Sun Tzu Unpredictability characterizes President Trump´s Tactics and something major might be about to happen

 

Israel was created to play a role in the Middle East as a tool for the United States and other Western Countries to keep an eye on the Arab World.

Having said that, Israel like Saddam Hussein and General Noriega and many others, has gone rogue. Israel will exist as a partner as long as a more suitable partner is not found. Now, this is about to change.

Israel is dividing NATO partners. France and Spain, in particular, have become extremely critical of the genocidal behaviour of Israel in Palestine and elsewhere. Israel no longer responds to the designs of Western countries that created Israel. Israel like Iraq was not meant to be what Israel has become. For the most part, Israel is not genetically nor ethnically Jewish. The romantic notion that Jews were coming back to the land of their elders is a fake created in Europe. Mostly converts took over a portion of Palestine in 1948 and expansion started. Bit by bit, they started to add neighbouring territories and to occupy neighbouring countries. In Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler says "if you can take it and keep it, it is yours". Following Adolf Hitler´s logic, Israel has been expanding and expanding ever more. Mein Kampf and the policies of destruction, ethnic expansion and ethnic cleasing implementing genocidal policies of mass bombardment and starvation are the policies of Israel.

This is Palestine after bombing carried out by Israel. No, it is not Hiroshima or Nagasaki, it is Palestine or what is left of it. You can guess what happened to the people who lived in those towns. But how much is too much? The winds might be about to blow in a different direction. Truce with Houthis? Saudi Arabia as the most important partner in Middle East? Well, when both Spain and France are speaking louder and louder about the mass murder campaign and now starvation campaign carried out by Israel. Well, even the Vietnam War, one of the longest wars of the Twentieth Century came to an end and governments fell as a consequence of it. The US would no longer be what the US was. Mentalities changed. The US, that was the main perpetrator of the most unbelievable atrocities after World War Two, itself suffer the impact of what had been done in Vietnam.

Benjamin Netanyahu is an indicted criminal that is running away from Israeli Courts. He knows that his survival depends on the continuation of a genocidal war. He has brutalised Israeli peoples, many of whom are themselves behaving like genocidal maniacs. To sum it up, Benjamin Netanyahu´s policies are killing Jews, destroying essential human values, turning Israelis into social mutants that are losing their human nature.

Israel vs Iran: is this the real show?

 Is Israel versus Iran the real show?

We hear the news and see mass media flooded with articles about the dangers of widespread war in the Middle East and Asia Minor. We hear the news about North Koreans joining the fight in Ukraine. It is difficult to ascertain the real dimension of what we have been told. 

The real issue of widespred war in the Middle East and Asia Minor are not Israel or Iran, for that matter. The real issue are the vast amounts of oil and gas spread across the entire region. Kuwair, Bahrain, UAE, Saudi Arabia, and so forth. If the Middle East and Asia Minor were to go up in smoke this will be a catastrophe for the world economy as a whole and there would be massive political consequences.

Both Israel and Iran have to play according to the rules. The United States of America might care about Iran, but the USA cares more about money and as long as money is being made the lives of hundreds of thousands don't matter at all, but the monies being made by shareholders matter more than human lives.

As long as the business of war keeps going and does not get out of control threatening the value of shares it is business as usual. Don't attack nuclear facilities! Don't attack oil reserves! Don't do anything that could ruin the business of war. Both Israel and Iran have to play for their own public and therefore they have to do something to prove that they are doing something.

We are dealing with Jews that do not give a damn about Jews, people for whom their own people matter very little as long as they get what they want. We are dealing with the Bernie Madoffs of geopolitics. Benjamin Netanyahu is a Bernie Madoff of geopolitics. The massacres carried out by Israel will continue. Israel has a license to kill as long as the business of war goes on as usual and monies are being made, but the Bernie Madoff also know that there are limitations. When Iran threatens to attack all those who help Israel there are direct references to oil and gas countries in the region. So any action against Iran has to be limited not to push Iran to attack the real targets in the Middle East and Asia Minor. We know how things are now under the present US Administration and I reckon that things will not change dramatically under a new US Administration because the interests are the same and the people actually running the circus are the same.

With regards to North Korea, I reckon that Ukraine is for North Korea what the Spain's Civil War was for the Wehrmacht: a training ground. North Korea has been in isolation and has not had any opporunity to test its Army in real battles. Although the number of North Korean troops is minimal, Ukraine can provide valuable opportunities. It also sends the message of unity: boys, we are all in it together. Military cooperation at every level. About 3,000 North Korean troops will not make any major difference in the conduct of the war, from a Russian standpoint as the Russian Federation has mobilized hundreds of thousands of troops.

Much of what Western politicians say is no more than chit chat, a propaganda effort to justify the existence of people who are absolutely irrelevant. NATO is a business to keep money rolling in for shareholders. Any monies that go into the pockets of shareholders are not monies that serve the general public. They are not invested in health, education, transport, infra-structure and so forth. The most important problems remain forever unsolved and this is why we have got the problems that we have got with more and more people facing miserable lives.  

Oil and Gas: they never learn

When in the 1970s, Britain was going under, North Sea Oil and Gas saved the day. When the war in Ukraine started the conflict led to a shortage of oil and gas that led many European countries and Britain to harsh economic realities.

Now, Britain has a Labour government that is bent on taxing oil and gas companies to the hilt. Companies pay almost 80% as taxes. There comes a point when exploration and production costs are no longer sustainable and the natural consequence is that the oil and gas business can become no longer viable. We already have the experience of what happened to British shipyards that could not remain competitive. They went under. They could not survive.

Now, we have a vociferous government that is bent in getting Britain into several wars, wars that could make oil and gas unattainable, unreachable. Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates and others happen to be in a region that could be engulfed by war and if that happens access to oil and gas produced in such region will no longer be a possibility. What will happen then? What happened before when we had no access to oil and gas?

The British Prime Minister that does not know what a woman is believes that carbon capture is energy production. The level of stupidity has risen exponentially. He talks about alternatives. Well, private business might not be interested in such alternatives when they don't make sense for business. In fact, in recent times that been public tenders and the private sector showed no interest in bidding.

It could be the case that everything will have to be financed mostly with public monies coming from taxation and not with private investment. But in the meantime, while the British governent struggles to transform dreams into reality we might find ourselves facing blackouts and mass unemployment should there be a military conflict that prevents from having access to present energy sources. 

Palestine: Present troubles were triggered by the United Kingdom

Until 1948, Palestine was Palestine, but then Britain intervened and troubles began. After tne initial partition of Palestine, Israel went on swallowing bits and pieces of whatever was left of Palestine and this could only come at a price: a series of wars and atrocities that led to what is happening right now. Western powers completely ignored the local populations and newcomers from all over Europe settled down in what is now Israel. Present inhabitants mainly came from Eastern Europe and fron the then Soviet Union. Instead of integrating with the local populations, they brought their own customs and their own laws and their own systems of Apartheid in which local inhabitants were treated as second or third class citizens. Those who did not want to submit to the powers of the newcomers were isolated in ghettos that we know now as 'the occupied territories'. In fact, the whole of Palestine is 'occupied territories'.

British imperial myopia led to decades of atrocities and later on British mypia was replaced by American myopia and tragedies became a normal occurrence. We can talk about natural divisions and confrontations in the Middle East and Asia Minor, but we must also talk about how Western Powers benefitted from those divisions and confrontations to exploit natural resources that fed the industrial apparatus of the Developed World. For the USA, Britain and others people did not count at all. All they cared about was oil and their own geopolitical interests. They, the supposed heroes of Democracy, have no hesitation when supporting the exploitation of local populations by tyrannical rules. Tyrannical rulers only bother them if they are tyrannical rulers that they cannot control. As long as Saddam Hussein followed the diktats of the USA, he was a good dictator. The moment he turned againt US interests, he had to be eliminated. The same rules applied and apply to other regimes across the world. 

In Latin America, Henry Kissinger was the big mover of the so called Condor Plan, a system of cooperation between Latin American military dictatorships. The USA trained killers that terrorized their own peoples and torture and murder became commonplace with the full support of the US State Department. Now, President Biden talks about 'full support for Israel'. He does not even bother to mention that there are two sides in the conflict, but it is understandable since US has only cared for one side of those in the conflict. The USA does not give a damn about justice and human rights and this is easy to understand since certain peoples are not even seen as human beings. Those who are not part of the US geopolitical calculations do not exist and are totally expendable.

  

Democrats have two houses of Congress and Biden fails to push legislation through?

 

President Biden in the first two years of his presidential mandate fails to push legislation through Congress despite having majorities in both houses.

He travelled to Saudi Arabia to persuade Saudi Arabia to produce more oil to lower market prices, failed to persuade Saudi Arabia and managed to push up oil prices.

And what will happen in the mid-term elections? Will Democrats lose legislative control with President Biden turning himself into a lame duck President?

This is what America has to face at a very dangerous time in its history.

On the other side of the Atlantic, President Zelenskiy cannot trust his own intellgence officers and sacked none other than the chief intelligence official saying that Ukrainian intelligence services have been infiltrated and this is happening during an ongoing military conflict that Ukraine is losing despite the best propaganda efforts of the BBC, SKY, CNN and other Western media that want to maintain the 'Stalingrad ilusion of a winning Wehrmacht' but this time in Ukraine.

As temperatures soar we might be inclined to forget that temperatures will fall and that Europe will pay a very high price for the so called energy crisis and it is not going to be merely about economics, and issue that is already generating social unrest and will ultimately lead to political crisis and more.

If things don't change soon, this will be the Democrats' Vietnam. Jimmy Carter lost the opportunity of a second presidential mandate because of Iran and the failed rescue attempt of the hostages in Teheran. The withdrawal from Afghanistan was a clear indication that the present American government is not on top of its briefing. It was a popularity disaster as well as a military disaster. Could yet another crisis - this time a financial crisis - sink the Democrats' ship and open to the way to a return of the Republican Party?  

Rishi Sunak: EU embargo of Russian oil and gas will tip EU into recession

 

You couldn't make it up. On the one hand, Western politicians try to sound menacing and decisive and after speeches especially made with that purpose comes reality. Just a few days ago, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz raised the alert that such embargoes would seriously undermine the German economy. By extension if market prices go up, inflation will start to speed up in the EU and in the UK. Prices are no determined by particular countries. Prices are global. Only for this reason, there have been approaches to Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Venezuela to seek oil and gas production increases.

The Bank of England has just put up the basic interest rate on Thursday this week and announcing increases of interest rates would become the norm rather than the exception in months to come. Taking money away from peoples' pockets will curb consumption and curbing consumption means reduced economic activity. Reduced economic activity in turn means that with less demand many jobs will become redundant and jobs are being made redundant as you read both in terms of public jobs and private jobs. Why did a major ferry operator lay off 800 staff today? Is it because the company expects to have big earnings in the coming months? What about spring and summer when people tend go on vacation? Is it because they expect a reduction or an increase of the number of passengers wanting to travel to and from the continent?

The coming summer season could be a lot hotter and not just because of rising temperatures. Keep checking rising utility bills, travelling fares, fuel at the pumps and grocery bills.

The Fixed-Term Parliaments Act 2011 is said to be coming to an end. This will make the political situation a lot more fluid. But putting aside national elections, let's see what happens to the British economy from now until the May 2022 elections. Ordinary people are living under enormous pressure and such pressure is bound to be stronger if unemployment and inflation suddenly pick up. The combination of the two will be deadly.  

Nazanin: British outside Iran, but Iranian in her country of birth

The time to understand the way International Law works is long overdue. To hear a British minister talking about Iran using British citizens as hostages when in fact they are Iranian and hold British citizenship because of double nationality is appalling. 

Such kind of statements completely misrepresent what is actually going on. Iran is duly entitled to deal with its own citizens. While in Iran, British citizens born in Iran are de facto Iranian and not British. 

With regards to obligations Britain has regarding Iran, it is well known that Britain owes monies to Iran, monies that Britain is mandated to pay. This has been going on for ages and it is an issue that has poisoned British/Iranian relationships. Is it due to geopolitics? Is Britain failing to comply with international obligations contracted with Iran because of geopolitical considerations? 

It is thought that if Britain paid its debts Iranian attitudes would change, but what has happened for decades hasn't helped. Iran has been under siege and British history of interventions in Middle East and Asia Minor has made matters a lot worse. Since the fall of the Shah of Iran, USA and Britain have been involved in actions against Iran. They used Irak under Saddam Hussein to wage a chemical war against Iran because Iran dared to claim ownership of its oil resources. They never forgave Iran for daring to stand as an independent country.

When USA and Britain decided to get rid of Saddam Hussein, they created a vacuum that is now being filled up by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran with other countries being affected in the whole process. A mass exodus created by Britain and the USA led to neighbouring countries being flooded with refugees and this completely destabilized the entire region. The conflict in Syria very much started with the so called Arab Spring that both Britain and the USA promoted. The conflict in Yemen is perhaps and without perhaps the biggest tragedy that Britain and the USA actively contributed to create. What happened in Libya, what happened in Egypt, what is happening in Syria, what is happening in Yemen, what is happening in Lebanon and what is about to happen in Jordan could have been avoided. 

A knee-jerk reaction led to the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and this was followed by the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and what happened then is history leading to the mess we are in nowadays.

When we look for an explanation of why Iran could ever want to have nuclear weapons, the explanation is self-evident. Iran would look for nuclear weapons to deter any aggressor. Isn't this the explanation or justification for Britain to have its Nuclear Deterrent. Well, Iran is also entitled to have its Nuclear Deterrent to protect itself for external aggression.

In order to lower tensions, Britain will have to change its attitudes towards Iran. Paying debts could be a first step in the right direction. Britain will have to change its attitudes towards Saudi Arabia to reassure other players in the Middle East and Asia Minor that Britain will not support aggression against Iran and Britain will not be involved in wars by proxy like the ongoing conflict in Yemen. All regime-changing attempts must come to an end. All military interventions on foreign soil must come to an end. All demonizing campaigns by the political establishment and the mass media must come to an end. All economic warfare must come to an end. Normalization of relationships is the best way to prevent cases like the case of Nazanin from ever happening again.

 

Who will benefit from war in Middle East and Asia Minor and who will suffer because of it?

Who will benefit from war in Middle East and Asia Minor and who will suffer because of it?

A brief look at EU oil importers tells us that the Russian Federation produce 28.9 % of petroleum related products consumed in the European Union, followed by Norway with 12%. Around 8.9% comes from Saudi Arabia, 4.6% comes from Iraq, 4.6% comes from Azerbaijan, 6.5% comes from Kazahkstan (to name countries close to the conflict zone). About 20% of oil exports come through the straight that is going to be at the centre of a conflict between Iran and USA.

Depending on reserves and the duration of the conflict, the price escalade could and would force countries to recalculate national budgets across the European Union. The financial Tsunami that would be the direct consequence would lead to extraordinary political extremes across Europe. If you think that Democracy is already fragile, think again. What could happen would send nations towards the political abyss.

This, my friends, is the image of Armageddon and is very much a possibility should there be widespread war in the Middle East and Asia Minor. We are entering Nostradamus territory. 

Now, because of the implication of such conflict, how united will old allies be in this regard? Will economic considerations and the potential serious political repercussions be a reason to challenge old alliances? For the United States of America, such a conflict comes with the territory. The number of military bases spread across Iraq and other neighbouring countries of Iran has both a political and an economic dimension. In order to maintain its image as major Superpower, the United States cannot be seen as walking away from conflict after so many statements about 'consequences'. It comes a time when statements that are not supported with actions become not just an embarrassement but a sign of weakness.

Let's look at another issue that very much involves NATO and it is about Turkey's position as member of the alliance. Turkey recently acquired anti-missile defenses and Russian jets are on the way. Calls by the USA to prevent Turkey from acquiring Russian jets and Russian anti-missile defenses have fallen on deaf ears. President Erdogan is not going to do something that goes against Turkish interests. It is well known that Turkey is moving in to fill up a void created by what happened in Iraq and dealing with its own regional agenda that sometimes collides with the interests of the United States of America. As a member of NATO, Turkey is seen as getting too close to the Russian Federation. What can USA do about it? At the moment, it is all about talking and saying 'if you get this, we will not give you that'. Some people might be asking how reliable Turkey would be if there was a massive regional conflict.

How reliable would other members of NATO be if USA actions go against their crucial interests? Britain has been playing a waiting game not to go against agreements signed with Iran and the same attitude has been adopted by others in Continental Europe. USA has been telling Germany that Germany has to stop buying Russian oil and Russian gas. Easier said than done when 28.9% of energy supplies to the European Union come from the Russian Federation. I reckon that Germany and the rest of the EU will be reluctant to engage or support any actions that could undermine their own national interests.

Going farther East, China has been told by the USA that it has to protect its own ships going through waters that could be in the conflict zone if there is war against Iran and what about Japan? A possible confrontation in Asia Minor and in the Middle East would affect the entire world economy. It can be safely said that everybody will be affected in more ways than one and not just economically but politically. What is the Organisation of the United Nations saying about the possibility of such a conflict? Is the USA going to bypass - once again - the Organisation of the United Nations? 
 

IRAN: Yet another war?

IRAN: Yet another war?

The War in Afghanistan has been one of the longest conflicts having started in 2001 when the USA bombed Afghanistan and started a military campaign. In 2003, there was the illegal invasion of Iraq and several other conflicts across Africa, Middle East and Asia Minor followed. Now, another major conflict could be about to start and this time against Iran that shares a very long border with both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Some seem to be desperately trying to create more and more conflicts across the World. While this is happening the situation across Latin America is deteriorating. It would not be surprise if we see a return of military regimes across the board.

Europe itself is in political meltdown and political stability hangs in the balance as old uncertainties make a comeback. It seems that peace in Europe has lasted too long and that brushing contradictions under the carpet is not a long term solution. But things could be a lot worse if yet another major conflict erupts in Asia Minor. Major oil producing countries would be dramatically affected by such a conflict and we know that any conflict that affects vital energy supplies can cripple economies and political stability of neighbouring regions.

EU: Das Vierte Reich in the making

EU: Das Vierte Reich in the making

Let's not beat around the bush. The purpose is clear for all to see. The rise of a new block that will be on a collision course with China, Russia and the US and presumably also on a collision course with the rest of the World. 

For those who dreamed about a peace project, this is starting to look like a project for war with its own Central Government and its own Armed Forces.

From the Common Market to promote trade between free nations to Military Alliance to prepare for a massive confrontation.

In the old days, European Nations went to war against each other. They won or lost wars, territories were partitioned or taken over depend on who was the winner and this was the way things went for a very long time. Now, we the rise of a blend of Axe and Entente that could have catastrophic consequences for those who belong to the blend of Axe and Entente and for those outside such arrangement. 

For those who believe in present arrangements with NATO as the guarantor of peace and security and not just in Europe but worldwide there is a major crisis in the horizon. As tensions rise in the Middle East and Asia Minor with the withdrawal of European forces from Iraq and elsewhere because of the confrontation of USA and some Gulf nations with Iran, other players will have to make very hard decisions. What will be Turkey's position, for example. During the second war against Iraq, Turkey wasn't very enthusiastic about it. Saddam Hussein was keeping the lid on Kurdish aspirations and the defeat of Saddam Hussein would lead to the de-facto partition of Iraq giving Kurds in Northern Iraq a free hand to help their own people in Turkey and elsewhere.

Whatever the Lib Dems and others can say about the European Union as a supporter peace, Centralised Power and the existence of European Union Armed Forces plus talk about 'uniting to stand up to China, Russia and US' are not about peace. It looks a lot more like preparation for War.

What do Americans think about the arrangement proposed? Let us remember that Isolationism was very much appreciated in the USA after the losses suffered in World War One. The American public didn't want to get involved in European Wars. Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Winston Churchill had to make huge efforts to persuade the American public that the USA had to get involved in World War Two. Had not been for the Japanese attack in Pearl Harbour and the subsequent declaration of war issue by both Germany and Italy against the USA, it would have been extremely difficult to get the USA directly involved in Europe. Sending war materials including ships and tanks was one thing that the American people could accept with the proviso that it was merely a transaction that was going to be paid for. Sending their sons and daughters to die in an European war was quite another.

Now, according to Angela Merkel, the USA is a foe, something that the European Union must stand against. Disagreements in terms of trade are now combined with disagreements in terms of Foreign Policy. But how of Angela Merkel's war-like approach is real. Lets think for a moment about the relationship between Germany and the Russian Federation. The Poles and others are complaining that while EU countries suffer because of sanctions against the Russian Federation there is no clarity in terms of German/Russian relations when it comes to oil and gas. The USA itself has criticised Germany's approach regarding oil and gas acquired from the Russian Federation.

Despite all the aforementioned, public expressions that describe USA, China and Russia as foes are not reassuring. 

 

Nostradamus and the Middle East: Are we on the verge of a major cataclism?

Nostradamus and the Middle East: Are we on the verge of a major disaster? In the 1990s and then again in 2003, the issue was Iraq, and Palestine was an ongoing headache that had become a constant and so there were no unexpected consequences believed to be about to come out of it.

What Western military intervention in Iraq in 2003 opened was a can of worms that is now spreading in every direction reaching Europe with very undesirable effects to the point that political stability in Europe is being seriously undermined.

Despite the fact that the major players, US and Russia are decidedly involved in a series of conflicts, the risk is that those trying to fill up the gaps might unwittingly turn regional issues into something major.

When secondary players become involved, there might be not enough reasons for restraint and as the battle of words takes over the unexpected might happen. There are government and there are populations and government playing the tune for internal audiences in an effort to prevent or to counter internal upheaval are most dangerous since external wars are thought to be - a good way to silence internal opposition or to cover up bad governance.

The South Atlantic War initiated by the Argentinian Military Junta was a desperate attempt by the military to play for time when the military were loosing control. They need something that could unite a very divided Argentina. Whatever can be used to counter internal divisions will be used to try and unite public opinion in favour of governments. 

Kurdish struggle towards statehood goes on. Kurdish populations exist in Iran, Iraq, Turkey and also in Syria and Turkey is the one most affected. Israel and Iran have been at odds for a very long time. Israel favoured the invasion of Iraq and now is pushing the US to see Iran as a valid target and to justify military operations within Syrian territory. While many in the European Union favoured the continuation of a nuclear deal signed up with Iran, US withdrew from the pact and has announced that it would be reduced its military intervention in Syria. Israeli action in Syria and elsewhere justify the level of mistrust of Iranian authorities when Iranians who are fighting against Islamic State are being killed by Israeli jets.

Saudi Arabia and Iran are in a proxy war in Yemen. Qatar is leaving OPEC and is not in good terms with Saudi Arabia. Lebanon and Jordan could be brought into conflict due to Israel military operations in the region. And then there is the relationship between European countries and countries in the Middle East. Germany and France announced an embargo on arms sales to Saudi Arabia. Turkey - a NATO country - threatened France - another NATO country - about French military operations in support of Kurdish fighters in Syria.

Where the initial flash will come from that will trigger a major conflict is everybody's guess but there are plenty of possibilities for disaster to strike. The assassination of a Saudi Arabian journalist in spite of the savagery and callousness shown by the Saudi Arabian Monarchy might be seen as insignificant when it comes to a very difficult balancing exercise.

Britain's attempt to defuse the situation in Yemen has to do with putting an end to a human catastrophe but it has also the aim of reducing the chances of a direct confrontation between Saudi Arabia and Iran. 

We are dealing with a House of Cards. One wrong move and wars will spread in every direction. 

Anti- American President Barak Obama said to veto law that allows 9/11 families to sue Saudi Arabia

Anti-American President Barak Obama said to veto law that allows 9/11 families to sue Saudi Arabia.

Nothing new. No one has single-handedly created more conflicts and downgraded the United States of America like Barak Obama.

Luckily there is a date on the calendar in January 2017 when the American people will see the back of Barak Obama.

Ottoman Empire Part 2: Next stop? Israel

Turkey is fully supporting Islamic State. This is not just about cheap oil that Turkey is acquiring as it finances and arms Islamic State.

With Saddam Hussein out of the way, with a compromised Syria and a weakened Egypt, Palestine is ripe for the taking.

Turkey knows that the outcome of a direct confrontation with Israel, the only major player that could stop Turkey in the region, would be counter productive. Therefore, it is ready and willing to wage a war by proxy against Israel, a war that could prove to be very popular amongst people that until now have been locked in combat against Islamic State.

With Russia in Syria, Islamic State aka Turkey knows that its chances in Syria are limited and therefore a change of course towards Golan Heights and the Occupied Territories would make many in the Muslim World have a change of hearts. There must be a lot of thinking going on about ways to unite Muslim factions in a Holy War against Jews and incidentally also unite factions of those who live in the so called Western World to make them act as one.

The essence would be to make everyone believe that 'this is not a war between Sunni and Shiite. This is a war against our real enemies'. In more than one way, since the days of Saladin, Sultan of Egypt, internal divisions have always weakened Muslim attempts 'to conquer the world'.

About 23% of the World's population is Muslim. I cannot even begin to imagine what would be possible if Muslims across all continents were to get together with one single purpose. Turkey aka Islamic State is very much looking for a unifying theme. Beheading and killing fellow Muslims couldn't possibly be part of such an approach but we the intensification of external intervention a change of direction looks increasingly feasible.

Saudi Arabia is not even a worthy opponent nor are worthy opponents any of the other Arab States both big and small. What an amazing paradox! Turkey, a NATO member, leading a Muslim Holy War to achieve territorial and political hegemony across Africa, Asia Minor and the Middle East, now on a head on confrontation with Israel.

Syria IS Bombing

Motion to bomb Islamic State headquarters and others installations operated by Islamic State in Syria

I went yesterday to the House of Commons to listen with intent and in situ to all the arguments presented on the Syrian issue.

66 Labour MPs out of 231 Labour MPs supported the government motion - this means in practical terms that the vast majority of Labour MPs supported Jeremy Corbyn's position against bombing Syria. So all the talk by the mass media about a rebellion against Jeremy Corbyn is utter and absolute rubbish.   

1)    The Conservatives presented the case not as war on Syria but as an extension of military operations presently carried out in Iraq despite the fact that crossing into Syria will effectively mean entering into another country without the express authorization of the Syrian government.

2)    In Iraq, air attacks are carried out in cooperation with Iraqi ground forces. In Syria, air attacks will be carried out mainly in Raqqa (a town that is reportedly being used as headquarters by  Islamic State in order to carry operations in Syria and elsewhere).

3)    The motion presented in the House of Commons makes no mention of British ground forces being involved in Syria and it leaves open the question about what kind of effectiveness bombing operations will have without the involvement of troops on the ground.

4)    Trying to deflect the issue of not having British ground forces, or EU ground forces or NATO ground forces ore regional forces from neighbouring countries, the Conservatives gave a figure that was constantly changing mentioning groups that are already fighting in Iraq against both the Syrian government, against Islamic States and against each other (40,000, 50,000, 70,000) and that therefore lack any kind of coordination.

5)    The issue of Turkey and of Saudi Arabia supporting Islamic State was brought up several times and the question about who is supporting Islamic State was insistently made without having any formal reply from the Government that put forward the motion.

Karl Hohenstauffen

Ever wondered where ISIS gets Toyota trucks and Weaponry?

If Erwin Rommel had had the supply of transport and weapons ISIS seems to be getting, the Afrika Korps would have defeated the Allies in World War Two,

Does Turkey provide supplies for ISIS? Does Saudi Arabia provide supplies for ISIS? Endless supply of fuel, endless supply of transport, endless supply of weapons including anti-aircraft missiles. Where do you people think they come from?

Well, add to this that somebody is buying oil produced by ISIS. Everything points in the direction of the White House that was instrumental in supporting AlQaeda and in the creation of ISIS. The fury regarding Russia military intervention in Syria proves the point since Russia is targeting those US, UK and others support. Do you actually think that without US support a long line of trucks could be moving around without being detected by US satellite capabilities?

The United States of America knows where ISIS is precisely because the USA is supporting ISIS and has been doing so from the very beginning. Everything else is merely playing for the gallery of the naive and brainwashed massed daily fed the usual quota of crap provided by the US State Department and echoes by the useful idiots of the mass media.