Contrary to criminal NATO war propaganda that only exposes all those like Fisk who wallow in their own excrement, civilians know the Syrian Army are not terrorists and that al-Nusra who the British regime illegally refuse to prosecute, are terrorists.

It is the most obvious self evident matter of fact, that it is no conspiracy theory that civilian society’s rule of law guides all right minded law abiding civilians who do not support the British regime or their terrorists trying to illegally overthrow the Syrian government.


murdoch & co: the british regime's al-nusra terrorists, who are not our 'own' terrorists

Fisk’s MI6 hymn sheet is one example of why NATO propaganda is purely criminal because it intends (mens rea) that civilians are slaughtered to raise revenue for a criminal gang of garbage collectors in Westminster who have long ago ‘overstepped’ all legal administrative boundaries as our servants.

Mr Fisk would not dare test his hymn sheet against our truth before any jury in any court of law.


The point Mr Fisk is trying to make from all and any angles is this:


mr fisk is trying to smash civilian society's rule of law by saying britain can illegally refuse to prosecute al-nusra terrorists, because the syrian army are terrorists


Of course it is not just America 'siding' with al-Nusra terrorists.





No apologies for returning today [to try and convince civilians the Syrian Army are terrorists] to the strange case of the “moderate” Jabhat  al-Nusra rebels, the throat-cutters and executioners who are playing the anti-Isis card to woo the US.

Their leader, you may recall, told Qatar’s Al Jazeera channel that his al-Qaeda affiliated warriors will oppose both Isis and Bashar al-Assad – and even protect Syria’s Christian and Alawite minorities. The usual American nomenklatura are telling the world this is tosh. It’s the “conspiracy theorists” who are to blame, they say, for suggesting that the US might send barrel-loads of new weapons to such men. No. The US would never deal with those who are on its infamous, though pointless, “terrorist list”. Besides, Qatar would never promote these killers as moderates – would they?

Well, first, let’s take another look at all these conspiracy theorists. By chance, that inestimable French journal Le Monde Diplomatique this month carries a wodge of articles under the title “Did you say conspiracy?”, painfully dissecting how many false-flag stories turned out to be true. There’s the Mukden incident, for example, a 1931 Chinese attack on imperial Japan which turned out to be a Japanese attack on China and led to the Japanese invasion of Manchuria, the Rape of Nanking, et al.

Then there’s the 1933 burning of the Reichstag which might have been started by the Nazis rather than the communists; the successful – and real – CIA-MI5 plot to overthrow Iran’s elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, in which bombs were supposedly planted by (yet again) communists; Israel’s 1954 “Operation Susannah” in which Israeli-organised attacks on UK and US buildings in Cairo were blamed on Egyptian nationalists; and the 1964 Tonkin incident, when America reported totally imaginary North Vietnamese attacks on a US warship, which led to the very real launching of the Vietnam War. Interestingly, Latin America provides even more proof of real US plots: Guatemala, Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Nicaragua, Cuba, you name it.

The French monthly also carries a very fair critique of those who believe George W and his chums engineered the 9/11 attacks – as if a US president who screwed up everything he ever did in the Middle East was capable of bringing down the World Trade Centre [there is no recognized legal defence of stupidity]– and of the Arab world’s obsession with Western conspiracies that allow dictators and nations [western puppets under the same chain of command] to duck their own responsibility for terrible events.

Thus, the lie [must be true then] that a female Israeli official had sex with Arab leaders to blackmail them into supporting pro-Israeli policies; the perpetrator of this nonsense, the Egyptian newspaper Al Masry Al Youm, later apologised – but, courtesy of the internet, the lie is still repeated [as though MSM are truth tellers].

Western powers, Arabs are told, conspired to create the 2011 Middle East revolutions to produce instability and civil war in the Arab world. The Americans planned the insurgency against Assad [the former French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas publicly stated and it was not disputed, the British asked him if he wanted to be involved in overthrowing the Syrian government] and the coup against Mubarak – the former to rid Israel of its most powerful neighbour, the latter intended to bring the Muslim Brotherhood to power and “diminish the greatness of Egypt”. Egyptian activists protesting the brutality of the coup’s winners – the army – are accused of taking money from Western intelligence agencies to further their cause [it is a fact in the accounting books of the US regime that the US National Endowment for Democracy fund 'opposition' everywhere]. Even Brigadier-General-President al-Sisi believes this stuff. Algerians still claim that the French Deuxième Bureau (an institution that ceased to exist in 1940) is today the puppeteer behind all Algerian political movements.

So I join, I think, the average reader of The Independent in responding to this tomfoolery with a great English expression: what a load of old cobblers! But wait.
When I was in Syria a few days ago, I heard several times that the Iranians, who have lost their own men defending the Assad regime, are stingy when it comes to economic assistance. One source in Damascus told me that they demand guarantees of real estate on any expenditure for the Syrian military. I don’t know if this is true, but just take a look at the latest estimates of the extremely undistinguished UN special envoy Staffan de Mistura who now announces that Iran spends, as much as £4bn a year on the Syrian regime – excluding, by the way, the cost of Iranian military personnel, the Hezbollah and Iraqi Shias fighting for Syria – a figure only outdone by a gentleman at the “US Institute of Peace” who puts the amount close to £13 billion.

And all this money supposedly comes from a country whose economy has been broken by sanctions? It doesn’t take a pea-brain to work out that if Iran still intends to manufacture nuclear weapons – the Israeli [and MI6] line – and has so much money to splurge on its allies, then it remains a far greater threat to Israel and Sunni states than al-Nusra or Isis or any other crackpot [crackpot is not a recognized defence either] Islamists in the region. And thus the Qataris [and let's not look at their bank balances] are today officially joining the campaign to “clean” the al-Qaeda killers of al-Nusra. A conspiracy theory, of course.

Think again. Read the words of the Qatari Foreign Minister, Khaled al-Attiyah, in an interview with Le Monde last month. “We are clearly against all extremism,” he stated, “but, apart from Daesh [Isis], all [sic] these groups are fighting to overthrow the [Assad] regime. The moderates cannot say to the Nusra Front ... ‘We won’t work with you’. You have to look at the situation and be realistic.”

In other words, al-Nusra’s sole aim is to destroy the Assad regime and, ergo, it is on the same side as the “moderates” and worthy of the same military assistance. If the “moderates” can’t say to al-Nusra, “We won’t work with you”, then how could the US?


Intelligence [oxymoron] reports to the French government have been recording US air strikes against Isis that have avoided endangering positions held by al-Nusra. When Isis arrived in its thousands to assault [commit massacres in] Palmyra last month – for the most part, in broad daylight – not one US plane appeared in Syrian skies [the Iranian government pointed out]. And all this when US pilots have been returning from almost 75 per cent of their missions against Isis with bombs still on board because they couldn’t find targets [again what the Iranian government have been reporting].

You don’t have to be a reporter, let alone a conspiracy theorist, to see the warning lights around the “war on terror” [a whole article without calling the nato war on syria a 'civil war] story in Syria. Because some of the terrorists are soon going to be our [I do not support these] terrorists – as long as they fight the even more horrible terrorists and the Assad terrorists [the whole point of the MI6 hymn sheet was to say this criminal lie] at the same time. All they need is more cash and more weapons. And I bet you they’ll get them, courtesy of the ol’ US of A. Just don’t mention the word conspiracy.



the cowardly fisk was not calling colonel saleh a terrorist to his face


Of course Fisk paints a fantasy world where the British MI6 are a virtuous holier than thou bunch with no blood on their own hands in the here and now.


Although there is a gaping hole in those prosecuted at the Nuremberg Trials, it is nevertheless instructive about how the criminality of war is planned.


All the propagandists of all shades have to agree to sing from the one hymn sheet that is ultimately only designed to bring all civilians behind NATO.



"...war did not just happen it was planned and prepared for over a long period of time and with no small skill and cunning....

...the entire structure of offices and officials was dedicated to the criminal purposes and committed to the use of the criminal methods planned by these defendants and their co-conspirators...

...always contemplated not merely overcoming current opposition but exterminating elements which could not be reconciled with its philosophy of the state.

We have here the surviving top politicians, militarists, financiers, diplomats, administrators, and propagandists... Who was responsible for these crimes if they were not?

.....this declaration of the law has taken them by surprise....they really are surprised that there is any such thing as law.

International law, natural law, any law at all was to these men simply a propaganda device to be invoked when it helped and to be ignored when it would condemn what they wanted to do.

...the ultimate step in avoiding wars, which are inevitable in a system of international lawlessness, is to make statesmen responsible to law...[Nuremberg Trials]


There is no identifiable rational law abiding sanity in NATO war propaganda, but instead cold calculating evil human greed, that as we have long complained attaches labels like ‘reporter’ to itself.

It matters not what label criminal propagandists attach to themselves, in the very same way it matters not what monikers terrorists trying to illegally overthrow the Syrian government attach to themselves.

The very same Fabius who brazenly admitted bombing New Zealand because of complete civilian opposition across the Pacific to Europe refusing to conduct nuclear testing in it’s own backyard, is only still around because he has avoided legal accountability.

It is just plan offensive that anyone would demand civilians listen to, let alone trust the word of a proven criminal, just because he hides behind the moniker of ‘politician’.

European ‘royalty’ and ‘politics’ waged Two World Wars to slaughter their ‘own’ civilians to create a military garrison called Israel in the Middle East, before the US & UK committed Genocide murdering 500,000 Iraqi children through illegal sanctions on Iraq, making 9/11 a tiny drop in a false flag ocean.

Stupidity is not a recognized defence in law.

It is a matter of fact that NATO seeks to avoid legal accountability over the most serious crimes known to humanity.

In legal terms there is no difference between the many monikered lethally armed foreign backed mercenary terrorists trying to overthrow the Syrian government who are openly backed by the Iranian government who did throw NATO out, much as Hezbollah have done in Lebanon.

The Syrian Army are not terrorists and all the foreign back western mercenary terrorists, whether the FSA, al-Nusra, al-Qaeda, ‘Islamic State’ are not ‘our’ terrorists but those of our regimes.

I personally think NATO propaganda is imploding in it's own excrement.








Please note: Our long-standing civilian resistance that began on June 2nd 2001 is not a 'news' media outlet. We only publish information to help save civilian lives.