amount of chemical weapons in one of our neighbouring countries. So cleansing Syria of chemical weapons is a significant development. One should be grateful for this. But this should not become a tactic; it should be a real cleansing. The second dimension to this is that the issue is not solely about chemical weapons,” Gul told reporters on 11th September, following the International Financial Systems Forum in Istanbul.

The Syrian foreign minister said 10th September that his government was ready to turn over its chemical weapons stockpile in line with the proposal, in order “to thwart U.S. aggression.”

However, President Gul called on the U.S. authorities to not view the situation only in terms of chemical weaponry but to remember that the Syrian civil war, has claimed over 100,000 lives, so far.

“There is a country here where over 100,000 people have been killed, where a cruel civil war reigns, where people’s cities are destroyed. This must be stopped. There has to be a political strategy as a way out. Otherwise, no one can accept things going as they are,” he said, adding that the overturning of the chemical weapons did not dismiss the need for a real solution in the war-stricken country.

Meanwhile, Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Levent Gumrukcu said that Turkey welcomes the proposal that would allow Syria to surrender chemical weapons to the control of the international community, but that would not absolve Syria of its responsibility for past incidents where chemical weapons were used,

“Any new process should not abolish obligation of accountability [for using chemical agents by the Syrian regime] anyway,” Gumrukcu said at a press conference on Sept.11.

The use of chemical weapons is just one part of the crisis in Syria, but not the sole element, he added, citing that due to the Syrian regime’s “violence” more than 100,000 people had been killed and more than 2 million displaced.

The international community should understand that all these elements are threats against international and regional peace and security, and develop a strategy accordingly, he added.

“Turkey’s expectation is that the U.N. should respond to its responsibility on Syria with integrity. This is Turkey’s priority. However, heading for tactical steps and falling into a trap, rather than taking steps that would pursue essence of Syrian crisis in order to produce a solution, will be misleading steps,” he said.

Turkish foreign ministry officials have recently had diplomatic contacts with U.S., French and Russian officials regarding Turkey’s views about recent proposal for surrendering Syria’s chemical weapons to the international community’s oversight. Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu has yet to hold a phone conversation with his colleagues regarding the proposal, Gumrukcu said.

Turkey is currently host to 460,000 Syrian refugees.


(If Turkey didn't encourage Jihadists then 100k deaths would not have happened!)
 
happyliza said:
George is just brilliant on this 'talk/shout' show. So comical and hilarious. Shame such a serious discussion is highjacked (on purpose).

George Galloway vs Jo Coburn – Chemical Weapons

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Bbq30MlZNE

Agree with you there happyliza. His grin at the end made me laugh. :D He managed to get quite a few digs into the Beeb, Israel and wound the host up beautifully.
 
What do you think of this article? Probably true or probably disinfo?

_http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=110043&cid=31&fromval=1&frid=31&seccatid=71&s1=1

Truth of US-Russia Confrontation

Daoud Rammal – As-Safir



Aggression was over the Moment those Two Missiles were Fired



A well informed diplomatic source told As-Safir newspaper that “the US war on Syria had started and ended the moment those two ballistic missiles were fired, leaving inconsistent information, as Israel denied and Russia confirmed, until an Israeli statement was issued indicating they were fired in the context of an Israeli-US joint drill and fell in the sea, and that they were not related to the Syrian crisis.”

The source further told the Lebanese daily that “the US forces fired these two rockets from a NATO base in Spain, and were instantly detected by the Russian radars and confronted by the Russian defense systems, so one of them exploded in the airspace and the second one diverted towards the sea.”

In this context, the source pointed out that “the statement issued by the Russian Defense Ministry, which stated the detection of two ballistic missiles fired towards the Middle East, intended to neglect two points: the first was the location from which the two rockets were fired, and the second was their downing. Why? Because the moment the full military operation was launched, Head of the Russian Intelligence Service contacted the US intelligence and informed it that “hitting Damascus means hitting Moscow, and we have removed the term “downed the two missiles” from the statement to preserve the bilateral relations and to avoid escalation. Therefore, you must immediately reconsider your policies, approaches and intentions on the Syrian crisis, as you must be certain that you cannot eliminate our presence in the Mediterranean.”

“This unannounced direct confrontation between Moscow and Washington increased the Obama Administration’s confusion and certainty that the Russian side was ready to move until the end with the Syrian cause, and that the US did not have a way out of its impasse except through a Russian initiative which would save America’s face…” he added.

From this point, the diplomatic source clarified that “in order to avoid further US confusion, and after Israel denied knowing anything about the rocket firing in its first statement, which is the truth, Washington demanded Tel Aviv to adopt the rocket firing to save its face in front of the International Community, especially since these two rockets were the beginning of the US aggression on Syria and the announcement of the beginning of military operations, after which US President Barack Obama was supposed to go to the G20 Summit in Russia to negotiate the destiny of Syrian President Bashr Al-Assad. However, he went to find a way out of the impasse he’s in.”

The source further indicated that “after the US-Russia rocket confrontation, Moscow intended to increase its number of military experts in Russia, and added to its military units and destroyers to enhance its military presence in the Mediterranean. It also set a time for announcing about its initiative on stopping the aggression on Syria after the G20 Summit, after drawing a side scene on the sidelines of the summit which was followed by two successive visits for Iranian Foreign Minister, Hussein Amir Abdul Lahyan, and Syrian Foreign Minister, Walid Al-Moallem, in which a way out was agreed on with the Russian side, and it included a Syrian announcement on approving the Russian initiative regarding putting Syrian chemical weapons under international supervision and preparing Syria for joining the non-proliferation treaty.

Finally, the source pointed out that “One of the first results of the US-Russian military confrontation was the British House of Commons’ rejection to participate in a war on Syria. This was followed by European stances, most significantly, the German stance announced by Chancellor Angela Merkel."



Translated by Sara Taha Moughnieh
 
Windmill knight said:
What do you think of this article? Probably true or probably disinfo?

I think it's plausible although I'm not sure Israel would step in and take the blame so readily nor would I have thought the British house of commons' vote would have been influenced from a logistics point of view. Who knows? - It would explain the utter incompetence and ineffectiveness of Obama's actions since that date, but there again just Obama himself is explanation enough.
 
I wouldn't believe the story.

Reasons:-

- Why would america back down when they know full well if they engage Syria, they engage Iran, Russia and even China. This is something they would have known beforehand, so if russia or Iran stepped up, they would have expected it and not run cowering to the hills.

- America would have known Russia had the capability to shoot down its missile so they wouldn't have fired it in the first place unless they wanted to test defense systems which implies all that happened after was america playing a game, "Oh no, we'll stop, please please we didn't know you had such capabilities etc etc". This doesn't make sense though as america really isn't playing a game as all indications point to the whole syria affair being in disarray with many opposing factions. That or they are very good actors.

- If the missiles came from spain, they would have been detected by others who would have probably reported to the media so we should have more than just one source.

- Who is this source and how does he know all this info? This is top level stuff so how is it that the source not only knows it but passed it onto the media? Passing it onto the media can only mean they will start to investigate those who knew making it more likely that he will get caught. This is a big risk for anyone to take especially when you take into account the self-preservation programme. The reward must outweigh the risk.

- How does the vote in the british parliament factor into this? Did all those MPs get briefed on this and somehow none of them leaked it?


Conclusion: We can't know for sure whether it is true or false unless we have more to go on but for the time being, it is most likely a false story.
 
Regarding those missiles, I read it was israel that was responsible and the reasons made sense

- Israel wants a war, it'll provide it with the best cover to eliminate all its enemies not to mention pound Iran back to the stoneage.
- Israel doesn't want to fight this war, it would much rather america and other NATO countries fight on its behalf
- Israel will try to instigate the war if they see it is less likely to happen i.e. america and NATO backing down etc


The missiles might have just been an attempted provocation to get someone to react so that another can react and before we know it all are firing at each other.
 
What do you think of this article? Probably true or probably disinfo?

At this point, I would lean towards it being true. I think Obama "jumped the gun" so to speak, to show the world how "exceptional" the US is, with wishful thinking that Putin wouldn't retaliate once the US got overtly militarily involved with Syria, risking a full fledged nuclear war. But I think Obama was taken completely off guard with Putin's reaction... That Russia is still a mighty power to be reckoned with, and that the US is going to have to get used to the idea of "taking a back seat" from now on. In other words, "pick on someone your own size" and see how "exceptional" you are...
 
I seem to remember some such phrase that said something like "nothing in politics happens without a reason." I think Obama, Kerry and Putin are all playing pre-determined roles...the stick, the carrot and the rescuer, and it is very well acted and choreographed at this stage. Question is, who will be the first to deviate from the script and why?
 
KJN said:
I seem to remember some such phrase that said something like "nothing in politics happens without a reason." I think Obama, Kerry and Putin are all playing pre-determined roles...the stick, the carrot and the rescuer, and it is very well acted and choreographed at this stage. Question is, who will be the first to deviate from the script and why?

Yeah i remember something like that too. I can't remember the original quote but i remember that it clearly stated that it's all carefully scripted, & all on a time schedule as well. I'm sure that quote was from the early part of the 20th century too. Many authors & investigators have long since proven this to be the case in their own ways, the incredible thing is that there is so much information in the public arena (libraries etc before the internet) about the things happening now. In the early - mid 20th century loads of "those in the know" would just come right out & say their future plans for this that & whatever. Food, politics, sanitation & waste, all in the days when public debate meant that the public would get involved in those court hearings that revealed so much. I'm sure Laura has covered this somewhere. "The stick the carrot & the rescuer?" "Problem. Reaction. Solution."
 
KJN said:
I seem to remember some such phrase that said something like "nothing in politics happens without a reason." I think Obama, Kerry and Putin are all playing pre-determined roles...the stick, the carrot and the rescuer, and it is very well acted and choreographed at this stage. Question is, who will be the first to deviate from the script and why?

You're probably thinking of "In politics, if it happens, it was planned that way." (Paraphrased) Attributed Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
 
SeekinTruth said:
KJN said:
I seem to remember some such phrase that said something like "nothing in politics happens without a reason." I think Obama, Kerry and Putin are all playing pre-determined roles...the stick, the carrot and the rescuer, and it is very well acted and choreographed at this stage. Question is, who will be the first to deviate from the script and why?

You're probably thinking of "In politics, if it happens, it was planned that way." (Paraphrased) Attributed Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

That's it. Thank you!
 
I'm wondering about these 'marathon talks' that Kerry and Lavrov are supposedly having (third day starting, they say). I mean, how and what can you talk about for over 15 hours per day with people like Kerry? It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall at these meetings. I get the feeling that these talks are theatrics to give the world an impression that they could agree on something. Maybe they are stalling this way, so that they can get their ranks in order in respective countries.
 
Hello,

Here's a recent theory on a french website (my natural tongue)
_http://fawkes-news.blogspot.fr/2013/09/le-big-bang-des-illuminatis-se-rapproche.html

Use the automate traductor to have a good idea of what it talks about, I'm not going to summarize it.
It's one possible scenario, pretty credible, to add to this conversation about what's going to come.

I still think they won't use nuclear as they don't want the planet to be uninhabitable (at least in many areas ), but it's just my opinion.

Cheers everybody
 
Back
Top Bottom