The other day I did an interview for Press TV & one of the things I said was ISIS was a creation of Mossad & the CIA. Relatively few people have any idea this is so. Most of us in the West are being made to believe our leaders are fighting ISIS. WE ARE NOT! CAMERON, OBAMA & HOLLANDE AREN’T DOING ANYTHING OF THE SORT! In fact we are supplying ISIS with arms. Why are we doing this? Because this is what Israel wants. This is all in accordance with the Oded Yinon’s plan to create Greater Israel. We are mere puppets for the Zionists. The West has no interest in seeing Assad go. 

 

However, I’m rather dismayed with Press TV’s title – ANALYST WARNS STRIKING ISIL WILL DETERIORATE FANATICISM. I’m not sure even if it makes sense. I simply cannot use it. 

 

 

http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/11/22/438756/Analyst-warns-striking-ISIL-will-deteriorate-fanaticism

 

 

Here is the interview in full – 

 

Q. 1. There are speculations that Prime Minister David Cameron is preparing to take Britain to war with ISIL terrorists. He will set out his strategy over this to the MPs within days and some are already saying he will get a yes from the lawmakers for military action against the terrorists. How do you think the British public thinks about going to a new war?

 

I’ll give you the short answer first – Cameron’s strategy will be the one he’s always pursued – it’s all about regime change in Syria – nothing else. The UK public though is fed up with war. However, the media presents such as lopsided view of the case, diplomacy & truth never enters the equation. There is never any debate. Therefore, you wouldn’t know so many people are opposed to what Cameron is doing.

 

To understand what’s really occurring in Syria one has to go back a few years. I believe Cameron is hardly setting out a new strategy; rather a continuation of what he’s set out to do from the outset. He said ‘Assad must go.’ He made this clear. Do people have such short memories? Back in 2013 it was widely claimed Assad gassed his own people. No real evidence was presented. Moreover the case was never made, that with the US & UK baying for Assad’s blood, it was highly unlikely Assad would do anything to incur the wrath of the international community. Surely if Assad was going to gas anyone it would be the Rebels – not his own people. Consequent UN & Russian reports stated Assad had not used chemical weapons.

 

If anything this chemical attack was a typical false flag event carried out by the rebels for the purpose of blaming Assad. This way a case could be made by media & politicians alike for direct military intervention in Syria thus giving the Rebels the air support they needed in order to topple Assad. Cameron continued to press for military intervention on the back of these false claims. Of course this has been the tried & tested method in the past – every call for war is preceeded by a pack of lies. This time the British people weren’t buying it. Independent polls stated that up to 90% of the British public were opposed to military intervention in Syria. Members of Parliament voted accordingly & Cameron was left humiliated when his call for war was defeated.

 

Well the British public’s position has not changed. Of course in the past two years, while we’ve been alegedly fighting this war on terror, we’re led to believe this new terrible terrorist threat ISIS, one even worse than Al Qaeda, had emerged out of nowhere. Incredibly we were sold the idea that all the new state-of-the-art weaponry, machinery & ammunition that they suddenly got their hands on was simply left in Iraq for them to just take. Thank you very much. Is this how we’re supposed to be fighting terrorism? To just leave them all the fire-power under the sun? Nothing was made of this. Instead, for well over a year, the ISIS fear factor was ramped up, finally giving the West the excuse they needed to bomb Syria. They had to fight the very terrorist threat that they had actually created.

 

With the resumption of US & UK bombing on the premise we were combating ISIS fanatics, inexplicably ISIS went from strength to strength, seizing vast swathes of land, while Assad’s position grew increasingly perilous. Assad had no option but to ask Vladimir Putin for help & Russia took up the challenge with zest. Cut a long story short – within two weeks the Russians had achieved more than the US & UK had in over 6 months. ISIS targets were being pounded making a mockery of the very notion the West was engaging ISIS. The proof is in the pudding – when Russia asked the US & UK for assistance on the intelligence front, Allied help was not forthcoming.

 

It is for this reason I believe the Russian plane was targeted & consequent events in Paris were staged. With the Russians destroying ISIS, the West was about to lose it’s excuse to fight this non-existent threat of terrorism. With the media ramping up the ISIS fear factor to Defcon 1 thanks to these ‘attacks’ in Europe, the agenda to bomb Syria is once again on the table. What earthly reason should I have to believe that Cameron is going to fight ISIS rather than jeopardise Assad’s position. All we’ve heard up to now are lies.

 

 

Q.2. Former premier Blair is already under pressures over his 2003 decision to send Britain to the war in Iraq. How do you think Britain has learned from the lessons of the Iraq war in any potential decision to take up arms against the ISIL?

 

One must remember in 2003 over a million people attended a march for peace. The media did their level best to play this protest down. The British public were never in favor of the Iraq war. And so it later transpired the decision for war had already been taken. They were going to war regardless!

 

I’m not sure if we’ve learned from the Iraq war – I think it’s fair to say more people are fed up with being embroiled in conflicts in far off lands but much of the public relies on the media for guidance & to be perfectly frank – there isn’t any. Perhaps the problem lies in the fact that few people realise war-mongers & media barons are both sides of the same coin.

 

Q.3. How do you think Britain could suffer from the backlash of launching a military intervention in Syria and against the ISIL terrorists? What do you think would be the potential risks for this country especially given that it has a large population of Muslims and many of them may already be ISIL sympathizers.

 

This whole situation is absurd. It seems like we’re trying to create terrorist fanatics. I mean what do we expect when we destroy entire nations that have never caused us any harm? Of course this is a problem, but civil unrest I believe is something they’re perfectly happy to see. This way the Police can be given even more power, while our rights are further eroded. In many ways ISIS is killing two birds with one stone. Unless one makes the distinction of who ISIS really is & who they’re taking orders from, the situation will always appear very muddled for most folk.

 

I believe ISIS is a CIA/Mossad creation, formed for the purpose of being the ground forces in the operation to take out 7 countries in all. Back in 2006 General Wesley Clark revealed that this was the plan 10 days after 9/11. However, with the debacle in Iraq, it would have been nigh on impossible for America’s politicians to sell the need to put ground forces into Libya, Syria, Lebanon etc. The best they could hope for was give ‘rebels’ who allegedly were fed up with dictators like Gaddafi & Assad, weapons plus the air support they’d require. Things went well in Libya. Once again we must not be side-tracked by thinking – well, all we’ve done is totally destroy Libya. We’ve created absolute chaos. It’s a mess. Why do I say this? Because this is what they wanted all along – to create utter turmoil so that these countries never recover. Why do I say allegedly fed up with dictators? Because by far & away the worst Arab regimes – Saudi Arabia, Bahrain & Qatar seemingly can do nothing to incur the West’s wrath. Gaddafi & Assad in comparison to the dictators in Saudi Arabia are positively angelic.

 

It’s hard to gauge what percentage of Muslims realise what ISIS really is & which side they represent. If one looks at the facts we can safely say so far ISIS have slaughtered mainly Arabs, Muslims & some Christians. They have never attacked Israel which is next door to Syria. So if ISIS is an Islamic terrorist organisation then it’s the first one that’s deaf, dumb & blind.

 

We can safely say ISIS is fighting the Syrian army which itself is receiving help. Therefore one is obliged to ask how is ISIS being serviced or more importantly, who is servicing this vast army of mercenary killers. Therefore it is inconceivable to imagine the West isn’t helping ISIS because how else can they maintain their supply lines? Also there have been several reports that claim ISIS injured are being sent to Israeli hospitals & recently a high ranking Israeli officer was captured in Iraq. Well, what was he doing there?

 

It may not be abundantly clear but the only way one can connect all the dots is if one states – ISIS is a US creation, just like Al Qaeda for the benefit of Israel & Israel only. All that’s occurred up to now is in conjunction with Oded Yinon’s 1982 plan to create Greater Israel. This is why the goal all along was to attack 7 countries – Iran being the last. When all is said & done, Israel will be only power in the Middle East.

 

On the home front ISIS is being used specifically to strip people of their fundamental rights. Soon, criticising one’s government could result in being labelled a potential ‘terrorist’. Such a notion beggars belief yet this is precisely what’s on the agenda. If one then goes the whole hog to conclude America, Canada, UK, France, Germany, Australia are already occupied territories of Israel, one doesn’t need to spell out what is really happening & the obvious dangers.

---