THE GUARDIAN IS PART OF THE PROBLEM NOT THE SOLUTION

The editorial in The Guardian today focuses on the interview of President Bashar al Assad of Syria by Jeremy Bowen of the BBC. The author of the editorial basically calls Assad a liar and a murderer, and ends with this paragraph:

When the turmoil began in Syria, Mr Assad reacted by declaring that he would bring the whole Middle East to a state of chaos. He has contributed to doing just that. He is getting away with it. Everyone knows that there is not, and may never have been, an easy solution. But sticking one’s head in the sand and hoping the war on Isis will bring peace to Syria is a delusional approach. Syrian civilians are not helped when the west has no credible strategy to offer beyond air strikes on Isis and letting military data be communicated to the Assad regime. Nor are the Sunni constituencies that the coalition is supposed to rally against Isis ever going to be convinced of the efficiency of the strategy if Mr Assad, supported by Iran and Russia, is allowed to portray himself as part of a common fight. He is, as ever, part of the problem, not the solution.

[source : The Guardian view on Bashar al-Assad’s BBC interview: the lies of a tyrant, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/10/guardian-view-bashar-al-assad-bbc-interview-lies-tyrant, 10th February 2015]

I would direct the editor of The Guardian to this quote as provided by The Guardian itself:

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred... The voice of opponents no less than that of friends has a right to be heard."

[source : History of the Guardian, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/gnm-archive/2002/jun/06/1, Accessed 11th February 2015]

The editorial does not mention once the following nations:
Israel
USA
Saudi Arabia
Turkey
Qatar
Jordan
France
United Kingdom

Shortly after 9/11 General Wesley Clark was told of a plan for war and regime change in seven nations in five years.

Here is Clark in 2007 revealing that plan:


The nations named to Clark were:
Iraq
Iran
Syria
Lebanon
Sudan
Somalia
Libya

You will note that the plan was possibly conceived as early as 1991 which would explain why Israel wrote A Clean Break in 1996 naming Iraq, Iran, Syria and Hezbollah as targets for war and regime change.

You will also note that of these only one was named as a suspect in 9/11, and that was Iraq. But because the evidence against Iraq was thin it was also accused of aiming WMDs at our backyard barbecues.

As a response to 9/11 there was a little detour into Afghanistan allegedly to get bin Laden but it was actually to restore opium harvests after The Taliban had destroyed the crops. Bin Laden died around Christmas 2001 from Marfan Syndrome but somebody forgot to tell us.

But in 2003 we invaded Iraq but found no evidence of involvement in 9/11 and no evidence of WMDs.

In 2006 Israel waged war on Lebanon but Hezbollah was not destroyed.

So by 2007 this Plan A was moribund due to the invasion of Iraq not going as smoothly as planned or the plan being too optimistic and ambitious. Either way the NATO general public was tired of war. So a Plan B was hatched consisting of the Arab Spring in which there would be 'revolutions' in some Arab countries which would be helped by NATO, or if the leaders of those nations targeted for 'revolution' resisted then a humanitarian crisis would be engineered and then NATO would have to bomb people to liberate them.

So in 2007 an agreement was reached between the USA, Israel and Saudi Arabia that the latter would unleash the nastiest international cutthroat Jihadis onto Syria, Lebanon and Iran.

In 2009 the British asked former French foreign minister Roland Dumas to help to plan how to smuggle Jihadis into Syria.

However these Jihadis were first unleashed onto Libya, as per the plan revealed to Wesley Clark, and under the banner of The Arab Spring NATO became the Jihadi Air Force protecting and assisting what was essentially al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb.

After Libya these Jihadis were smuggled into Syria via Turkey and Lebanon.

And there they have remained, at first apparently winning but since June 2013 being heavily defeated despite receiving funding from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, weapons and training from the USA in Jordan, medical and military assistance from Israel, and Turkey giving them virtually free passage through the Turkey-Syria border, and in some cases bombing Syrian positions to help the Jihadis enter Syria!! This is why Prince Bandar threatened Putin in the summer of 2013 that he Bandar would unleash hell in Syria is Putin didn't dump Assad. On 21st August 2013 Bandar unleashed hell in Ghouta. And this is why the price of oil has been drastically reduced as part of an economic war on Russia to persuade Russia to dump Assad, in addition to all the sanctions etc. And this is why the Jihadis have morphed into what is essentially an even more barbaric colony of Saudi Arabia in Syria and Iraq.

9/11 was supposed to redraw the energy map of the world under Zionism. The war in Syria is all about a pipeline from the Pars gas field to Europe: NATO and its Gulf and Zionist allies want a pipeline from Qatar through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and Turkey, with a branch into Israel, so that Russia's energy business with Europe can be disrupted; but Assad wants a pipeline from Iran through Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and onto Europe but not threatening Russia's business.

This is why The Guardian dumped Nafeez Ahmed when he exposed the true reason for the war on Gaza last year: Israel needs energy but hasn't got it, but the Palestinians have but can't exploit it.

But the plans for war have all failed spectacularly.

FAILED!!!

FAILED!!!

FAILED!!!

But all this escapes The Guardian as it violates its founding principles as stated in the History of The Guardian.

The Guardian achieved national and international recognition under the editorship of CP Scott, who held the post for 57 years from 1872. Scott bought the paper in 1907 following the death of Taylor's son, and pledged that the principles laid down in the founder's will would be upheld by retaining the independence of the newspaper. CP Scott outlined those principals in a much-quoted article written to celebrate the centenary of the paper: "Comment is free, but facts are sacred... The voice of opponents no less than that of friends has a right to be heard."

Why would The Guardian betray this journalistic integrity?

Who is the editor of The Guardian?

Who would refuse to tell you all this while blaming Assad for the deaths of over 200,000 Syrians and creating millions of Syrian refugees?

Who thinks that a nation should not be allowed to protect and defend its national sovereignty against international cutthroat cannibal Jihadis and instead bow down before the Empire and kiss its feet?

Ladies and gentlemen, meet Jonathan Freedland, who was on the BBC's Get Galloway programme, a.k.a. BBC QT.

Freedland is on the far right (of this image).

This photo says it all...... @georgegalloway pic.twitter.com/ucafOez9ZJ

— Team George Galloway (@TeamGeorgeG) February 10, 2015

Freedland is a Jew. He pretends to be against Israel but said fuck all last year as Israel murdered over 2000 people in Gaza, over 500 of them children, and does not tell you all of the above.

So you tell me: is The Guardian part of the solution or part of the problem?

Are we being told sacred facts?

Er, nope.