The Today programme interviewed the former head of MI6, Sir John Sawers, today.
What is the only thing of interest the website has taken from that interview and indeed the Today programme itself as it headlines the interview…Ex-MI6 boss rebuffs Johnson demo call…? That Sawers criticises Boris Johnson for suggesting people protest outside of the Russian embassy about Syria.
He’d be better having them protest outside the BBC for what is happening in Syria and in Europe as it is flooded with refugees as the war is as much to do with the BBC’s actions as it has with Russia.
Sawers goes on in the interview to say that ‘What we are seeing in Aleppo today are the direct consequences of Britain’s decision not to engage ourselves, we vacated the theatre and the Russians moved in…it was a mistake…as chemical weapons were being used in Damascus….’
He means of course the chemical weapons like the ones that the BBC had a film of before the vote in Parliament on military action against Syria but which the BBC didn’t release until after the vote had happened….thus denying the MPs the most recent example of Assad’s use of weapons of mass destruction. You must conclude a deliberate choice by the BBC to not release the film because they didn’t want military action to happen and they believed this film might sway the MPs. Such an important decision could conceivably have been sent all the way up to the top, Lord Hall Hall, to decide.
Labour claim they didn’t have enough evidence…
The defeat comes as a potential blow to the authority of Mr Cameron, who had already watered down a government motion proposing military action, in response to Labour’s demands for more evidence of President Assad’s guilt.
…..the evidence that the BBC withheld.
You have to ask now why the BBC is so shy about highlighting Sawers’ comments about the failure of British foreign policy which has resulted in so much death and destruction and disorder. Sawers notes that it was the vote in Parliament that was instrumental in influencing Obama to back away from military action as well.
Very serious and important points raised by Sawers and yet you find no mention on the website. Why? Possibly because what he says is in direct oppostion to everything the BBC believes in regard to the causes of the war in Syria, what can be done about it and of course the fact that the BBC always opposes any kind of military action…which brings us back to that vote.
Ed Miliband was of course the man who marched his troops up to the top of the hill and then ran away, backing out of supporting military action and betraying those millions of Syrians who now pay the price for his cowardice. But why was he so keen not to go to war and why was Cameron so eager to accept the vote as absolutely final? Because Media pressure, especially from the powerful and influential BBC, made politicians terrified of committing themselves to a course of action that they knew would be portrayed as illegal, disproportionate and probably as a war crime with every civilian death being laid at their door in graphic detail.
The BBC has spent over a decade attacking the politicians for the Iraq War and also even more disgracefullly attacking on their own behalf and in coordination with the wretched ambulance chasing lawyers [How little we hear of them now from the BBC as those same lawyers are being brought to book and their businesses taken down] the British troops that they hunted down and happily smeared with any and all claims of wrongdoing that were mostly baseless and without evidence.
Any wonder that politicians would think twice before taking any military action however justified and necessary.
Even now the BBC is aghast at the idea of confrontation as Andrew Mitchell compared the mass slaughter, the chemical weapons, the barrel bombs, the starvation, the bombing of schools, hospitals, aid convoys and welfare workers, with the Nazi support for the Fascists in Spain. For some reason the BBC thought this was all too much…Adrian Chiles suggested that we shouldn’t use such language as it might only inflame the situation and that any action to contain Assad and the Russians would only be provocative and result in more fighting…and that would be bad…worse than the alternative presumably…. the BBC’s answer is to allow Assad and the Russians free reign to do as they like….the same BBC that relentlessly chases down British troops for the slightest misdemeanour. Apparently we have to look at what happened last time we confronted Fascists who were set on taking over the world…we had a world war…can’t have that…so carry on Putin…where do you fancy next? Poland, Hungary, Finland, maybe Sweden? The BBC won’t object…too loudly.
In that comment by Chiles you have the very essence of the BBC thinking on so much…such as Islam and the Muslim community…don’t criticise them or they will get angry and discontented and become radicalised…and it will therefore be your fault….so look away and pretend it isn’t happening as they set up a parallel Islamic society….or the Russians annex country after country. Rather have a Caliphate than take forceful action to prevent mini-Pakistans being set up across the UK and Europe. Better red than dead. Do not, whatever you do, ever stand up for your own culture, beliefs, values and society. This only makes ‘them’ angry…be they Russians or Muslim fundamentalists.
Surrender is the basic BBC creed.
Trouble is the result of that surrender is hundreds of thousands dead, millions of refugees and a Europe being torn apart by the pressures heading their way in a seemingly unstoppable flow.
The irony…the ever so humane BBC helps cause one of the biggest humanitarian disasters since the second world war.
I see Theresa May has ordered Royal Mail bosses to explain themselves as Posties unwittingly shove scam letters through pensioners’ doors…perhaps she could have a word with another communication company’s top brass and suggest they stop supporting terrorists and mass murderers and start getting a grip on what is really going on in the world instead of continuing to live in a fantasy world where ‘diplomacy’ and refraining from confrontation is the only answer. If the Russians know you have no intention of using force to back up your fine words then they will just laugh in your face….as Assad has for the last 4 years.
Even the leftwing Der Spiegel is seeing the light on Syria:
How Syria Became the New Global War
Obama put his eggs in the diplomatic basket, but without the threat of military intervention. The US hoped that Russia would be prepared to drop its support of Assad, an approach which has proven erroneous. Now, the strategists in the White House and in the State Department don’t know what to do.
The “red line” that Obama once drew — the use of chemical weapons by the regime — was transgressed by Assad without consequences. “That robbed US foreign policy of any deterrent effect,” says Thanassis Cambanis, an expert on the Middle East with the Century Foundation. America’s hesitant strategy, he says, encouraged Putin to test out a more offensive-minded approach in the conflict — and to actively intervene militarily a year ago. “Putin waited until he was certain that the US would not intervene and then he did so himself.”
After the vote in Parliament Paddy Ashdown was ashamed…
The result of the vote was condemned by former Liberal Democrat leader Lord Ashdown, who tweeted that in “50 years trying to serve my country I have never felt so depressed [or] ashamed”.
He later told the BBC that by doing nothing President Assad will use chemical weapons more “those weapons will become more commonplace in the Middle East battlefield” and “we will feel the effects of that as well”.
Now in 2016 Der Spiegel notes he was right:
This war isn’t just destroying Syria. It is changing the entire world. Leaders around the world who are interested in crushing uprisings among their populations will take a close look at how the world reacts when the rules of the international community — as weak as they may be — are completely ignored. Such leaders will be pleased to note that nothing is beyond the pale. Huge, bunker-busting bombs can be dropped with impunity on schools and hospitals, as Putin is now doing. Sarin and chlorine gas can be deployed, as Assad has done. And as long as you have a powerful ally, preferably one with a seat on the Security Council, nothing happens.
A few days ago, there were a few — but not many — newspaper reports that Sudanese dictator Omar al-Bashir had, according to Amnesty International, used chemical weapons in Darfur. The story wasn’t worth much more than a brief blurb. It has, after all, become normal once again.
“Ed Miliband”
Did you hear him in the commons today! Shouting/spitting/frothing with bitterness and not a soul listening to him! And why would they, they never listened to him during the election/referendum (I mean his own MPs) so why would anyone bother taking the cotton wool out of their ears while he and Ken Clarke did their 2 man Europhile-act!
Ken Clarke was positively bursting not one blood vessel but possibly the ones in his toes as well! You’ve had your day Ken.
Their attitudes are the same as a very spoiled child being told it can’t have its own way. It is embarrassing to listen to, especially where they are talking down the nation, almost incessantly and once more telling myself and millions of others that we didn’t know what we were doing with our votes.
I am heartily sick of their superior attitudes and am almost at the point where I feel that they should be put up against a wall by an army of the disenchanted.
I knew exactly what I was voting for, as I suspect did almost everybody else who was bombarded with drivel for months beforehand. and the views of these insolent jokers are as irrelevant as they themselves.
I don’t have an answer to these anti-democratic MPs and their spoiling ways, but, if they fail to deliver then I believe they will face future consequences they may not like.
Aleppo is a city of c.2.25million people. The BBC and much of the MSM only consider 1/10th of the citizens of Aleppo in all their broadcasting and written output.
Of the roughly 200,000 people in the rebel/terrorist/moderate area there are, embedded amongst them a very large number of terrorists, they use Palestinian style tactics, fighting from schools, hospitals and such like while using innocents as human shields. This is the only reason that it is hard to avoid civilian casualties. It is an underhand and disgusting way to fight any war but seems to fit with the BBC’s current political leanings.
There are nine times as many citizens of Aleppo who have no voice at all, nobody wants to listen to or speak with them. Apparently they have food and medicine together with staff to deliver and administer this bounty to needy people in rebel held areas. The rebels will not allow this – it is they who are prolonging the suffering of many innocent people, this is their style, they care not one jot for the lives of Syrian citizens.
We need to hear something from the other side. This one sided reporting is being orchestrated by the Western powers with the aim of creating a Sunni state in a place where it doesn’t currently exist. If they think that there is going to be any kind of happy ending to any of this then they are utterly deluded. The deaths so far will be dwarfed by the future horrors to come.
Well said Stewie.
I fear that Boris and his friends in Washington, Kerry et al, are doing their best for regime change, which means protecting the rebels/terrorists under the guise of a cease fire/no fly zone and aid to civilians who are not going to get it from the rebels. As with Yugoslavia we are on the wrong side, and many Syrians will die in order for the west to establish a Sunni state. And when established God help the Christians and other minorities.
Changing the subject slightly!
Methinks that the opening rants by those MPs who are hostile to Brexit (as witnessed in parliament today) and tonight’s breaking news that Unilever is refusing to sell their products to Tesco leaving many of the shelves empty is no coincidence whatsoever!
I believe the big-conspiracy between certain companies who preferred a remain conclusion are now so bitter and twisted that they are now willing to show their true colours publically no matter the reaction from the Brexit shoppers who will now be taking a careful note re every product we buy and if the name Unilever is found on any Unilever product we will no longer buy off them preferring to show these traitors of our great nation that scare tactics/threats to small and loyal buisnessss/people will not be tolerated one little bit!
Get this Unilever – we’ve marked your card! Prepare to go to your buddies Millaband, Clarke, SNP/Liberal traitors to see if they will advise you when your products are no longer in demand! If you want to play it dirty – we Brexiteer’s are ready and waiting for the war of the shelves!
up for the war of the shekves!
It’s undeniable that the traitorous Islamic Al Beeb has blood on its hands for its role in what’s happening in Syria…. But that’s just the blood of the innocent Europeans, Americans, and Syrian Christians and Yazidis, massacred by it’s much loved and protected death cult followers, just for not being Muslims!
I have watched 3 unadulterated documentaries/front line access programs on what is happening in Syria… By those living, fighting and dying in Syria (they were all on the TV channel ‘Viceland’, and I have to say they were all brilliant in their raw honesty and brutality). The war in Syria is 100% religious. Fought for and because of Religion. The so called ‘rebels’ are all Islamic warriors undertaking Jihad as instructed by Muhammad. They are trying to take back their lands from the brutal dictator that is Assad, and Assad is doing everything to suppress it…. But make no mistake, every single solider fighting on both sides believe they are doing Allahs merciful bidding… And the rebels are 100% going to install Sharia law and a Islamic state in the mould of their Islamic brothers in the Islamic caliphate. Every single fighter on all 3 shows have already confirmed as much!!
There are no good guys in this war. The only way the world will ever get back to the way it was (if that ever can happen now) is for Assad to take back control of his lands… And yes using whatever means necessary. If the rebels win, the state they create will be exactly the same in religious ideology than ISIS.
To finish my post, I will repeat the words of a Sharia law judge, living and upholding Muhammads instructions in the rebel held areas in Aleppo….remember this is one of Islamic Al Beebs good guys…
he said….
“The reason that ISIS have caused so much trouble and will continue to do so, is because they have declared a caliphate before they’ve established Tamkeen (having a stable state).
Now they have started to apply Sharia, thinking they have permission from God.
This goes against the beliefs of religious scholars around the world. This is what IS did wrong (notice the absence of the words ‘so-called). The reason.. As this is going to cause a lot of trouble, as anyone who opposes ISIS will be considered against Sharia, and will be severely punished”
Its amazing how far the Islamic Al Beeb will go to lie, mislead, deceive, and brainwash the innocent, tolerant and peace loving people of the UK into believing a completely fabricated and utterly deadly message that Islam is anything other than what it was created to be… A death cult, created to devour the world and fill it’s rivers in the blood of the infidels…all in Muhammads glory
No, the muslims in Syria are not “trying to take back their lands”..
Those lands were Christian lands (with Yazidi and other minorities) until the muslim invaders arived from Arabia in 626 AD the invasion was complete by 640 AD.
Assads state is a secular state (he is from a minority, the Alawites, who Sunni fundamentalists do not accept are “true muslims”)…absolute anathema to IS and their Saudi sponsors, and the US and UK are involved because our rulers have been bought by Arab gold and the threat of higher oil prices, on which globalisation depends.
So yes a religious war backed up with global economics.
Milliband did the right thing in voting against the UK taking part in an ‘invasion’of Syria.
If I remember Cameron and Obama wanted to destabilize the Assad regime. The same Cameron and obama who liberated Libya, I am sure at the time Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey wanted to destabilize the Syrian regime as well.The same Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey that supplied IS with arms.
What do you think would have happened if Assad had fallen?
How many more people does Nato have to kill, How many more refuge routes to they need to open. Now, Boris is trying to flex his muscles. At same stage he will have to meet Ladrov the Russian foreign minister.
I work in the ME. Among the ex pats and locals the BBC is ridiculed for the bias, but Boris is running a close second.
I was in the ME in the 90s and saw the street collections for the Bosnian Mujahedeen and the accompanying beheading of Serbs videos…
Of course no one believed me when I told them about this at home.
“we” backed the wrong side then, and are now making the same mistake again.
If “we” can`t do the necessary, then “we” should quietly, passively support Russia in the defence of secular, multi-faith, Syria.
I can scarcely believe I am reading a post like this on biased BBC! A person such as Alan who has been so clearly manipulated by the Saudi backed UK & Western governments, plus the BBC.
I have a posted a few things about this before including new Russian intelligence gathering aircraft which now probably are in advance of anything in the West, and the fact that it isn’t exactly the first time the Religion of Peace operatives have moved command & control centres into areas which should be off limits.
How is it possible that when the Israeli forces bombed a hospital in Gaza Biased BBC were against the BBC reporting, but when Russia does the same (presumably under the same circumstances) it’s somehow a ‘war crime’ ?
This is not some cockamamie country this time, this is the worlds second super power, and it’s a pretty fair bet that they do know what they’re about.
The BBC for a change have pointed out the dangers of going toe to toe with Putins Russia, in a war we couldn’t possibly win, and unless you’re either a brainless simpleton, or a Saudi bitch bought & paid for you wouldn’t even suggest such.
I have also posted several links to pages on credible websites that state categorically the problems in Syria are wholly as a result of Saudi meddling, and that our involvement is a result of compromised politicians working on behalf of external agencies.
The Assad family came to power in the 1970s and they ruled over a regime which allowed religious tolerance of nearly all creeds the world holds. Why are we seeking to destroy this to allow the intolerance of Islamofascism ? The Sunni Wahabist belief that theirs is the only true religion.
If the Russians and the Syrians want to bomb them into oblivion then it’s fine by me, let them get on with it.