WAS SOUSSE ATROCITY DESIGNED TO SUPPORT WAR IN SYRIA?

Read the following by Tony Cartalucci:

US actively seeks to degrade #Syria's ability to fight #ISIS while 100s of trucks/day in #Turkey supply ISIS http://t.co/frq7GCs4Oa

— Land Destroyer (@LandDestroyer) June 29, 2015

You will find this:

After arming and funding a literal region-wide army of Al Qaeda terrorists, the United States now plans to use the resulting chaos to justify what it has sought since the beginning of the conflict when it became clear the Syrian government was not to capitulate or collapse – the establishment of buffer zones now called “safe zones” by Brookings.

These zones once created, will include US armed forces on the ground, literally occupying seized Syrian territory cleared by proxies including Kurdish groups and bands of Al Qaeda fighters in the north, and foreign terrorist militias operating along the Jordanian-Syrian border in the south. Brookings even admits that many of these zones would be created by extremists, but that “ideological purity” wound “no longer be quite as high of a bar.

The US assumes that once this territory is seized and US troops stationed there, the Syrian Arab Army will not dare attack in fear of provoking a direct US military response against Damascus. The Brookings paper states (emphasis added):

The idea would be to help moderate elements establish reliable safe zones within Syria once they were able. American, as well as Saudi and Turkish and British and Jordanian and other Arab forces would actin support, not only from the air but eventually on the ground via the presence of special forces as well. The approach would benefit from Syria’s open desert terrain which could allow creation of buffer zones that could be monitored for possible signs of enemy attack through a combination of technologies, patrols, and other methods that outside special forces could help Syrian local fighters set up.

Were Assad foolish enough to challenge these zones, even if he somehow forced the withdrawal of the outside special forces, he would be likely to lose his air power in ensuing retaliatory strikes by outside forces, depriving his military of one of its few advantages over ISIL.Thus, he would be unlikely to do this.

Note the reference to us, the British.

Since last Friday the British media has been focusing on the atrocity at Sousse. Today Cameron wrote in The Daily Telegraph that we must fight Islamic State at its source (I think by this he means we should march on the HQs of MI5 and MI6).

But we are actually having a minute silence this Friday!!!

They really are pushing Sousse as an attack on the British people as a nation.

WHY?!?!?!?!?

Was it designed that way?

Reports are now stating that there was more than one gunman who...would you Adam and Steve it...managed to get away, while the 'patsy' was killed.

Sounds familiar.

About a month ago reports surfaced in The Guardian that in March this year a meeting had taken place in Turkey at which those behind the illegal attack on Syria had decided that enough was enough, and the 'rebels' were going to be given all they wanted (except SAMs) to finish off Assad. Shortly after this meeting the rebels had some quick and spectacular victories. There were more allegations/complaints that Assad had used chemical weapons.

I wasn't surprised at this. The Syrian Arab Army and people have done a fantastic job so far, for over 4 years, in repelling the not-so-covert invasion of Syria by Saudi-sponsored cutthroat Jihadis. They did Gaddafi in 6 months, but that was with air support from NATO. NATO was unable to provoke the war it so desperately wanted after Prince Bandar's false flag of 21st August 2013, so the Syrian rebels have been 'on their own' so far (and by that I mean still receiving supplies from NATO but not the overt air support but were allowed to morph in to Islamic State).

This is why Cameron didn't pay the ransoms of David Haines and Alan Henning. He used their brutal murders by Islamic State so that we could intervene in Syria, not defeat Islamic State. Cameron boasts that only the USA bombs IS more than we do. But the number of bombs dropped on and sorties against IS are nothing compared to previous wars in Iraq. In other words, the USA isn't really trying. It is just watching and waiting and guiding the violence for the benefit of the warmongers: Wall Street, City of London, Atlantic Council, etc.

If I were a cynical bastard I would say that the financial status of both Greece and Ukraine, and with, it looks like, an escalation of intervention in Syria through implementing buffer zones, do not look providing a peaceful August this year.