Russell Brand on British Foreign Policy Hypocrisy

Why Was Russell Brand attacked for linking British Foreign Policy to Terrorism?

www.darkpolitricks.com

By Dark Politricks

Whilst I have the utmost respect for all the British and other victims of the Terrorist attack in Tunisia last week, I think the attack on Russell Brands podcast on today's minute of silence as "Total Bullshit", was a "Total Smokescreen" when you really listen to what he said.

If you forget the maybe crass way he says it and actually listen to what he says later on, he makes many good points about British Foreign Policy and how it has contributed to the rise of ISIS in the first place.

As David Cameron discusses extending his bombing campaign on ISIS from just Iraq to targets over the border in Syria we must remember the simple fact that no war has ever been won by just bombing from the air.

If we want to create more terrorists then yes, the plan will work. Bombs are indiscriminate no matter how much the Government and Armed Forces tell you otherwise.

We didn't win the war in Libya from our bombing campaign. It was the rebels on the ground that took advantage of our air support to defeat Gaddafi and turn Libya into the civil war mess it now is.

Libya is now  place where the "official government" has to meet on a ship at sea to protect it from attack.

Where thousands of people every day try to escape its shores by paying criminals to take them in dangerous boats to Europe, and where we wash our hands of them.


Libyan refugees risk death to flee their war-torn country
People smugglers take advantage of desperate people in the Mediterranean

Doesn't seem fair does it?

We destroy what once one of the most prosperous countries in Africa because we decided to support one side in a civil war after years of supporting al-Qaeda linked, anti Gaddafi terrorists, before making up with Gaddafi at Blairs famous meeting with the Colonel in the desert.

This was when normal relations resumed e.g arms sales in return for the Lockerbie suspects being handed over to face trial in Scotland and our oil companies being able to milk the countries reserves.

Then we decided to turn about-face, despite Gaddafi helping the CIA/MI6 with their black site torture prisons, and take him out of the picture.

Maybe he was just too much of a threat having talked about an African union, no central bank control and a shared Gold backed currency for the region.

Did you know that when Colonel Gaddafi took over Libya in 1967 it was one of the poorest nations in Africa but by the time he was killed by NATO and it's goons on the ground, Gaddafi had turned Libya into Africa’s wealthiest nation.

It had the highest life expectancy and GDP per capita on the continent. I bet you didn't even realise that fewer people lived below the poverty line in Libya than in the Netherlands!

People in pre NATO Libya could count on free education, free health care, a free home upon getting married, oil being shared out amongst the people and no central bank run by the same bankster cartel we all know and love.

Gaddafi even wanted to unite Africa under a single currency, a bit like the Euro, except it would be backed by Gold and therefore worth the paper it was written on.

We all know what happened to the last 3 US Presidents who tried going against the Banksters and their central banks, the same fate fell Gaddafi as did JFK. Was this a coincidence or just bad luck?

Whatever the reason was, Libya fell apart was due to NATO suddenly going from an ally in the fight against the war on terror - even sending Gitmo destined prisoners there to be tortured, to a terrorist backer. They provided the air cover and bombs that destroyed Libyan infrastructure before allowing their NATO armed terrorists on the ground to put a bullet in his head.

The country is now a mess and not a good advert for British intervention. The fact we are now trying to wash our hands of the mess we have caused by preventing refugees from Libya reaching Britain doesn't exactly say much about our leaders humanitarian nature.


A victim of the Tunisian beach attack is flown home today to RAF Brize Norton

So what about the ISIS terrorist who killed British terrorists?


Seifeddine Rezgui posing with weapons for ISIS

Yes of course it was a horrible disgusting evil act when an ISIS inspired student gunman, Seifeddine Rezgui, took it upon himself to kill 38 people in Tunisia including 30 British tourists.

This was a student who received military training in the war-torn country we helped to destroy, Libya, before taking it upon himself to kill and maim dozens of British and other Europeans on the beach of a holiday resort during the supposedly peaceful Islamic holiday of Ramadan.

ISIS has taken over from al-Qaeda as the big bogey man we should all be looking under our beds each night.

Islamic State are the most well-funded, well-equipped terrorist force on the planet and as their name states, Islamic State, they DO actually have a constantly expanding border that ignores previous Middle Eastern lines that were drawn across the borders of Iraq and Syria.

So while David Cameron puts forward plans to bomb Syria, and the Tories line up legislation to remove more of our civil rights, I bet that a huge proportion of Daily Mail readers will support such "Thought Police" laws and be all too willing to denounce any opponents as domestic extremists.

So with all these new laws and previous military action carried out in the region w e should really ask the question that no Tory/Labour politician seems to want to answer - have we helped create this monster?

Whilst they may claim otherwise the answer is YES. 

Yes Islamic terrorist acts occurred before 9.11 but they were mainly all due to the never-ending issue of Israel / Palestine.

If only the USA could pull its finger out its ass, stop AIPAC owned Congressmen from railroading any attempt at a fair solution and put pressure on Israel to come to a negotiated settlement that doesn't humiliate the Palestinians and adheres to International Law.

This form of law is supposed to be respected by all countries, and it was mainly created after World War II to punish the Germans for their treatment of the Jews, plus their illegal wars. Remember after Nuremberg it was decreed that the worst crime a state could commit was a war of aggression (a pre-emptive war you could say).

Yet how many pre-emptive wars have the Axis of War started since then?

Just in the last few decades (the Taliban did not commit 9.11 no matter how far you stretch the official story), and not to mention all the other underhand wars by proxy or through the use of false flag attacks to give cover such as Vietnam in earlier years.

Don't you think it hypocritical that the Jewish People, who through their Nuremberg judges had many Nazis and Germans put to death for "following orders" but are now killing Palestinians en mass whenever they invade Gaza (as even the Zionist Judge Goldstone reported on).

Plus the US seems fine about opting out of the International Criminal Court and allowing its own soldiers to commit acts of torture on command, sometimes as MI5/MI6 officers stand around watching, as British citizens are beaten and tortured by their CIA counterparts for refusing to answer the British Security Forces questions.

To say our foreign policy has no part to play in the radicalization of a large number of disaffected Muslims is to ignore a major component in solving the problem. Does our government really just think these people kill us for no other reason than they "hate our dwindling freedoms" or that they just want to reach paradise?

If it's our freedoms they hate then that argument will soon no longer exist as we seem to be very busy handing them over on a plate. In the not too distant future even this bogus reason drummed out by FOX and other mainstream media companies won't be valid.

From our rights to protest, to our right to surf the Internet in peace without being monitored and logged to our right to free speech, our civil liberties are being demolished chunk by chunk.

If the Tories get their way we could all be labelled domestic extremists if you dare speak your mind and it doesn't fit with the Government line on a subject. Want to talk to your girlfriend in peace without anyone spying in on your saucy chat by using an encrypted chat service, well you must have something to hide under new plans by the Conservative government. Only terrorists use encryption don't you know?

As Russell Brand says in his podcast the minute silence held on Friday was a way for the Government to act as if it cared about the dead holiday makers whilst it continued to carry on selling arms to some of the most despotic regimes in the world.

Not only are we selling arms to Bahrain and Egypt, two countries who have recently cracked down on its own people, killing many and repealing the rights of millions, but we are selling billions of weapons to one of the cruelest countries on the face of the planet - Saudi Arabia.

This is a country who is engaged in a massive bombing campaign in Yemen, killing innocent civilians, using banned weapons and with hardly a whisper being mentioned about the slaughter in the mainstream news.

Why is it this Islamic State is being helped by the British whilst we are supposedly fighting another Islamic State in Iraq/Syria?

David Cameron was criticised the other day for not calling Islamic State just that, saying it was not truly Islamic and not a state. From where I am looking it seems to fit the bill perfectly. They adhere to strict Islamic law, just like Saudi Arabia and the Islamic courts in Iran and they seem to have their own state, one that issues its own gold based currency, sells oil to Syria and Turkey and is well-funded and armed.

As for fighting it, are really doing all we can or do we like the fact that a huge terrorist organisation is there to scare the masses and keep the military industrial complexes coffers full?

There have been many reports of British and US planes caught dropping Israeli and US/UK weapons to the very army we are supposed to be fighting. This is from a report in an Australian newspaper in February 2015.

Iraq’s army has shot down two British planes carrying weapons for ISIL terrorists in Iraq’s Al Anbar province.

Hakem al-Zameli, head of the Iraqi Parliament’s National Security and Defence Committee revealed that the committee “has access to the photos of both planes that are British and have crashed while they were carrying weapons for the ISIL,” FARS News reported. The senior lawmaker said that the Iraqi parliament has asked London for explanations and added it is receiving daily reports from security forces and people in the province on countless flights led by the U.S.-led coalition’s planes, which airdrop weapons and supplies for the group in terrorist-held areas.

The Iraqi lawmaker explained that the United States prefers the chaotic situation in the province because it reportedly does not want the ISIL crisis to come to an end. The al-Ahed news website quoted Khalaf Tarmouz, head of Al Anbar Provincial Council saying that they have “discovered weapons made in the United States, European countries and Israel from the areas liberated from ISIL’s control in Al-Baqdadi region.” Mr Tarmouz added that the weapons made by European nations and Israel was discovered from the terrorists in the Eastern parts of Ramadi.

Read more at: www.australiannationalreview.com

Apart from our lacklustre or duplicitous fight against ISIS in one region we are also busy arming some of the most human right abusing nations on the face of the earth. In fact from our own list of 28 potential human rights abusing countries, we are currently selling arms to 23 of them!

How is that for hypocrisy?

Does this list of human rights abuses mean anything as it sure doesn't look that way.

If we wanted to try to repeal the tide of Islamic extremism in the world and take our holiday makers faces out of the firing line then maybe we should be strictly adhering to lists such as these and banning companies such as BAE from selling weapons to countries who publicly whip and jail women who have been gang raped purely because they left the house by themselves. A medieval country that is no better in my eyes than the Islamic State to the North.

Maybe we should be a voice for reason and legality by not being scared of the USA or Israel and their lobby groups and say loudly that:

a) Israel is a war criminal when it slaughters children and women in the street when it attacks Gaza en mass after it feebly retaliated for the slaughter of its own citizens. It always seems to be the Palestinians fault but you only need look a few days ahead before finding some Israeli crime that was the instigator of any firecracker launched against Israel's "Iron Dome".

b) We should say that the USA is not the bastion of freedom and democracy that it pretends to be and that it's new "laws of war" that have legitimised the killing of journalists as "unprivileged belligerents" is unacceptable along with the killing of retreating troops.

We should also try to revert the tide of war by using some logic for once and realise that our foreign policy IS a major contributor to many people's radicalization that leads them into the hands of extremist groups.

1. We need to do all we can to resolve the Israeli / Palestinian conflict. Recognise Palestine as a country in the UN and give it the ability to take Israel to court for crimes it has committed. Force Israel to define its borders, return the illegal settlers to within Israeli borders as defined by the UN decades ago, stop the blockade on Gaza and attack all (recent and previous), hijackings of aid flotillas as Piracy on the high seas. Tony Blair was a Zionist stooge who cared little about peace and more about making money as Official Middle Eastern Peace Envoy. We need to get Israel to play in the same legal framework as other countries that we are expecting to such as Iran who we are expecting to bend over backwards to prove they have no nuclear ambitions without a bomb in sight, whilst Israel is sitting on a stockpile of at least 200 war heads and is not even a member of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty. Hypocrisy!
2. We should realise that we have caused more extremism than if we had just left well alone in Iraq. Saddam Hussein may have been a horrible dictator but at least the 3 countries we cobbled together with the French after World War I stuck together without infighting. It seems cruel to say but if the Arab Spring has shown us something it is that if we remove the Western backed dictators that were ruling these countries that seem to fall apart into civil war and ethnic strife pretty quickly. We had no reason to go to war with Iraq our ex ally apart from the fact Tony Blair promised to George W (I speak to God) Bush that he would. What happened, Iran has taken control of the Shia's in the South, the Kurds have basically created their own country to the north and the Sunnis have created the beast of ISIS in the rest of the country. Splitting the country into three parts on ethnic lines seems the logical way forward if we don't want ISIS to take all before it.
3. We should admit that supporting "moderate" groups fighting Assad in Syria, like the Free Syrian Army, was a mistake. These groups are now ISIS controlled and there even been instances of western air drops of supplies falling into ISIS held locations and UK planes being shot down by Iraqi defence forces for seemingly dropping supplies to Islamic State deliberately. The FSA has been found to have sold kidnapped journalists to ISIS who were then beheaded as well as committing despicable acts of its own such as the famous video of a FSA solider ripping the heart and lungs out of a dead Syrian solider and eating them on tape. There are NO moderates to support and if we want to defeat ISIS we should be willing to admit that the only real forces on the ground willing to do the fighting for us are the Syrian Army, The Kurds and the Iranians who have been the only forces along with Shia militias preventing the US trained Iraqi forces from turning tail and running away like they have done on numerous occasions even when outnumbering their enemy. We should forget past and current issues and support Iran and Syria in their fight against ISIS as surely they are the lesser of two evils?
4. We should ask WHY is it that Israel feels no threat from ISIS on their doorstep. When every other Islamic terrorist group in history has labelled the Israeli conflict as the major point of grievance, ISIS has been very quiet on the matter. You would think Israel who is always going on about how they are fighting for their very existence in the region, would be scared shitless of such a well-funded and armed group on their borders. Instead they are more worried about firecrackers from Gaza than the tens of thousands of well equipped Islamic nutters on their flank. Could it be down to the fact they are arming them in a divide and conquer tactic? Iraq and Syria's armies are no more and the Greater Israel project could be back on seeing they have no fixed borders. Do they see this as a chance to expand or are they not scared for some other reason. Why is it ISIS are not even considering attacking Israel when any Islamic terrorist group worth its name with as much weaponry and money as they have would have them as their number one target?

Russell Brand on British Foreign Policy Hypocrisy

Whatever you think about Russell Brand he makes some good points about UK foreign policy in this podcast.

View his reaction to the horrific events in Tunisia and the response of David Cameron.

If British foreign policy is truly a force for democracy then why does the UK sell arms to repressive states?


View Russell Brand and "Tunisia Minute Of Silence - Total Bullshit: Russell Brand The Trews (E350)" on YouTube.com.

By Dark Politricks

View the original article on my main site at www.darkpolitricks.com

 

© 2015 Copyright Dark Politricks

ISIS, Israel, Iran and the "War on Terror"

ISIS, Israel, Iran and the "War on Terror"

By Dark Politricks

This is what I mean when I stated in my last article that we are hypocritical when it comes to our treatment of Saudi Arabia in relation to ISIS.

Saudi Arabia, has decided to lash a woman 200 times for being gang-raped by seven men. Her actual crime was leaving her house, thus making being gang-raped her own fault, - Gang Raped Saudi Woman Sentenced to 200 lashes, 6 months in jail.

Two “Islamic States”, one gets massive arms supplies, Royal visits and ignored when it comes to their human right abuses. Whilst the other gets bombed and denounced as terrorists for doing the same thing in a cruder manner.

Whilst I have no problem admitting these evil ISIS bastards are terrorists. We must remember that we helped create them with our divide and conquer strategy in the Middle East that seems to be for the Greater Israel project.

Keep the enemy fighting amongst themselves whilst Israel expands and Bibi gets standing ovations at Congress for denouncing Iranian bomb making that is based on flimsy evidence at best, on top of a whole lot of lies and ignored data from reputable Atomic inspectors and agencies.

It seems as if the Israeli President is more concerned about a non factual threat from Iran, whilst sitting on a whole pile of nuclear weapons that could destroy the Middle East himself, than the threat of ISIS on his door. Why?

Why would the Israelis who were so concerned about al-Qaeda not feel the threat of ISIS on their borders and concentrate instead on Iranian bomb making.

Here we have 3 Islamic States all being treated differently because of what they CAN do for their allies, and who they are allied to, rather than their actual potential threat to the outside world.

If we had to order the three by the amount of death and evil they have done to the world then Saudi Arabia, Israel’s ally against Iran and funder of terrorism around the world including 9.11 would surely sit at the top and Iran at the bottom.

The Saudi’s practise a form of 18th century Wahhabist Islam that the European Parliament in 2013 labelled as the main source of global terrorism.

This brutal form of anti Shi’ite Islamic brutality has even led to attacks on American citizens on their homeland. In fact entire sections of the 9.11 commission report was blacked out keeping Saudi Arabia’s name from their findings.

Even this nypost.com. explains it clearly.

“The Saudis deny any role in 9/11, but the CIA in one memo reportedly found “incontrovertible evidence” that Saudi government officials — not just wealthy Saudi hardliners, but high-level diplomats and intelligence officers employed by the kingdom — helped the hijackers both financially and logistically. The intelligence files cited in the report directly implicate the Saudi embassy in Washington and consulate in Los Angeles in the attacks, making 9/11 not just an act of terrorism, but an act of war.”

“The findings, if confirmed, would back up open-source reporting showing the hijackers had, at a minimum, ties to several Saudi officials and agents while they were preparing for their attacks inside the United States. In fact, they got help from Saudi VIPs from coast to coast.“

View the full article at nypost.com.

This can only be down to the close relationship between ex Saudi US ambassador, Prince Bandar and the Bush clan that prevented the natural course of a post 9.11 war on the real attackers, Saudi Arabia and their white washing from the attacks.

According to the official conspiracy theory, 15 of the hijackers were Saudi, with Saudi financing and Saudi help according to the leaked sections from the 28 full pages of the 800 page 9/11 commission report that were classified due to George W Bush’s say so.

Where 7,200 words once stood in the 9/11 commission report there are now just dots where a huge section related to the involvement of Saudi Arabia in the attacks were laid out.

“A pair of lawmakers who recently read the redacted portion say they are “absolutely shocked” at the level of foreign state involvement in the attacks.”

So why didn't we see Saudi Arabia burned to a crisp rather than two unrelated countries that seemed to only further US and Israeli geopolitical goals?

Could it be the Bandar-Bush close ties or as some say “terrorist network”, that kept Saudi Arabia’s name from the report, despite their deep involvement in the killing of thousands of American citizens.

I keep being reminded of ex Mossad agent, Victor Ostrovsky in his book “By Way of Deception” when he repeats what he was told was the future of Saddam Hussein in the Middle East.

“After the bombing of Libya, our friend Qadhafi is sure to stay out of the picture for some time. Iraq and Saddam Hussein are the next target. We’re starting now to build him up as the big villain. It will take some time, but in the end, there’s no doubt it’ll work.”

“But isn’t Saddam regarded as moderate toward us, allied with Jordan, the big enemy of Iran and Syria?”

“Yes, that’s why I’m opposed to this action. But that’s the directive, and I must follow it. Hopefully, you and I will be done with our little operation before anything big happens. After all, we have already destroyed his nuclear facility, and we are making money by selling hlm technology and equipment through South Africa.”

In the following weeks, more and more discoveries were made regarding the big gun and other elements of the Saddam war machine. The Mossad had all but saturated the intelligence field with information regarding the evil intentions of Saddam the Terrible, banking on the fact that before long, he’d have enough rope to hang himself. It was very clear what the Mossad’s overall goal was. It wanted the West to do its bidding, just as the Americans had in Libya with the bombing of Qadhafi.

After all, Israel didn’t possess carriers and ample air power, and although it was capable of bombing a refugee camp in Tunis, that was not the same.

The Mossad leaders knew that if they could make Saddam appear bad enough and a threat to the Gulf oil supply, of which he’d been the protector up to that point, then the United States and its allies would not let him get away with anything, but would take measures that would all but eliminate his army and his weapons potential, especially if they were led to believe that this might just be their last chance before he went nuclear.

By Way Of Deception - Victor Ostrovsky

It seems as if the Israeli’s are up to their old tricks again regarding Syria and Iran using proxies such as ISIS to do their fighting for them plus of course the axis of war, the US/UK, who think they can win wars by bombing from planes.

In reality many people think this war from the air is an excuse to supply ISIS with weapons to keep the war going. Numerous papers have reported on this.

Iraqi army downs 2 UK planes carrying weapons to ISIL

Here is the Washington Post trying to excuse the dropping of weapons to ISIS by saying it was an accident.

We can’t have the war on terror ending too soon can we! Not when the militarisation of our police forces at home isn't yet complete and we still have a few liberties left.

Remember this war on terror was because we had to fight these evil terrorists who hated our freedoms.

Doesn't anyone think it strange we have lost more freedoms in the years since this war started than in any time before. Even when the IRA was at war with us for 30+ years we didn't give up our liberties at home.

It was only with the installation of MI5 mole Tony Blair in the Labour party, who brought it so far into the centre ground that there was hardly any difference between it and the Tories, that we started handing our freedoms over on a plate and misusing them, such as Gordon Brown using anti-terrorism laws to freeze Icelandic money in UK banks after their financial crash.

I think the only left wing party left with any MP’s in the UK parliament is the Green Party who has one! All the rest are pro-war, pro-austerity, pro-US foreign policy and pro-globalist.

So whilst Saudi Arabia is allied with Israel due their common hatred of Iran, the ISIS terrorists that Iran are actually doing the main fighting against along with the Kurds are being built up as the next big bogey man we should attack.

A repeat of Mossads built up of Saddam Hussein as the big bogey man so that their “big brother” could beat it up in the school playground years before.

If ISIS don’t attack Israel with all their weapons, money from oil sales to western companies, supplies from the US/UK and a supposedly rabid fundamentalist approach to Islam then something is very strange!

Either it’s due to factions within Saudi Arabia that are still financing them and commanding them not to disturb their Israeli ally or the Israeli’s have some kind of control over the group.

Even al-Qaeda made repeated calls to annex the evil Zionist state but I have been dearth of hearing anything of that kind from the head of Islamic State, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

Are Mossad following their motto “by way of deception” or is something else going on?

© 2015 Dark Politricks

View the original article at www.darkpolitricks.com.

Killing the Islamic State

Killing The Islamic State

By Dark Politricks

ISIS or "Islamic State" as they call themselves, is as barbaric a group as they come. However the misnomer of the term Islamic State is being used to justify attacks on all Muslims whether they are fundamentalists or moderates.

Not all Muslims are the same just as not all Christians or Jews are. The same goes for Atheists, Buddhists and any other group of people on this planet whether the Daily Mail tells you differently or not.

Whilst ISIS may believe they are an Islamic State or a new Caliphate for the 21st century. Other Islamic States such as Iran and Saudi Arabia are fighting or preparing to fight against them. 

Not all Islamic States are the same either whether they put that title in their countries name or not. 

There have been many Islamic Caliphates ( Islamic Governments ) throughout history and as with most religions the concept itself is split on tribal lines with Sunnis believing that the leader of any Caliphate should be elected by the Muslim people themselves whilst the Shia's believe that only a direct descendant from Muhammad's family can call himself a leader.

History shows that Islamic Governments who ruled from the Middle East to Europe, North Africa and at one point encompassing half of Spain, had at times more welcoming views to other religions than even the Christian Empires of the time. They allowed Jews and Christians to live amongst them and society was pluralistic as it could be under the circumstances of the age. Not all empires were welcoming but during the "golden age" of Islam the leaders of their lands did nothing to harm people of different belief systems living amongst them.

At one point the Umayyad Caliphate covered 5.17 million square miles, making it the largest empire the world had yet seen, and the fifth-largest ever to exist in history. The Ottoman Empire was Islamic in nature and trade, science and culture flourished throughout Islamic States at various points.

It was never the home to such people as those now calling themselves the new Islamic Caliphate.

However ISIS, just like the Taliban with their fundamentalist nature,believe in a strict interpretation of the Koran, and therefore ban music, dancing, and many modern items which seems to contradict directly their love of social media as a tool to spread their message on YouTube and Facebook. Most importantly pictures of the prophet are banned 100%. We have all witnessed the attacks on journalists who print cartoons of him, and it seems to be the ultimate insult that one can take to many Muslims around the world.

It seems as if these people believe the 7th century was the end of all human advancement in Culture, Science and Ethics.

Most importantly this group of people believe that it is okay to kill any human, whether woman, child or OAP, Christian or Muslim, who doesn't believe in their cruel barbaric form of governance.

You may have seen all the videos, accompanied by beautiful Islamic music, as people in cars film themselves doing drive by shootings on main roads in northern Iraq. Swerving back to ensure the occupants of any vehicle are killed fully and properly and any survivors of their attacks are filmed pleading for their lives before being shot in dug outs or cut to bits with knives and swords. They seem to think this indiscriminate slaughter is a propaganda tool for anyone witnessing it and they seem to be right as many young people flock to the Middle East to join their cause.

Even with all the numerous witnesses and dead victims appearing all over the place people, websites, news stations such as FOX and even forensic analysts are claiming that the recently heavily edited ISIS videos of Jihad John beheading captured journalists and aid workers, and even the burning alive of the captured Syrian pilot, are actually faked or staged.

Why ISIS would need to stage brutal killings when they have proven themselves to be sick murdering bastards by raping young girls and killing opponents by the truck load I don't know. 

I have seen videos of whole convoys of trucks carrying captured Iraqi males being driven to a ditch where they are taken and shot. These are in no way heavily edited films and many are shot on phone cameras by the soldiers fighting for ISIS themselves.

However leaving aside any debate on fakery when it comes to beheadings, what I do know is that the rise of ISIS is a foreign policy error of the axis of war, and the US/UK's training and funding of "moderate" anti Assad groups like the Free Syrian Army have not helped one bit.

These groups have shown themselves to be just as barbaric as the rest of the groups fighting in Syria and any funding or training by Qatar, Saudi Arabia or the CIA have just helped to make ISIS into one of the most formidable terrorist groups in histpry.

We can all follow the trail of this conflict back to the "successful" overthrow of Gaddafi in Libya, a country which is now a mess and a huge training base for pro ISIS groups and then to Iraq and Afghanistan and 9.11.

From our intervention in Iraq, which was basically three countries held together by a Western backed dictator, to our war on the Taliban who only asked for some proof of Osama bin-Laden's guilt in the 9.11 attacks, before being denied it and bombed into Halliburton's pockets, the foreign policy decisions of our leaders have either been totally foolish or carefully planned to ensure we have a well equipped army to fight for the next few decades.

We can even go all the way back to the 1st World War and the Balfour Agreement which let Jews immigrate to Palestine in return for US help for Britain in the war, and then the carving up of captured Ottoman Empire holdings into countries that never existed such as Iraq.

Yes our foreign policy is immoral and imbalanced with support for dictators one moment when they serve our purposes and then their overthrow when they stop being useful. To be honest it did seem as if the Middle East was a whole lot calmer when Gaddafi and Hussein were in power.

To go back to the concept of a Caliphate, the whole area from Africa to Iraq and Afghanistan is tribal and localised in nature. These tribes have fought each other for centuries and it was only when their lands were controlled by Caliphate leaders, dictators, and leaders of Western Empire that they seemed to settle and stop their religious and tribal strife.

Take that firm grip away and the old rivalries return unabated.

Personally I have no love for any organised religion and whether it's the break up of the Roman Empire, Henry VIII leaving the Catholic Church and setting up the Church of England so he could get his leg over, or Protestants and Catholics fighting in Ireland, Christians cannot claim to be any less tribal when it comes to irrational belief systems.

One must also remember that Islam is the 3rd branch of the Abrahamic faith.

Please remember that the first books of the old Testament, which allow for the stoning to death of adulterers and other capital punishments for eating shellfish and other stupid laws were at one stage all carried out by Jews, Christians and Muslims.

The fact that Jews are now mostly atheists and Christians have followed their own testament based on the belief that Jesus was the Messiah doesn't take anything away from the core beliefs that all 3 religions once held, and the laws and punishments dealt out for breaking them.

The fact we are not criticising Islamic States like Saudi Arabia for their beheadings whilst attacking the new Islamic State for theirs is total hypocrisy.

Iran's stoning to death of people can be seen on websites along with Iraqi's brutal slaying of rapists in which the whole male community take part in the killing.

Video proof of such "punishments" can all be found on certain "death sites" on the Internet if you want to look hard enough for them.

So whilst we are no way clean when it comes to the rise of ISIS, we should absolutely oppose it for its fundamentalist religious nature.

The fact that I would like Saudi Arabia, Iran and the Taliban to be classed in the same group takes nothing away from the brutality we are facing from this group of 7th century loving killers.

We may have helped stir the pot, and even funded the initial groups who became part of ISIS.

Most definitely the criminal Bandar-Bush enterprise needs it's terrorist tentacles chopping off ASAP.

The close ties between oil rich Saudi Arabia, it's ex ambassador and now terrorist group funding Prince Bandar and the Bush family, whose tarnished history goes way back to Prescott Bush and his Nazi funding days, is long over due some legal oversight.

We have funded Islamic groups to fight Communism and then used them to destabilise countries we wanted to encroach into. The history of our involvement is there for anyone who wants to see it.

One only need research Operation Gladio and Gladio 2 to see why we have allowed these groups to flourish and the benefits we got from allowing them to.

However once again blowback is going to bite the hand that fed it hard and fast.

To get down to basics I don't want to see anymore UK working class men sign up for the Army or RAF to go and fight ISIS.

We have already fought and lost against similar terrorist groups in Afghanistan and Iraq so why keep the military industrial complexes wheels waxed with tax payers money?

Anyway the UK Armed Forces are no match to anyone's anymore due to cuts from Tory and Labour governments. Faced with ISIS captured US anti-aircraft weapons from fleeing Iraqi forces I wouldn't be surprised to see a lot more English people being beheaded by Jihad John or burned alive in cages if we were to return to the killing fields of Iraq and Syria.

The UK military cannot even face the threat from a resurgent Russia, no matter how many times our Eurofighter Typhoons have to be scrambled to fend off Russian Bombers from the coast of Cornwall.

We have cut our armed forces to the bare bones. We are certainly not fit for any war worth fighting unless Jersey tried invading Sussex.

Anyway, on a side note, I wonder why Cornwall is Russia's target for "probing"?

It couldn't be anything to do with the huge amount of under-water cables taking Internet and Phone messages across the Atlantic to the USA from Europe could it? Or is it just the western edge of NATO's Europe?

Remember folks if the war in Ukraine actually gets hot between Russia and NATO then China's recent demo of a laser fired into space to destroy a satellite it had "no use for" or in other words, a warning to the USA that they could take down any US satellites they wanted, making the techno dependent US military redundant, will become true. Russia will most certainly do the same.

Russia is well-known to have far superior missiles and rockets than the US and it would be no surprise to see Satellites falling from the skies during the first days of any war.

So whilst some ignorant people may feel that a hot war with Russia over Ukraine and broken promises post Berlin wall are worth going head into, some other fools think that re-sending defeated forces back into Iraq to bomb ISIS from afar will defeat them.

If we want to crush ISIS, and we should, then we should allow the countries most involved to do the fighting. We should also stop funding Nazi's in Kiev and ask Russia to help by arming its proxies in Syria and Iran. With Russian military weapons these two countries could crush them fully without a Western jet being flown.

Jordan is already keen to bomb the hell out of ISIS because of their burned alive pilot, and Iran has been helping the Shia's in Iraq fight ISIS for a long while now.

The Kurds are also well into a hot war at the other end of Iraq and if only we agreed that ISIS was worse for the world than President Assad of Syria then we could allow Syria a free hand to attack from the north.

Why we keep on insisting that President Assad is the real bad guy when there are clearly worse figures about in the area I don't know. We could easily let Syria and Iran with Russian arms squash ISIS in the middle like a cockroach in the night with a heavy shoe.

Then if only we could get Israel who take US arms, de-construct them, and sell them on to Russia and other countries join the fight from the West it would be game over.

I know that sounds like a dream but logically it makes sense. It's just a shame logic pays no part in foreign affairs or Israel's behaviour in the world.

Israel has one of the biggest and most sophisticated armies in the world yet they spend their time either setting up fake al-Qaeda groups to then "catch" or allowing the US to instead. Just like leading a blind and dumb rat to a piece of poisoned cheese.

If only Israel could stop using their military might to crush the cornered and starving people of Gaza and instead realised the threat to their east. Their weaponry would be no match to ISIS if they actually fought them.

However if they are not worried about ISIS then it can only be due to their infiltration of, or setting up of, ISIS networks. Nothing else makes sense.

For the Islamic State, who should in all theory from their previous and past behaviour, hate Jews and Zionists, not try to attack Israel it can only be down to the fact that they are bought and paid for terrorists - like so many al-Qaeda networks before them.

If ISIS do attack Israel then they will have a real enemy to fight for once instead of pretend Iranian nukes and Gazan fire cracker rockets.

They could then join the pincer movement by Assad from the north and the Kurds, and Iraq and Iran from the south to crush this disgusting beast as hard as it likes. They don't even have to hold hands with Iran to do it, they are all neighbours with an unwelcome guest, so they should all want to resolve the problem.

It doesn't matter who created ISIS.

It doesn't matter which Saudi Royals still fund it as their government cries out for help between beheadings every Friday after prayers.

It doesn't matter if ISIS are owned, created or stage-managed actors, they are still scum that need demolishing.

The only thing that matters is that the axis of war doesn't go back into an area they have just left tails dangling between their legs.

If Islamic countries (and hopefully Jewish) can come together in their area of influence to destroy this beast on their own then it will do more for the social cohesion of the Middle East than anything the Western nations have done since World War One when the French and English carved up the lands that created Iraq in the first place.

Let's leave the fighting to the people who have most to lose.

It will be clear to see if ISIS don't attack Israel that something very, very wrong is occurring, and on any account Israel joining Iran to destroy this evil creation can only be a good thing, whether together or by separate means.

Lets just agree to not send anymore of our boys out to these deserts to fight.

We have already done enough damage.

It's someone else's turn to turn the tide.

View the original article on www.darkpolitricks.com.

ISIS and how our leaders are hypocrites when it comes to this Islamic State and not Saudi Arabia

ISIS and how our leaders are hypocrites when it comes to this Islamic State and not Saudi Arabia

By Dark Politricks

Whether you like Russell Brand or not I would urge you to subscribe to the Trews YouTube channel.

In the video at the bottom of the page Russell Brand dissects the recent upgrading of the terror threat in the UK due to the beheading of a US journalist by a man with a UK accent.

As he rightly says, Saudi Arabia has beheaded numerous people since August the 4th yet we continue to sell weapons and do big business with that Islamic State. If the man had a Saudi accent it probably wouldn't have made the news like the many beheadings that happen all the time in that terror state.

Why is it that we don't stop our relationships with such counties as Saudi Arabia and Qatar and others that fund the these terrorist groups that David Cameron wants more working class English and American people to go and fight.

Remember just months ago our leaders were saying that the enemy was President Assad of Syria and our governments were supporting, funding and arming groups that were fighting his government.

Now that these groups have crossed the border into Iraq and become ISIS they suddenly become the enemy. People who were "bravely" fighting Assad are now "terrorists". Groups we trained and armed are now in Iraq causing havoc under the banner of the Islamic State.

As Russell Brand rightly says. For people like millionaire David Cameron, and his fellow Etonion friends, who are directors and shareholders in arms companies and other businesses who benefit from wars, to tell us to fight another war is hypocritical.

For Cameron to lecture us that we must go over to Iraq and lose more freedoms and liberties at home due to another UK/US foreign policy that has gone awry, just like the arming of the Mujahideen in Afghanistan who then became the Taliban and al-Qaeda, is pure bullshit.

He isn't going to go an fight for his belief that we must go to war with ISIS.

No it will be the poor, working classes, who join the army as the only way out of communities that have been decimated by Tory policies, that will be doing the fighting for him. When our leaders send their own sons and daughters to war zones and don't skip military service like many US Presidents or politicians have, then we can look at them with more respect when it comes to war.

Chicken Hawks telling me that I must go and fight for their own foreign policy blowbacks can fuck off and fight themselves. I am tired of people who haven't seen real violence telling people who have to go and fight. When you have heard a knife enter a body, the sound and memory stays with you forever. When you have killed another human being it stays with you.

This is why so many ex-generals and military leaders are against war whilst people who have never been in one are for them.

The millions of people who marched against the war in Iraq through London a decade ago knew that war wasn't the answer. Some people, like Tony Blair and David Cameron, still claim that our interference in the region, in Iraq, Iran and Syria hasn't led to this creation of the monster called ISIS or Islamic State, they are blatantly wrong.

The only solution to a regional crisis such as the formation of the Islamic State has to come from the region itself, without us sending more troops to the region. We can help by stopping our crusades on former leaders who were our friends only a few years ago and instead attacking the real enemies in the region such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar who are funding these terrorist groups.

Here are just a few ideas for how regional countries could help.

Israel could do itself a massive PR job favour and use it's massive armed forces to attack ISIS instead of Palestinians for instance. The US has spent billions giving Israel tons of fighter planes, missile systems and other arms. Why can't Israel see the real terror on it's borders rather than the poor, malnourished, suffering people of Gaza, and do the world a favour by going after them instead?

Iran could be allowed to help Iraq, along with Assad, to form a pincer movement on ISIS for instance. We could help by stopping to claim Assad is a war criminal without facts and remember our leaders used to have dinner with the same people we are now trying to remove e.g Assad and former leaders Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein.


President Assad having dinner with John Kerry


Donald Rumsfeld meeting Saddam Hussein


Tony Blair meeting Col Gaddafi

If we stopped labelling Iran and Syria as the enemy and realised that they could actually be the solution to a problem we caused then they could become rehabilitated members of the international community again.

And most of all we need to realise that countries like Saudi Arabia and Qatar are funding and arming these groups whilst we make billions from arms sales to these countries.

Let's remember that if the US Government's story of what happened on 9.11 is correct. Then the people who attacked the country was Saudi Arabia not Afghanistan or Iraq.

Logically the US should have gone to war with this despot backward 7th century country, where people are beheaded or mutilated daily as punishment for crimes we don't even send people to prison for.

A country where thousands of Princes and Royal members live a life of luxury, holiday in Dubai, send for models to have sex with or pay millions to have famous pop stars sing at their parties. All whilst the majority of the population live in absolute poverty.

This was the country the US should have attacked if the US conclusions on who the terrorists on 9.11 were was correct.

However that would have meant the Bush family falling out with their favourite despots, Bandar-Bush incorporated has been causing havoc for years. The Bushes and the leaders of Saudi Arabia were too closely linked and yet the US claimed 19 Saudi hijackers were behind the 9.11 attacks. Hypocrites and liars.



Lets listen to Russell Brand talk about ISIS and David Cameron's support for more US/UK war as the solution to it.


View the original article Russell Brand and me on ISIS and why our leaders are hypocrites when it comes to the Islamic State and Saudi Arabia at www.darkpolitricks.com.