Archive for the ‘War in Iraq’ Category

Will anyone bring the War Criminal Tony Blair to justice?

July 6, 2016

Will anyone bring the War Criminal Tony Blair to justice?

By Dark Politricks

www.darkpolitricks.com

Now the Chilcot report is out, does this mean that the Tory Government have the balls to go and arrest Tony Blair for pushing the illegal Iraq war?

Here was someone who knew that the evidence was false yet still promised George W Bush to be with him whatever, despite the UN and his own legal advisers, saying that the war was illegal.

Just like the many EU referendums before BREXIT, it was “no that’s the wrong answer, go and find the right one”, until a dodgy legal basis was provided to give Blair cover for his actions by Lord Goldsmith. I wonder how and why he got given his title….

I doubt any Tories will do anything to put their establishment buddy Blair’s head in the block as it would mean putting their own heads in as well. Many of them eagerly went along with the falsehood that many in the world knew was a blatant lie.

It does however make sense why the Blairite push for power against their Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn was planned just before this week’s revelations. They were hoping to take the sting out of the massive news story it will surely become, their own names off the front pages, and provide a different headline for the newspapers. However we must ensure that #Chilcot stays in the news and social media despite other political manoeuvrings.

If we have to wait for the Blairites to return to the Labour fold and for Corbyn to get elected before seeing Blair in the Hague then we could be waiting a long time. However hopefully a massive class action case by the families of dead UK soldiers, and maybe millions of Iraqi’s hurt by the war, could be formed to take him to civil court instead.

Hopefully they could win and sting Blair with a massive monetary punishment as OJ Simpson was, to take away all the millions he has made since leading the country into Iraq by selling speeches, and pretending to be a “Peace Envoy”. All whilst making money for himself in the Middle East advising dictators and lobbying the UN to vote against Palestinian statehood in 2011 – on the payroll of the Israelis no doubt.

The Palestinians had this to say about Tony Blair:

There is no one within the Palestinian leadership that supports or likes or trusts Tony Blair, particularly because of the very damaging role he played during our UN bid.

He is considered persona non grata in Palestine. Although we can’t prevent him from coming here, we can hopefully minimise the role he can play because he is not a mediator, he is totally biased on one side.

So what were the main findings of the Chilcot report which we have had to wait 7 years for?

  • There was no imminent threat from Saddam Hussein; The strategy of containment could have been adapted and continued for some time; The majority of the Security Council supported continuing UN inspections and monitoring.
  • The UK chose to join the invasion of Iraq before the peaceful options for disarmament had been exhausted. Military action at that time was not a last resort.
  • On 28 July 2002, the then Prime Minister Tony Blair assured US President George W Bush he would be with him “whatever”. But in the letter, he pointed out that a US coalition for military action would need: Progress on the Middle East peace process; UN authority; and a shift in public opinion in the UK, Europe, and among Arab leaders.
  • Judgements about the severity of threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction – known as WMD – were presented with a certainty that was not justified.
  • Intelligence had “not established beyond doubt” that Saddam Hussein had continued to produce chemical and biological weapons.
  • Policy on Iraq was made on the basis of flawed intelligence assessments. It was not challenged, and should have been.
  • The circumstances in which it was decided that there was a legal basis for UK military action were “far from satisfactory”.
  • The invasion began on 20 March 2003 but not until 13 March did then Attorney General Lord Goldsmith advise there was on balance a secure legal basis for military action. Apart from No 10’s response to his letter on 14 March, no formal record was made of that decision and the precise grounds on which it was made remain unclear.
  • The UK’s actions undermined the authority of the United Nations Security Council: The UN’s Charter puts responsibility for the maintenance of peace and security in the Security Council. The UK government was claiming to act on behalf of the international community “to uphold the authority of the Security Council”. But it knew it did not have a majority supporting its actions.
  • In Cabinet, there was little questioning of Lord Goldsmith about his advice and no substantive discussion of the legal issues recorded
  • Between 2003 and 2009, UK forces in Iraq faced gaps in some key capability areas – including armoured vehicles, reconnaissance and intelligence assets and helicopter support.
  • Despite explicit warnings, the consequences of the invasion were underestimated. The planning and preparations for Iraq after Saddam Hussein were “wholly inadequate”.
  • The government failed to achieve the stated objectives it had set itself in Iraq. More than 200 British citizens died as a result of the conflict. Iraqi people suffered greatly. By July 2009, at least 150,000 Iraqis had died, probably many more. More than one million were displaced.
  • The report sets out lessons to be learned: It found Mr Blair overestimated his ability to influence US decisions on Iraq; and the UK’s relationship with the US does not require unconditional support.

So will anyone apart from Jeremy Corbyn whose whole party seems to have deserted him despite having overwhelming support from the Labour membership and Trade Unions do anything about the lies of Tony Blair that led us to war and the creation of ISIS which haunts us all now?

Despite the massacres, huge car bombs killing hundreds almost on a daily basis during the Iraq civil war, journalists getting their heads cut off by ISIS and al-Qaeda and the strengthening of Iran, Tony Blair still thinks he made the right decision. He said this in the report:

Whether people agree or disagree with my decision to take military action against Saddam Hussein; I took it in good faith and in what I believed to be the best interests of the country

So no remorse then for the many people killed and injured from 2003 to this very day, all coming from his decision to back George W Bush who had some narcissistic desire to achieve what his father didn’t in the earlier Gulf War, remove Saddam from power. This was despite any links to 9.11 or any evidence that he posed a threat to the region.

Saddam and RumsfeldThis was a dictator that was supported by the USA during the 80’s in it’s war with Iran, and many in George W Bushes cabinet were players from that era such as Donald Rumsfeld who is seen here having a good time with his favoured dictator of the region.

I have no doubt that the USA believed Saddam still had weapons of mass destruction because they used to sell him so many of them, including the nerve gas which he used against Iranian soldiers and Iraqi rebels. No complaint was made about it at the time of the event but when it came to the standard demonisation of the enemy before a war all this was put into the heads of the public to paint a horrible picture of their ex friend and enabled dictator.

Despite warnings by the CIA that Iraq was using chemical weapons almost daily Donald Rumsfeld who was at the time a successful executive in the pharmaceutical industry, continued to make it possible for Saddam to buy supplies from American firms.

This included biological weapons and viruses such as anthrax and bubonic plague. Also during the time the US was selling Iraq chemical and biological weapons the UK under Maggie Thatcher was selling up to 78 different types of military equipment including Land Rovers, tank recovery vehicles, terrain-following radar and spare tank parts according to released government reports.

Apparently this pleased Maggie very much. She said she was “very pleased” with the “Contracts worth over £150m [that] have been concluded [with Iraq] in the last six months including one for £34m (for armoured recovery vehicles through Jordan),” which was written by a junior minister, Thomas Trenchard, in 1981. This letter also stated that meetings with Saddam Hussein “represent a significant step forward in establishing a working relationship with Iraq which should produce both political and major commercial benefits”.

So not only did the UK and USA help stock up Saddam Hussein with all the WMD they then accused him of having, a very hypocritical move but to be expected by the two major powers in the axis of continual war, but we actually helped him use those weapons on Iranians.

Iran was finally brought to the negotiating table by providing Iraq the location of Iranian troops, as well as the locations of Iranian logistics facilities and details about Iranian air defences once they had learned that Iran was about to gain a major strategic advantage in the 8 year long war.

They were fully aware that Hussein’s military would attack with chemical weapons, including sarin and mustard gas prior to four major offensives in early 1988 that relied on U.S. satellite imagery, maps, and other intelligence.

These attacks helped to tilt the war in Iraq’s favour and bring Iran to the negotiating table, and they ensured that the Reagan administration’s long-standing policy of securing an Iraqi victory would succeed. But they were also the last in a series of chemical strikes stretching back several years that the Reagan administration knew about and didn’t disclose.

So not only were we totally hypocritical when dealing with Saddam helping him use WMD that we sold him in the first place, but we started a war of aggression against his country that was not thought out, had no plans for after the invasion, spilled over into sectarian violence and civil war and the formation of terrorist groups where there were none before.

So how many dead people does Blair and Bush have on their hands from their decision to go to war “on faulty intelligence” or as normal people say “illegally”?

How many dead and injured victims have their been over the last 12+ years and the years prior…

-The US/ UN sanctions on Iraq of the 1990s, which interdicted chlorine for much of that decade and so made water purification impossible were responsible for over half a million deaths, mainly children.
-The Illegal war which Blair promised Bush to support even though Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with it is thought to have killed at least half a million people.
-The depleted uranium weapons used in Fallujah that are still causing babies to be born without legs and arms and horrible birth defects.
-The long civil war came after the fall of Saddam between the Sunnis, Shia’s and Kurds.
-The forming of al-Qaeda in Iraq in 2004 when no al-Qaeda terrorists had existed before.
The forming of ISIS which is now fighting Iraqi, Kurdish, Syrian and Russian soldiers and inspiring terrorist attacks in the west. All whilst we do very little to stop them (and even support them) whilst allowing our ally Turkey to bomb the Kurds instead.
-And that’s not even counting all the dead US/UK soldiers.
-And those who came home with missing limbs from IEDS and PTSD now living in poverty on the streets or in jail.

I wonder what the total death count is, or will ever be……

I also wonder if the world has the strength to punish a war criminal that wasn’t on the losing side for once?

By Dark Politricks

View the original article on the main site www.darkpolitricks.com.

 

© 2016 By Dark Politricks

Advertisements

The War On ISIS – Killing The Islamic State

February 23, 2015

The War On ISIS – Killing The Islamic State

By Dark Politricks

ISIS or “Islamic State” as they call themselves, is as barbaric a group as they come. However the misnomer of the term Islamic State is being used to justify attacks on all Muslims whether they are fundamentalists or moderates. Not all Muslims are the same just as not all Christians or Jews are. The same goes for Atheists, Buddhists and any other group of people on this planet whether the Daily Mail tells you differently or not.

Whilst ISIS may believe they are an Islamic State or a new Caliphate for the 21st century. Other Islamic States such as Iran and Saudi Arabia are fighting or preparing to fight against them. Not all Islamic States are the same either whether they put that title in their countries name or not.

There have been many Islamic Caliphates ( Islamic Governments ) throughout history and as with most religions the concept itself is split on tribal lines with Sunnis believing that the leader of any Caliphate should be elected by the Muslim people themselves whilst the Shia’s believe that only a direct descendant from Muhammad’s family can call himself a leader.

History shows that Islamic Governments who ruled from the Middle East to Europe, North Africa and at one point encompassing half of Spain, had at times more welcoming views to other religions than even the Christian Empires of the time. They allowed Jews and Christians to live amongst them and society was pluralistic as it could be under the circumstances of the age. Not all empires were welcoming but during the “golden age” of Islam the leaders of their lands did nothing to harm people of different belief systems living amongst them.

At one point the Umayyad Caliphate covered 5.17 million square miles, making it the largest empire the world had yet seen, and the fifth-largest ever to exist in history. The Ottoman Empire was Islamic in nature and trade, science and culture flourished throughout Islamic States at various points.

It was never the home to such people as those now calling themselves the new Islamic Caliphate.

However ISIS, just like the Taliban with their fundamentalist nature,believe in a strict interpretation of the Koran, and therefore ban music, dancing, and many modern items which seems to contradict directly their love of social media as a tool to spread their message on YouTube and Facebook. Most importantly pictures of the prophet are banned 100%. We have all witnessed the attacks on journalists who print cartoons of him, and it seems to be the ultimate insult that one can take to many Muslims around the world.

It seems as if these people believe the 7th century was the end of all human advancement in Culture, Science and Ethics.

Most importantly this group of people believe that it is okay to kill any human, whether woman, child or OAP, Christian or Muslim, who doesn’t believe in their cruel barbaric form of governance.

You may have seen all the videos, accompanied by beautiful Islamic music, as people in cars film themselves doing drive by shootings on main roads in northern Iraq. Swerving back to ensure the occupants of any vehicle are killed fully and properly and any survivors of their attacks are filmed pleading for their lives before being shot in dug outs or cut to bits with knives and swords. They seem to think this indiscriminate slaughter is a propaganda tool for anyone witnessing it and they seem to be right as many young people flock to the Middle East to join their cause.

Even with all the numerous witnesses and dead victims appearing all over the place people, websites, news stations such as FOX and even forensic analysts are claiming that the recently heavily edited ISIS videos of Jihad John beheading captured journalists and aid workers, and even the burning alive of the captured Syrian pilot, are actually faked or staged.

Why ISIS would need to stage brutal killings when they have proven themselves to be sick murdering bastards by raping young girls and killing opponents by the truck load I don’t know. I have seen videos of whole convoys of trucks carrying captured Iraqi males being driven to a ditch where they are taken and shot. These are in no way heavily edited films and many are shot on phone cameras by the soldiers fighting for ISIS themselves.

However leaving aside any debate on fakery when it comes to beheadings, what I do know is that the rise of ISIS is a foreign policy error of the axis of war, and the US/UK’s training and funding of “moderate” anti Assad groups like the Free Syrian Army have not helped one bit. These groups have shown themselves to be just as barbaric as the rest of the groups fighting in Syria and any funding or training by Qatar, Saudi Arabia or the CIA have just helped to make ISIS into one of the most formidable terrorist groups in history.

We can all follow the trail of this conflict back to the “successful” overthrow of Gaddafi in Libya, a country which is now a mess and a huge training base for pro ISIS groups and then to Iraq and Afghanistan and 9.11.

From our intervention in Iraq, which was basically three countries held together by a Western backed dictator, to our war on the Taliban who only asked for some proof of Osama bin-Laden’s guilt in the 9.11 attacks, before being denied it and bombed into Halliburton’s pockets, the foreign policy decisions of our leaders have either been totally foolish or carefully planned to ensure we have a well equipped army to fight for the next few decades.

We can even go all the way back to the 1st World War and the Balfour Agreement which let Jews immigrate to Palestine in return for US help for Britain in the war, and then the carving up of captured Ottoman Empire holdings into countries that never existed such as Iraq.

Yes our foreign policy is immoral and imbalanced with support for dictators one moment when they serve our purposes and then their overthrow when they stop being useful. To be honest it did seem as if the Middle East was a whole lot calmer when Gaddafi and Hussein were in power.

To go back to the concept of a Caliphate, the whole area from Africa to Iraq and Afghanistan is tribal and localised in nature. These tribes have fought each other for centuries and it was only when their lands were controlled by Caliphate leaders, dictators, and leaders of Western Empire that they seemed to settle and stop their religious and tribal strife. Take that firm grip away and the old rivalries return unabated.

Personally I have no love for any organised religion and whether it’s the break up of the Roman Empire, Henry VIII leaving the Catholic Church and setting up the Church of England so he could get his leg over, or Protestants and Catholics fighting in Ireland, Christians cannot claim to be any less tribal when it comes to irrational belief systems.

One must also remember that Islam is the 3rd branch of the Abrahamic faith.

Please remember that the first books of the old Testament, which allow for the stoning to death of adulterers and other capital punishments for eating shellfish and other stupid laws were at one stage all carried out by Jews, Christians and Muslims.

The fact that Jews are now mostly atheists and Christians have followed their own testament based on the belief that Jesus was the Messiah doesn’t take anything away from the core beliefs that all 3 religions once held, and the laws and punishments dealt out for breaking them.

The fact we are not criticising Islamic States like Saudi Arabia for their beheadings whilst attacking the new Islamic State for theirs is total hypocrisy.

Iran’s stoning to death of people can be seen on websites along with Iraqi’s brutal slaying of rapists in which the whole male community take part in the killing.

Video proof of such “punishments” can all be found on certain “death sites” on the Internet if you want to look hard enough for them.

So whilst we are no way clean when it comes to the rise of ISIS, we should absolutely oppose it for its fundamentalist religious nature.

The fact that I would like Saudi Arabia, Iran and the Taliban to be classed in the same group takes nothing away from the brutality we are facing from this group of 7th century loving killers.

We may have helped stir the pot, and even funded the initial groups who became part of ISIS.

Most definitely the criminal Bandar-Bush enterprise needs it’s terrorist tentacles chopping off ASAP.

The close ties between oil rich Saudi Arabia, it’s ex ambassador and now terrorist group funding Prince Bandar and the Bush family, whose tarnished history goes way back to Prescott Bush and his Nazi funding days, is long over due some legal oversight.

We have funded Islamic groups to fight Communism and then used them to destabilise countries we wanted to encroach into. The history of our involvement is there for anyone who wants to see it.

One only need research Operation Gladio and Gladio 2 to see why we have allowed these groups to flourish and the benefits we got from allowing them to.

However once again blowback is going to bite the hand that fed it hard and fast.

To get down to basics I don’t want to see anymore UK working class men sign up for the Army or RAF to go and fight ISIS.

We have already fought and lost against similar terrorist groups in Afghanistan and Iraq so why keep the military industrial complexes wheels waxed with tax payers money?

Anyway the UK Armed Forces are no match to anyone’s anymore due to cuts from Tory and Labour governments. Faced with ISIS captured US anti-aircraft weapons from fleeing Iraqi forces I wouldn’t be surprised to see a lot more English people being beheaded by Jihad John or burned alive in cages if we were to return to the killing fields of Iraq and Syria.

The UK military cannot even face the threat from a resurgent Russia, no matter how many times our Eurofighter Typhoons have to be scrambled to fend off Russian Bombers from the coast of Cornwall.

We have cut our armed forces to the bare bones. We are certainly not fit for any war worth fighting unless Jersey tried invading Sussex.

Anyway, on a side note, I wonder why Cornwall is Russia’s target for “probing”?

It couldn’t be anything to do with the huge amount of under-water cables taking Internet and Phone messages across the Atlantic to the USA from Europe could it? Or is it just the western edge of NATO’s Europe?

Remember folks if the war in Ukraine actually gets hot between Russia and NATO then China’s recent demo of a laser fired into space to destroy a satellite it had “no use for” or in other words, a warning to the USA that they could take down any US satellites they wanted, making the techno dependent US military redundant, will become true. Russia will most certainly do the same.

Russia is well-known to have far superior missiles and rockets than the US and it would be no surprise to see Satellites falling from the skies during the first days of any war.

So whilst some ignorant people may feel that a hot war with Russia over Ukraine and broken promises post Berlin wall are worth going head into, some other fools think that re-sending defeated forces back into Iraq to bomb ISIS from afar will defeat them.

If we want to crush ISIS, and we should, then we should allow the countries most involved to do the fighting. We should also stop funding Nazi’s in Kiev and ask Russia to help by arming its proxies in Syria and Iran. With Russian military weapons these two countries could crush them fully without a Western jet being flown.

Jordan is already keen to bomb the hell out of ISIS because of their burned alive pilot, and Iran has been helping the Shia’s in Iraq fight ISIS for a long while now.

The Kurds are also well into a hot war at the other end of Iraq and if only we agreed that ISIS was worse for the world than President Assad of Syria then we could allow Syria a free hand to attack from the north.

Why we keep on insisting that President Assad is the real bad guy when there are clearly worse figures about in the area I don’t know. We could easily let Syria and Iran with Russian arms squash ISIS in the middle like a cockroach in the night with a heavy shoe.

Then if only we could get Israel who take US arms, de-construct them, and sell them on to Russia and other countries join the fight from the West it would be game over. I know that sounds like a dream but logically it makes sense. It’s just a shame logic pays no part in foreign affairs or Israel’s behaviour in the world.

Israel has one of the biggest and most sophisticated armies in the world yet they spend their time either setting up fake al-Qaeda groups to then “catch” or allowing the US to instead. Just like leading a blind and dumb rat to a piece of poisoned cheese.

If only Israel could stop using their military might to crush the cornered and starving people of Gaza and instead realised the threat to their east. Their weaponry would be no match to ISIS if they actually fought them.

However if they are not worried about ISIS then it can only be due to their infiltration of, or setting up of, ISIS networks. Nothing else makes sense.

For the Islamic State, who should in all theory from their previous and past behaviour, hate Jews and Zionists, not try to attack Israel it can only be down to the fact that they are bought and paid for terrorists – like so many al-Qaeda networks before them.

If ISIS do attack Israel then they will have a real enemy to fight for once instead of pretend Iranian nukes and Gazan fire cracker rockets.

They could then join the pincer movement by Assad from the north and the Kurds, and Iraq and Iran from the south to crush this disgusting beast as hard as it likes. They don’t even have to hold hands with Iran to do it, they are all neighbours with an unwelcome guest, so they should all want to resolve the problem.

It doesn’t matter who created ISIS.

It doesn’t matter which Saudi Royals still fund it as their government cries out for help between beheadings every Friday after prayers.

It doesn’t matter if ISIS are owned, created or stage-managed actors, they are still scum that need demolishing.

The only thing that matters is that the axis of war doesn’t go back into an area they have just left tails dangling between their legs.

If Islamic countries (and hopefully Jewish) can come together in their area of influence to destroy this beast on their own then it will do more for the social cohesion of the Middle East than anything the Western nations have done since World War One when the French and English carved up the lands that created Iraq in the first place.

Let’s leave the fighting to the people who have most to lose.

It will be clear to see if ISIS don’t attack Israel that something very, very wrong is occurring, and on any account Israel joining Iran to destroy this evil creation can only be a good thing, whether together or by separate means.

Lets just agree to not send anymore of our boys out to these deserts to fight.

We have already done enough damage.

It’s someone else’s turn to turn the tide.

 

View the original article on www.darkpolitricks.com.

Russell Brand on ISIS and my thoughts on why our leaders are hypocrites when it comes to Islamic State and Saudi Arabia

September 6, 2014

Russell Brand on ISIS and my thoughts on why our leaders are hypocrites when it comes to Islamic State and Saudi Arabia

By Dark Politricks

Whether you like Russell Brand or not I would urge you to subscribe to the Trews YouTube channel to hear his point of view. Whether you agree or disagree with him on various matters it is always good to get alternative points of views on important matters.

In the video at the bottom of the page Russell Brand dissects the recent upgrading of the terror threat in the UK. This was due to the beheading of a US journalist by a man with a UK accent.

As he rightly says, Saudi Arabia has beheaded numerous people since August the 4th yet we continue to sell weapons and do big business with that Islamic State. If the man had a Saudi accent it probably wouldn’t have made the news like the many beheadings that happen all the time in that terror state.

Why is it that we don’t stop our relationships with such counties as Saudi Arabia and Qatar and others that fund the these terrorist groups that David Cameron wants more working class English and American people to go and fight.

Remember just months ago our leaders were saying that the enemy was President Assad of Syria and our governments were supporting, funding and arming groups that were fighting his government.

Now that these groups have crossed the border into Iraq and become ISIS they suddenly become the enemy. People who were “bravely” fighting Assad are now “terrorists”. Groups we trained and armed are now in Iraq causing havoc under the banner of the Islamic State.

As Russell Brand rightly says. For people like millionaire David Cameron, and his fellow Etonion friends, who are directors and shareholders in arms companies and other businesses who benefit from wars, to tell us to fight another war is hypocritical.

For Cameron to lecture us that we must go over to Iraq and lose more freedoms and liberties at home due to another UK/US foreign policy that has gone awry, just like the arming of the Mujahideen in Afghanistan who then became the Taliban and al-Qaeda, is pure bullshit.

He isn’t going to go an fight for his belief that we must go to war with ISIS.

No it will be the poor, working classes, who join the army as the only way out of communities that have been decimated by Tory policies, that will be doing the fighting for him. When our leaders send their own sons and daughters to war zones and don’t skip military service like many US Presidents or politicians have, then we can look at them with more respect when it comes to war.

Chicken Hawks telling me that I must go and fight for their own foreign policy blowbacks can fuck off and fight themselves. I am tired of people who haven’t seen real violence telling people who have to go and fight. When you have heard a knife enter a body, the sound and memory stays with you forever. When you have killed another human being it stays with you.

This is why so many ex-generals and military leaders are against war whilst people who have never been in one are for them.

The millions of people who marched against the war in Iraq through London a decade ago knew that war wasn’t the answer. Some people, like Tony Blair and David Cameron, still claim that our interference in the region, in Iraq, Iran and Syria hasn’t led to this creation of the monster called ISIS or Islamic State, they are blatantly wrong.

The only solution to a regional crisis such as the formation of the Islamic State has to come from the region itself, without us sending more troops to the region. We can help by stopping our crusades on former leaders who were our friends only a few years ago and instead attacking the real enemies in the region such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar who are funding these terrorist groups.

Here are just a few ideas for how regional countries could help.

Israel could do itself a massive PR job favour and use it’s massive armed forces to attack ISIS instead of Palestinians for instance. The US has spent billions giving Israel tons of fighter planes, missile systems and other arms. Why can’t Israel see the real terror on it’s borders rather than the poor, malnourished, suffering people of Gaza, and do the world a favour by going after them instead?

Iran could be allowed to help Iraq, along with Assad, to form a pincer movement on ISIS for instance. We could help by stopping to claim Assad is a war criminal without facts and remember our leaders used to have dinner with the same people we are now trying to remove e.g Assad and former leaders Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein.

John Kerry having dinner with President Assad
President Assad having dinner with John Kerry

Donald Rumsfeld and Saddam Hussein
Donald Rumsfeld meeting Saddam Hussein

Tony Blair meeting Col Gaddadi
Tony Blair meeting Col Gaddafi

If we stopped labeling Iran and Syria as the enemy and realised that they could actually be the solution to a problem we caused then they could become rehabilitated members of the international community again.

And most of all we need to realise that countries like Saudi Arabia and Qatar are funding and arming these groups whilst we make billions from arms sales to these countries.

Let’s remember that if the US Government’s story of what happened on 9.11 is correct. Then the people who attacked the country was Saudi Arabia not Afghanistan or Iraq.

Logically the US should have gone to war with this despot backward 7th century country, where people are beheaded or mutilated daily as punishment for crimes we don’t even send people to prison for.

A country where thousands of Princes and Royal members live a life of luxury, holiday in Dubai, send for models to have sex with or pay millions to have famous pop stars sing at their parties. All whilst the majority of the population live in absolute poverty.

This was the country the US should have attacked if the US conclusions on who the terrorists on 9.11 were was correct.

However that would have meant the Bush family falling out with their favourite despots, Bandar-Bush incorporated has been causing havoc for years. The Bushes and the leaders of Saudi Arabia were too closely linked and yet the US claimed 19 Saudi hijackers were behind the 9.11 attacks. Hypocrites and liars.

Bandar-Bush

Lets listen to Russell Brand talk about ISIS and David Cameron’s support for more US/UK war as the solution to it.

 

View the original article Russell Brand and me on ISIS and why our leaders are hypocrites when it comes to the Islamic State and Saudi Arabia at www.darkpolitricks.com.

New Video Compilation Of 9/11 Witness Testimony To Explosives Being Used At WTC-7

February 13, 2014

New Video Compilation Of 9/11 Witness Testimony To Explosives Being Used At WTC-7

darkpolitricks.com
By Dark Politricks

These are some very good videos which sceptics and believers of the official conspiracy story on 9/11 and what brought down the Twin Towers should watch.

Why? Well the videos contain numerous clips of TV footage from the day of the attacks which are hard to find nowadays.

This TV footage from mainstream channels shows numerous witnesses and TV commentators speaking of how they heard bombs and explosives go off. What is very illuminating is how on the day of the event even the mainstream media were willing to ask questions about explosives, controlled demolitions and drones / military planes being flown into the buildings. It’s such a shame that they are all now towing the party line and keeping quiet about what they know happened that day.

From Fireman to Policeman, reporters and office workers there are numerous witnesses who on the day claim to have been in all parts of the WTC when they either saw, heard or were injured by explosions that happened BEFORE the Towers fell.

This includes the smashed up lobby which is seen on camera in which people died which the official story explains by claiming fire from the planes shot down the elevator from the impact site.

This is despite the fact that the elevators were hermetically sealed which would have prevented this from occurring. Also whilst people are seen on camera in the holes near the plane impact zones perfectly unharmed people were being killed, burned and thrown all over the place hundreds of floors away at the bottom of the towers.

There is also enough live video footage to rubbish claims that no loud bangs, explosions or cutter charge like sounds were heard on the day. Numerous clips will show you how loud the explosions were and how similar they were to demolition explosives as well as dozens of witnesses who talk about leaving the scene as “bombs are still in the building”.

The videos also explain how easy it would be for a small team of people to plant enough explosives near the cores of the Twin Towers without:

  1. Being spotted by witnesses.
  2. Taking a long time as skeptics claim.
  3. And using only a dozen or so small inconspicuous boxes containing high-grade military explosives.

By planting these high explosives on every second floor and using programmed timers it would be easy to demolish the central core of the WTC and stage what looked like a pancake collapse.

The Maths is pretty simple and the power outs in the days leading up to 9/11 would have provided these conspirators with enough time and cover to carry out their job without being spotted.

Not only were the bomb sniffing dogs pulled out of the towers before the attacks but CIA 9.11 whistleblower Susan Lindaur, who was one of the first people arrested under the PATRIOT Attack for trying to tell her story, explains how in the run up to the attacks vans and men carrying tools and equipment would visit the towers every night for days in a row between 3-5 am in the morning when no other staff were present.

The blackouts gave the cover that engineers needed to do work as well as enabling CCTV to be off at the time needed to plant the explosives. A small team could plant enough bombs to demolish both towers within 24 hours.

How they could have easily rigged the WTC Towers for demolition

The videos also show some clips I personally haven’t seen until now including a shot of WTC-7 before it fell and what looks like cutter charges going off all across the building.

You can actually see small flashes of light dot from window to window from the right to left of the building and this would have been required for WTC-7 to fall into its own footprint the way it did.

No sporadic fires could have caused such an evenly and well-timed collapse including the 2+ seconds of freefall. Even the company NIST asked to carry out experiments to try and prove how the buildings fell could not replicate a collapse scenario which means NIST had to rely on computer models and unrealistic parameters to explain how a single point of failure caused what looks like a demolition sequence in WTC-7.

Just like the video of the collapse of WTC-7 which shows the Penthouse of the building dipping before the rest of the structure the same goes for the Twin Towers. You can see the highest points of the towers, the aerials and other equipment on top of the tower’s core dip before the rest of the building starts to collapse. This all indicates that the central columns had been removed first.

For people who haven’t seen the structure of WTC and think a plane and office fires could have demolished it’s huge central core think again.

The way the building was built meant that even if the trusses and other supporting columns and beams were weakened by fire or a plane the central core would remain intact. The sides of the building may have toppled or slowly fallen off bit by bit but there is no way a fire could have caused the huge central core to be crushed and pulverized into dust as it was.

The explosive nature of the collapse was so intense that steel and other materials were melded together and fires burnt underground for ages during the clean up process.

Pictures of the WTC Twin Towers Design and Central Core

The central core of the Twin Towers
The design of the Twin Towers WTC-2
Twin Towers Central CoreThe Reinforced core of the World Trade Center

The videos also show clips of other buildings that were hit by debris from WTC, including buildings where huge steel girders were embedded into their walls after being shot out sideways from the collapse.

How a fire could have caused enough pressure to do this I don’t know but these other buildings didn’t catch fire and then have a free fall like collapse as WTC-7 did. Therefore it is very odd how WTC-7 acted in the way it did when many other buildings were hit by the falling debris from WTC.

What explosives were used to destroy the Twin Towers

The numerous interviews with witnesses and bystanders from the day also talk about the military looking planes that hit the buildings.

There are multiple witnesses who saw the planes and detail how they were grey or very dark, and didn’t look anything like the red and blue American Airlines aircraft that supposedly hit the Twin Towers.

Remember that even back in the 60’s certain people in the Military and US government (Operation Northwoods) thought it was a good idea to stage a false flag attack and blame it on Cuba by automatically flying planes, sending out fake distress calls saying they had been hijacked by Cubans and then crash the planes. All this so that the US public would believe Cuba was at fault therefore legitimizing a war of aggression against the island. If the US could plan a false flag attack like that back in the 60’s then imagine what automated chaos they could instigate with modern technology.

Military Planes Used To Hit The Twin Towers

In the following video CIA whistle-blower, Susan Lindaur, gives a speech where she explains the war with Iraq wasn’t necessary and that before 9.11 Iraq was actually bending over backwards to help the USA. They even offered to provide the US Government with everything they wanted which negated any need for an armed conflict. She claims her back channel mission between the US and Iraq had provided a lucrative and unexpected bounty of gifts which has been kept secret from the US population.

This included:

  • Allowing the weapons inspectors into the country.
  • An FBI presence in the country to hunt down terrorists.
  • Llucrative oil and commercial contracts.
  • Even Saddam Hussein offering to stand down and hold free elections.

She also talks about her reasons for believing that both hijacked planes AND explosives were used to bring down the Twin Towers, the planes being a cover story for the demolition job. It is well worth listening to the story of a 9.11 whistleblower who tried to tell her story to the US government and the people but was instead jailed for a year under the nefariously named PATRIOT ACT.

As I say in my article 9.11 Sceptics versus logic and reasoning, what we need is a full criminal investigation with subpoena power into the events of 9.11.

Although much of the physical evidence has been destroyed a lot hasn’t and many witnesses and conspirators are still walking around freely.

Obama never brought the change the USA required after the criminal Bush administration therefore only a real concerted push by the people can bring around REAL change.

It’s either that or you continue to stick your heads in the sand.

Know your place. Do NOT ask questions. Keep quiet and suffer in silence as the war on terror is used to justify a massive crack down on civil liberties and the building of a new high-tech police state. Be monitored 24/7 and treated like criminals at airports. Be sheep on a slow walk to the slaughter house.

Or you can stand up for what you know is wrong. Fight the lies we are constantly being fed by our Government and their bought off media whores. Ask questions and don’t accept the official line. Do something worthwhile with your life whilst you still can.

Further reading on 9.11 from Dark Politricks:

9.11 Sceptics versus logic and reasoning

9.11 Remaining Questions and no answers

The 9/11 Passenger Paradox: What happened to Flight 93

The Pentagon Attack

Video shows a missile hitting the Pentagon

Is The Pentagon Attack Finally Solved

View the original article A Video Compilation Of 9/11 Witness Testimony To Explosives Being Used At WTC-7 at darkpolitricks.com

My end of year Dark Politricks review 2013

January 1, 2014

My end of year Dark Politricks review 2013

By Dark Politricks

Once again I bring the year to a close with a review of what I think are the biggest stories of the last 365 days.

There are so many to choose from therefore I have just picked a few of the important points that managed to make it from the alternative news to the mainstream and back again.

There is a poll at the end and it would be great if you could take part and let me know your thoughts on the matter.

Syria – war averted for once.

For once the Axis of war didn’t get its way when it came to the war they desperately wanted in Syria. This war had been planned since 9.11 and it was part of the “Sweep it all up. Things related and not” comment made by Donald Rumsfeld in the aftermath of the 9.11 attacks.

Iraq was to fall first, then Syria and finally Iran. A splintered Middle East with no serious opposition to US / Israel power in the regime was the aim. A Greater Israel was the dream and a fractured opposition had to be created for the dream to become true.

However after the debacle of the Iraq war Iran became the main benefactor of the US/UK failure to suppress the uprising and they left with their tails between their legs. This scared the hell out of Israel and meant that the axis of evil had to ferment a Sunni uprising to get the Shiites and Sunnis fighting amongst themselves all over the region to prevent a united Iraq coming under the total influence of Iran.

The plan was to destroy Syria and block Syrian  help to their Hezbollah agents who were receiving arms from their benefactor to use against northern Israel. Not only would Syria be cracked into a hundred pieces as Alawites fought Sunni’s and Shiites, but the Christians who had lived there for thousands of years in peace would be caught in the middle as Church after Church was destroyed, ancient villages taken over and ruined, and kids were forced at gun point to convert to Islam.

However it was determined Russian Diplomacy that prevented this useless war in the Middle East over Syria from coming to fruition. Whilst the French, British and US were trying to gain public support for another war, the people just weren’t buying their lies anymore.

US soldiers put their jobs on the line and used social media to show their disdain for fighting yet another war alongside al-Qaeda terrorists with their #IdidntJoin and #NoSyriaWar Twitter campaigns.

They could see that their Government was duplicitous and had no problems using al-Qaeda as the bogeyman in one part of the world and then supply guns, training and support for them in another war zone if it helped their geo-political goals.

Here are just a few of the photos from the #IdidntJoin and #NoSyriaWar Twitter campaign.

Twitter Flooded With Active Duty Military & Veterans Opposing Attack on Syria 020913join1

Twitter Flooded With Active Duty Military & Veterans Opposing Attack on Syria 020913join1

Twitter Flooded With Active Duty Military & Veterans Opposing Attack on Syria 020913join1

Twitter Flooded With Active Duty Military & Veterans Opposing Attack on Syria 020913join1

Twitter Flooded With Active Duty Military & Veterans Opposing Attack on Syria 020913join1

Read about the #IdidntJoin #NoSyriaWar campaign here.

With videos of Free Syrian Army soldiers (supposedly moderates) eating hearts and lungs of dead soldiers and then putting them up on Youtube.com, the world quickly saw that this was no rebel army that shared their common culture, ideals and ethics that we did in the west. Why on earth would we want to fight alongside this lot of Islamic heart eaters.

Also why was it that our leaders were so keen to back the heart eating, beheading, child killing nutters in Syria when they are basically the same people who were killing our own soldiers on the streets of London such as the horrible case of Lee Rigby?

With fake claims of Chemical weapons attacks by Syrian forces, and huge stashes of Sarin gas found in rebel compounds it was clear the idea was to use a false flag attack to draw us into the war on the side of the Saudi and UAE backed Islamic extremists.

However with Russian diplomacy actually paying dividends, and the amazing display of UK bottle that showed the UK government wouldn’t just blindly follow the USA into any war they wanted us in, the plan to bomb Syria soon fell apart.

The Syrian regime said they would hand over all their chemical weapons and come to the peace table, something the Islamic terrorists didn’t want to do without first getting President Assad to resign. However the US accepted the plan and another war has been averted – so far.

The war was all about taking Syria off the chessboard so that Hezbollah was weakened and Iran would become Isolated.

However this hasn’t happened and it has shown the west up for its real reasons for starting another useless war in the Middle East. Geo-political reasons, protection of Israel, the splintering of any anti-western alliances and the building of more military bases in sensitive areas that control oil and major shipping lanes.

The Iraq War

The 10th birthday of the Iraq war was the bloodiest since 2008. with 1000’s of deaths everyday the bombings continue daily as Sunni extremists fight the Shiite government and the civilians are caught in the crossfire.

The plan may have been to get the Iraqi’s fighting amongst themselves but instead it has given the Iraqi’s a Shiite government focused towards Iran. This is probably the reason the number of roadside bombings assassinations and killings has been ramped up as Sunni’s try to re-gain power through force.

It does make me laugh now to see that picture of George Bush aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln claiming that the war in Iraq was now over back in 2003, on May 1st – just over a DECADE ago!

George W Bush stated at the time that this was the end to major combat operations in Iraq. However it was just the beginning of the Iraqi insurgency.

In fact the majority of casualties, both military and civilian, occurred after this foolish speech by the “Commander-in-Chief” of the allied forces.

Mission un-acomplished

Edward Snowden

He has been the receiver of many awards this year but he is still stuck in limbo with only temporary asylum in RussiaEdward  Snowden was  the NSA analyst that had to go on the run to reveal what he knew about the massive surveillance state the USA had built up over the past decade.

The start, of this huge monitoring of the masses began many years ago with programs like ECHELON, yet after 9.11 the rules were brushed aside about not spying on your own countrymen and the US Constitution was treated like the piece of old paper George W Bush once claimed it was.

With the help of Glenn Greenwald and a number of papers including The UK’s Guardian, Snowden and Greenwald revealed the massive computer servers that were literally sucking terabytes of data straight from major routers, under water pipes, and back doors in commonly used programs.

Programs and applications many of us use such as Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Skype, Twitter and many others who were secretly working in cahoots with the security state.

Programs such as PRSIM were revealed to the masses and it was quickly explained how just with an email address or telephone number an NSA analyst could enter it into a computer and then find out anything about that person that resided online.

From email boxes “in the cloud” such as Gmail (which was the downfall of CIA chief David Petraeus ) to TRAPWIRE a huge link up of CCTV cameras, traffic cameras, cinema and parking tickets and credit card purchases in shops the data “trapped” could be used to monitor your movements through a city 24/7.

In fact the amount of data was so large that the US Government had to build a city sized computer server warehouse in UTAH to hold it all.

As revealed by Wired this center is a:

“heavily fortified $2 billion center (and) should be up and running in September 2013. Flowing through its servers and routers and stored in near-bottomless databases will be all forms of communication, including the complete contents of private emails, cell phone calls, and Google searches, as well as all sorts of personal data trails—parking receipts, travel itineraries, bookstore purchases, and other digital “pocket litter.”

As most of us are all walking around with monitoring devices on us 24/7 i.e phones we are basically asking to be tracked. Our modern phones contain a myriad of ways to monitor and track us from having the microphone remotely turned on to listen to us or the camera switched on to take photographs of our surroundings. That’s forgetting about the GPS positioning that pinpoints us at any time. Useful for when you have lost your phone but not so handy when you don’t want the security state to know where you are.

Even with GPS disabled, triangulation from phone masts can be used to pinpoint us less accurately, and have you noticed how all smart phones nowadays make it impossible to remove the battery?

That’s because even with your phone switched off there is enough electricity in the device to “ping” it and locate it or turn on the microphone or camera. The only way to be safe would be to leave it at home when your going somewhere you “shouldn’t” or buy an old “numpty” phone – one of those designed for OAP’s that let you text and make calls only.

Oh and don’t forget that Google and IPhone have been caught numerous times recording all our GPS co-ordinations on a hidden database in the phone that can be easily removed (even without wires) by Policemen to find out where we have been. Think you are living in George Orwell’s 1984 – well we are well past that by 30 years now!

You can read some of the ways to reduce your Internet footprint on this article of mine but unless you want to live without a phone, TV and computer you are basically hooked into the Matrix and available for monitoring at any time.

Edward Snowden is wanted by the US government for revealing state secrets but many see him as a hero for revealing the level of spying the NSA went to after the reigns were let off them after 9.11.

With the UK’s GCHQ basically acting as their “bitch” and doing lots of dirty work purely for cash. The “Special Relationship” is alive and well. Also without a written Constitution or Bill or Rights to rein them in the junior partners across the Atlantic are able to get away with a whole lot more than the NSA can. Even trawling the whole Internet for data to be analysed for “potential” threats.

These NSA analysts are even going even as far as playing games like World of Warcraft because they believed terrorists were using the inbuilt talking and messaging features within the VOIP games to send messages to each other about potential attacks – either that or it was some clever clogs idea at the NSA to let them play games all day whilst their superiors thought they were working.

Edward Snowden gave this years Channel 4 alternative Christmas speech. It is well worth listening to.

Chelsea Manning

An important story which was supposed to be about liberty and war crimes was turned into a MSM piece about sexuality and unimportant questions. This was due to Chelsea Manning’s decision to mitigate his “crimes” on a “confused sexual identity status” instead of the morality of what he was doing by revealing war crimes by the US Army in Iraq.

What should have been a massive debate in the public sphere about the legality of acts of war was turned into a farce.  The war crime such as the one he released to WikiLeaks which showed innocent Iraqi’s and TV reporters shot to death by US pilots who were almost climaxing during the event was totally ignored and just treated as “war as normal”.

Who should junior soldiers report these crimes against humanity to. Crimes which break numerous International laws and conventions?

What happens if they are ignored or punished. Would they even dare to bring the matter up to a superior and would that superior even listen or would they be disciplined for breaking the all important rule to “shut your mouth and do your job”.

With the number of US female soldiers who complain about sexual assault being jailed in containers in Iraq for just raising the issue it is clear the US military has no time for “complainers” whether the complaint is valid or not.

In July of 2005, Jamie Leigh Jones, then 20 and working in Iraq, alleged she was gang-raped and beaten by fellow KBR employees and locked in a shipping container by managers after she sought out law enforcement. Jones and her lawyers, who lost a federal civil suit against KBR in July, said nearly 40 other female KBR employees who worked in Afghanistan and Iraq told them stories of rape, beatings and sexual harassment.

The FED celebrated it’s 100th birthday in 2013.

Responsible for numerous bubbles, booms n busts, the US Federal Reserve act was passed in the dead of night in 1913.

This act enabled the big banks to control the money supply of the USA by printing it and  then lending it to their friends in the banking world. With the positions in the Treasury and the big banks like Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan acting more like a revolving door it is no wonder the big banks always get their bailouts on the backs of the poor tax payers when they play roulette with our savings and pensions and then lose.

With a few lone voices like Ron Paul calling for an end to the FED the movement to end this printing of fiat currency and the Government paying it back with interest from tax payers has been brought to the mainstream and more and more people are asking why we have such a system in the first place.

With many founding US fathers claiming the war of Independence was about controlling their own money and not letting the English tax them without representation the FED would be the anti-Christ if they could see it in action now.

From a recent article by George Washington:

The Federal Reserve Act was passed in 1913 in response to a wave of bank crises, which had hit on average every six years over a period of 80 years. The resulting economic depressions triggered a populist movement for monetary reform in the 1890s. Mary Ellen Lease, an early populist leader, said in a fiery speech that could have been written today:

Wall Street owns the country. It is no longer a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, but a government of Wall Street, by Wall Street, and for Wall Street. The great common people of this country are slaves, and monopoly is the master. .. . Money rules. .. .Our laws are the output of a system which clothes rascals in robes and honesty in rags. The parties lie to us and the political speakers mislead us. .. .

We want money, land and transportation. We want the abolition of the National Banks, and we want the power to make loans direct from the government. We want the foreclosure system wiped out.

That was what they wanted, but the Federal Reserve Act that they got was not what the populists had fought for, or what their leader William Jennings Bryan thought he was approving when he voted for it in 1913. In the stirring speech that won him the Democratic presidential nomination in 1896, Bryan insisted:

[We] believe that the right to coin money and issue money is a function of government. .. . Those who are opposed to this proposition tell us that the issue of paper money is a function of the bank and that the government ought to go out of the banking business.

I stand with Thomas Jefferson. .. and tell them, as he did, that the issue of money is a function of the government and that the banks should go out of the governing business.

With Wall Street banks that were called “Too big to fail” in 2008 now almost 3 times as big in 2013 Wall Street is a monster out of control. The Occupy moment may have opened some people eyes to how debt based money really works and how the US Government is occupied and owned by Wall Street banksters but it is not enough.

Without some banksters being jailed for their crimes as they were in Iceland the banksters will continue to steal and pillage money from the masses. Then when they are caught out when their  convoluted investment pyramid schemes fail as they always do they claim bailouts from the tax payers. The same game goes on as usual.

A few heads on poles outside the City of London and Wall Street including those of Jamie Dimon and Lloyd Blankfein would be a nice start but until the austerity measures implemented by our government starts to bite hard not enough people will get angry enough to demand blood for their poverty and the bankers crimes.

Hopefully 2014 will be a better year as more and more people are becoming awakened to the games played all around them by Governments and banks. If 2013 ha been a good year for you then great if not lets all plan to make 2014 a better one.

Please take the time to let me know what you think the most important act of 2013 was with this poll. You can add comments or extra options as I have only put in a few of many possible questions.

Use the comment box on the page at the bottom or the comment box on the Polldaddy page if you want.

View the original article My end of year Dark Politricks review 2013 at darkpolitricks.com

Help Get Bradley Manning Out Of Jail!

June 16, 2013

Help Get Bradley Manning Out Of Jail!

By Dark Politricks

This is a campaign video for the organisation “I am Bradley Manning”.

They are campaigning for the release of the young tortured whistleblower who had the balls to see something wrong and stand up and be counted. They also want the charge “aiding the enemy” dropped.

As the video says not many young soldiers would be brave enough to see a war crime committed and try and do and something about it and whistle blowers are supposed to be protected by US law.

However we all know that isn’t true as President Obama (a supposed Liberal) has persecuted more whistleblowers than any other President in history.

However instead of being protected Bradley Manning has been tortured and humiliated through lack of visits and daylight, plus forced to stay naked in his cell (for his own safety of course).

He now faces a long time in prison, and maybe even the death penalty, particularly due to the “aiding the enemy” charge.

All the time he is up in court he can be proud to know that he is a Nobel Peace Prize nominee and that thousands of people are supporting and thinking about his plight.

Please visit the website iam.bradleymanning.org and show your support.

Also pass the link on and help the site anyway you can by promoting it and subscribing to the mailing list.

The sites mission statement says the following:

Amidst courtroom secrecy, whistleblower and Nobel Peace Prize nominee Bradley Manning is on trial after three years of confinement.

The information that Bradley gave to the public has been a catalyst for pro-democracy movements in the Arab world, exposed the unjust detainment of innocent people at Guantanamo Bay, shown us the true human cost of our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and changed journalism forever.

There is no evidence that anyone died as a result of the leaked information, yet Bradley faces life in prison or possibly death. The greatest charge against him is that of “aiding the enemy,” a capital offence. As the public who benefited from this information, does that make us the enemy?

What price will future whistleblowers pay?

I have added a link to the “I am Bradley Manning” site to my list of campaigns down the right hand side of the page and I have also just realised I still had a link to the “Free Gary McKinnon” campaign site down there.

Whilst the unfair and unbalanced extradition treaty between the US and UK has still not be resolved yet – particularly due to the feeble version of the Freedom Bill ( or Protection of Freedoms Bill ) that was actually passed when compared to the original proposed Freedom billGary McKinnon himself has won his battle to not be extradited to the USA.

Therefore I will be removing the link as his future has been secured and he will not be prosecuted by English courts either.

Therefore I am happy to tick a campaign off my list!

If you missed the reasons why, and the outrage from the Americans following Theresa May’s decision not to extradite him, then the following article from the site explains the reasons why.

 Remember the site is still campaigning to get the extradition laws changed:

Joint CPS/MPS statement on the case of Gary McKinnon

Statement by Keir Starmer QC, Director of Public Prosecutions, and Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service on the case of Gary McKinnon

Between 1 February 2001 and 19 March 2002, Gary McKinnon allegedly gained unauthorised access to 97 United States (US) Government computers. An investigation was launched in the US and a request for assistance was made to the National Hi-Tech Crime Unit in England and Wales. Following discussions between the US Department of Justice, the police and the Crown Prosecution Service in the autumn of 2002, a decision was taken that the appropriate place for Mr McKinnon to be tried was the United States.

The reasons for that decision were:

The harm occurred in the US – the activity was directed against the military infrastructure of the US;
An investigation had already been launched in the US;
There were a large number of witnesses, most of whom were located in the US;
All of the physical evidence (with the exception of Mr McKinnon’s computer) was located in the US;
The US prosecutors were able to bring a case that reflected the full extent of Mr McKinnon’s alleged criminality; and
The bulk of the unused material was located in the US. Given the nature of the offence, this inevitably included highly sensitive information and the US courts were best placed to deal with any issues arising in relation to this material.

As a result, the US sought Mr McKinnon’s extradition from England and Wales for trial in the US.

The decision that the appropriate place for Mr McKinnon to be tried was the US was affirmed in 2009 and subsequently challenged in the High Court. That challenge failed. As Lord Justice Stanley Burnton said in his judgment: “… [it is] the decision of the DPP, which I consider to be lawful and unchallengeable, not to prosecute him here … the USA is the appropriate forum for his prosecution.”

On 16 October 2012, the Home Secretary decided not to extradite Mr McKinnon to the US on the basis of his health. She also announced that it was now for the DPP to decide whether Mr McKinnon had a case to answer in a UK court. At that stage there was no live criminal investigation in England and Wales, nor had there been for many years.

The DPP and the Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police therefore agreed to convene a joint police/CPS panel to consider whether a new criminal investigation should be commenced.

None of the reasons for the original decision in 2002 that the appropriate place for Mr McKinnon to be tried was the United States have altered. So far as the evidence is concerned, the position in 2012 is the same as it was in 2002. Most of the witnesses are in the US, as is nearly all the physical evidence and the bulk of the unused material, some of which is sensitive. Accordingly, in November this year, the CPS and the police met senior officials from the US Department of Justice to discuss the possibility of bringing the US witnesses to England and Wales for trial and of transferring all the US material to this jurisdiction to be considered.

The potential difficulties in bringing a case in England and Wales now should not be underestimated, not least the passage of time, the logistics of transferring sensitive evidence prepared for a court in the US to LONDON for trial, the participation of US government witnesses in the trial and the need fully to comply with the duties of disclosure imposed on the CPS. The prospects of a conviction against Mr McKinnon which reflects the full extent of his alleged criminality are not high.

After consulting with the Metropolitan Police Service and the CPS and having carefully considered matters, on 4 December this year, US authorities indicated to us that they would be willing to co-operate with a prosecution in England and Wales if that would serve the interest of justice. However, they do not consider that making all the US witnesses available for trial in London and transferring all of the US material to this jurisdiction would be in the interests of justice given our representations and the reasons for the decision that the US was the appropriate forum as set out above. That is a decision the US authorities are fully entitled to reach and we respect their decision.

Against this background, the joint CPS/police panel recommended to the Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police that he should not commence a new criminal investigation into Mr McKinnon. The Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police has accepted that advice.

Therefore I am very happy to remove this link now Gary McKinnon is safe from US prison life.

You can still visit the site at freegary.org.uk to get up to date information on details to any changes to the extradition treaty if and when they happen.

I just hope I can remove this campaign link for iam.bradleymanning.org as soon as possible.

View the original article I Am Bradley Manning – Help Bust Him Out Of Jail! at darkpolitricks.com

10 Years On – Was the War in Iraq Worth a Million Deaths?

March 21, 2013

10 Years On – Was the War in Iraq Worth a Million Deaths?

By Dark Politricks

As you should know by now the 10 year anniversary of the Iraq war has just passed.

The question is still hotly debated – was the war in Iraq worth it?

Was it worth the deaths of up to a million Iraqi civilians?

Was it worth the contamination of whole cities like Fallujah. Polluted so much by powerful weaponary that not only were the citizens affected but so were the soliders using the weapons.

Was it worth the new “Gulf War Syndrome” that returning soldiers are already facing. The fatigue, fevers, rashes, joint pain, intestinal problems, memory loss, mood swings, cancers and even the coughing up of blood and black goop that has been nicknamed “plume crud”?

Was it worth the deaths of so many American soldiers who were conned into thinking they were fighting al-Qaeda “over there” so they didn’t have to fight them at home?

Was it worth the debasement of the US media which parroted government press briefs as if real news. Newpapers and TV channels taking George W Bush and Dick Cheney’s word on matters that had no basis in truth. “Facts” such as the hidden WMD, Yellow Cake Uranium, or stockpiles of Anthrax waiting to be used against invading US forces. All weapons we had sold Saddam Hussein when he was “our friend” during the 80’s  for fighting a war with Iran. Weapons that for some reason he decided not to use whilst being attaacked by us. Was it worth showing the rest of the world another example of western hypocrisy?

Was it worth the destruction of all our civil liberties as suspiciously staged scare tactics such as the sending of Anthrax to US senators forced the passing of the pre-prepared PATRIOT ACT without anyone bothering to read it?

Was it worth the setting up of “Free Speech Zones” where first amendment rights that should be allowed at all places were limited to caged in areas where demonstrators could be filmed, monitored and logged onto watch lists?

Was it worth the destruction of a country that was only held together by a strong man dictator like Saddam Hussein into sectarian violence?

Iraq was a country that was created by the west after earlier wars, forcing the Kurds, Sunnis and Shi’ites to live together when logic dictated that three countries would have been a more sensible arrangement if partitioning was even required in the first place. Was it worth the continuing sectarian strife that will rock the region for years to come?

Was it worth the strengthening of Iran who has now become a major power player in the area. They now control and arm forces within Iraq as well as being linked to political parties, some of which are no better when it comes to liberty for the Iraqi people than Saddam Hussein.

Was it worth the huge dive in moral standing that the USA took when pictures of torture at Abu Ghraib came out and showed that America had stooped to the same standards as the enemies it claimed to fight on moral lines?

We only have to ask Tony Blair, a now hated figure on the world stage what it meant to him as he keeps on claiming that the world is better off without Saddam Hussein.

This is the same man who kissed Gaddafi and made up with the suspected architect of the Pan Am bombing over Lockerbie in return for oil deals and the patsy served up on a platter to serve time in a Scottish jail.

Politicians like Blair or Rumsfeld can be photographed standing next to future targets after selling them massive amounts of arms and then turn on them a few years later when their alliance based on the maxim “the enemy of your enemy is my friend” is no longer of use.

They are people who sell them the same weapons that they turn around and accusse them of having!

I wonder how “absolute” their morals relly are.

Donald Rumsfeld and best friend / arms purchaser of the 90's Saddam Hussien

What we know is that the Iraq war didn’t end when George W Bush stood on that aircraft carrier claiming that the war had ended only months after starting “shock n awe”.

Mission Accomplished

Instead the country did what all smaller armed forces do when attacked by larger forces.

They hid amongst the public and launched a guerrilla war of terror and attrition using IED’s and massive car bombs designed to kill and maim allied soldiers plus thousands of Iraqi civilians.

This is the same tactic the Taliban are using, the Viet Cong did successfully during the Vietnam war and former allies, including Osama bin-Laden, then called the Mujahideen not al-Qaeda during the Soviet war against Afghanistan.

We dragged the Iraqi peoples leader out of a hole in the ground, paraded him in front of camera’s and then tried him in front of a victors court before hanging him in front of the world.

The Iraqi resistence captured and tortured allied soldiers and contractors before cutting their heads off with knives and showing it online.

The Iraqi war showed us that the political process in supposed democratic governments and the UN is nothing more than a farce and that when the axis of war want a war they get it.

Despite the wishes of the people who marched in their millions across the world and the resignation of politicians like Robin Cook in the UK. The war was pushed through using false propaganda including the 45 minute attack time, WMD that had been sold to Iraq by our own countries, dodgy dossiers and false stories about links with al-Qaeda from dubious intelligence sources.

Don’t even get me started on the 9.11 commission which was used as a tool to drive home the need for another war against Iraq as witnesses claimed that every major terrorist act in modern times, incuding 9.11, had been backed or supported by Saddam Hussein.

Un-educated people still believe we went to war with Iraq because of the Twin Towers and not because we were worried about Saddam swapping from petrodollars to it’s own currency for oil purchases. Or the massive Halliburton contracts that were signed before hand to rebuild the country after we demolished it.

They think “the surge” worked not knowing about the £12 billion dollars that went missing due to plane loads of cash being flown in and then used to bribe tribes and insurgents into not attacking our troops. A tactic used by some allied forces in Afghanistan now.

I don’t even need to go on to the next level about false flag attacks carried out by SAS soldiers caught red handed dressed as insurgents with bombs and detonators.

Or the WikiLeaks video that caused outrage as it showed the blood lust of US pilots as they murdered reporters and civilians, shooting bursts of bullets into an ambulance that tried rescuing a survivor, and baying for an injured man to pick up a gun so they could finish him off.

Lest you think otherwise – I don’t think the war was worth it but what do you think?

Let me know your views in this poll.

View the original article on the main site Dark Politricks.

David Kelly, the KGB and conspiracy theories

July 25, 2010

By Dark Politicks

I haven’t vented my spleen on any major subject for while but today’s article in the Daily Mail about the death of David Kelly has given me another opportunity to write about a subject which I keep being drawn back to i.e conspiracy and why some people find it hard to entertain even the possibility of such events occurring especially when they involve agents of the state which is supposedly an entity that exists to protect us.

The article in the Mail reveals how an ex KGB agent who had defected to Britain was told by an MI5 agent how David Kelly had been killed by MI6 for “his reckless behaviour”.

There is a lot of evidence that supports the idea that David Kelly was killed rather than committing suicide which includes:

The supposed “death” cut to his wrist was such a cut that was

a) very hard to achieve, especially by David who had a problem with his arm and hand which meant he needed help to cut up his own food.

b) the cut to the ulnar artery was not enough to cause the loss of blood needed to kill someone especially when outside in the cold where the blood vessels would have narrowed to slow the bleed. This is backed up by 13 specialist doctors who revealed their concerns after the Hutton enquiry published it’s findings.

c) the amount of blood found at the scene where the body was found was minimal and not enough to justify the belief that severe blood loss was the cause of death.

d) the type of cut was very unusual for someone intent on committing suicide to make. No-one else died from that type of cut that year.

There is also other evidence such as:

  • the amount of painkillers found in his stomach was only a third of the amount needed to kill someone.
  • Evidence of livor mortis which reveals that Kelly had died on his back however he was reportedly found sitting up slumped against a tree.
  • The body contained a number of cuts and abrasions to the face, body and legs which are similar to those types of injuries that would be found after a fight.
  • No finger prints were found on the knife found at the scene.
  • The people who found his body claim that there wasn’t a bottle of water, knife or watch that the police say they found at the scene.
  • Contradictory evidence given by police officers to the Hutton enquiry about the number of officers at the scene.
  • His famous comment to the British ambassador that if Iraq was invaded he would “.. probably be found dead in the woods.”

And there are many more inconsistencies and discrepancies which taken together can give the impression that David Kelly’s death was not a suicide but the result of foul play.

Today’s revelation by someone in the intelligence community seems to back up this theory and we already have a number of politicians who also believe that David Kelly was silenced by the British government because of his famous leaks to Andrew Gilligan which revealed that the famous dodgy Iraq dossier was indeed “sexed up” to bolster the case for war.

The question one must ask is whether or not it is likely that David Kelly would have been killed by the British government.

As someone who considers themselves a skeptic I need to be even handed with my skepticism. Not only should I not take on face value any theory I hear, whether it be a conspiracy or not, I need to also question anything my government says or does.

I often find when I debate such topics such as the death of John F Kennedy or the 9/11 attacks that the view someone takes on the matter is never purely one based on what they actually know of the events, or historical precedence of similar events but rather what they believe or want to believe.

The primary factor which usually decides whether someone is willing to consider a conspiratorial view of a crime is whether or not they have any knowledge of previous misdeeds, lies and cover-ups committed by their government.

A lot of people are very unwilling to entertain ideas of government conspiracies as they are brought up to believe that men are just and good and that those who govern are meant to be the best of us. People who obtain high office do it so that they can serve the common good, help the poor, increase social justice and to always ensure truth wins the day never for personal reasons whether it be money, influence or power.

The intelligence agencies that are run by the supposedly benign state are not compartmentalised instruments of power that are used to manipulate overseas governments and domestic enemies at home through infiltration, propaganda and malicious attack. No instead they are unseen heroes who protect us from nasty terrorists, evil dictators and subversive home born extremists.

They could never be used by those who control them to manipulate events to the benefit of a few instead of the elected majority. Any events that are traced back to these agencies are always mistakes, oversights or signs that they need more power and money so that they can do the job right.

The answer with all things is usually that it’s a mix of both. Whilst many politicians aim to serve the common good many do not and we only need to look at history to see how politicians have been mired in scandal, deciet and lies since the ancient times of Greece and Rome.

Usually it is very hard to convince someone who has little knowledge of history that our leaders and their agencies could be used for such conspiratorial activities such as false flag attacks, assassination and media manipulation to drive the case for war. However for those of us who know history we can see that there is no logical reason to believe politicians and agents living in current times would behave any different from those from the past. Fashion, technology and events may change but the human condition remains the same and the motives that drive those who crave power are always around no matter what century we may live in.

So when we look at David Kelly’s death we can certainly rule out the possibility that our supposed civilised and just democratic government wouldn’t engage in such an event as history shows that belief to be based on nothing but wishful thinking. Just on a British note we can look over last century and take the following events as precedence to back our case:

1. The recent expenses scandal shows that a large percentage of our elected officials from all parties are always happy to enrich themselves at the expense of taxpayers. Some more than others for sure but we can certainly see that our elected officials are not the best that society can offer.

3. Tony Blair’s discussion with George Bush on how we could start a war with Iraq by lying to the public and staging a false flag attack. This involved flying a UN marked plane over Iraq and then shooting it down and blaming it on Saddam Hussein. Just the fact that they talked about carrying out such a malicious and deceitful event to start a war shows you what kind of line our leaders are prepared to cross when it comes to war.

4. The Suez crisis was another example of how our government is prepared to lie and use underhand methods to start wars. It is also an example of how our government is prepared to collude with other supposed democratic nations in events of a massive scale and to try to stage manage events which they can then take advantage of. Britain wanted to regain control of the canal which Nasser had nationalised so along with the French and Israelis they decided to start a war between Egypt and Israel in which they could then enter supposedly as “peace keepers” and in doing so they would regain control of this vital asset.

5. The assassination attempt of Colonel Gadaffi by MI6. This was revealed by an ex MI5 agent David Shayler who revealed the plot to the Independent newspaper which was immediately gagged. The plot involved MI6 paying a large sum of money to an Al Qaeda related Libyan terror cell to carry out an attack on Gadaffi in 1996. Not only does this event show our government is prepared to assassinate foreign leaders it doesn’t like it also shows how closely related our agencies have been to our supposed enemy du jour Al Qaeda. Instead of helping to bring Osama Bin Laden to justice we were helping to fund his terror cells when they helped our foreign objectives. Jump forward a few years and we were also helping the Al Qaeda funded Kosovan Liberation Army during the war in Serbia.

6. The IRA, Britains enemy for the later part of the 20th century, had been infiltrated by British agents who had obtained the highest levels within the organisation and who carried out numerous crimes including assassinations and torture on their behalf. The famous double agent Stakeknife who was a member of the Army’s Force Research Unit (FRU) was allowed to carry out up to 40 murders of loyalists, policemen, soldiers, and civilians just so he could protect his cover and keep passing top-grade intelligence to the British. He also kidnapped, interrogated, tortured and killed other IRA men suspected of being British informers. This shows us that our government is perfectly capable of infiltrating our most hardened terrorist enemies and that it is also happy for those double agents to carry out crimes of mass murder as long as they get intelligence in return.

Those were just 6 of many examples I could have given that are all backed up by publicly accessible evidence and they all relate to actual events that have occurred in our near history. When taken individually you could make an argument that it was just a one off, or a rouge element within an organisation however when taken together they show a pattern of behaviour that suggests our government is perfectly prepared to lie to the public, collude with terrorists and other governments and trade any-one’s life for intelligence if it helps obtain a political goal.

Therefore the question we must ask when it comes to David Kelly as well as to other events of a conspiratorial nature is not whether our government is capable of carrying it out but is there enough evidence to prove they did?

The obvious problem with all events like this is that evidence will be hard to find as we are dealing with professionals who deal in deception every day. Just like the Israeli Mossad whose motto is “By way of deception” our intelligence agencies are perfectly capable of committing a crime and making the evidence point elsewhere. If they weren’t then they’d be in the wrong job and we cannot every expect to find a smoking gun with MI6’s finger prints all over it.

Therefore we can only deal with the discrepancies in evidence, the loose ends and most of all look beyond the prima facie evidence of a body and a slit wrist and ask “who benefits” from the crime.

David Kelly certainly benefited if his aim was to commit suicide. He had just been outed as the source of the sexed up dossier claims revealed by the BBC and he had been threatened with the sack if he ever talked to journalists or spoke publicly about his work again. The problem with this theory is that David Kelly’s family claim he was not suicidal at the time of his death and was actually looking forward to his daughters wedding and getting back to his job.

On the other hand we have a government on the verge of war who was in the proceed of manipulating a hostile public opinion to believe that Iraq could attack British forces within 45 minutes if it so desired. Both the British government and the USA had earlier agreed to go to war and the only thing that they needed was a believable excuse. The WMD road was the chosen route and the dossier was supposed to be key evidence that would help make that case.

Therefore it was undoubtedly embarrassing that the source of claims that the evidence was sexed up was one of their own top Iraqi scientists and they certainly couldn’t trust that he wouldn’t leak some more intelligence or even quit his job and go public on everything else he might have known.

This other knowledge, which would have again been very bad for the government if made public was reportedly the story that 3 nukes were stolen on their way from South Africa to Oman by “unknown” factions.

Add to this his years of work at Porton Down on chemical and biological weapons and who knows what other inside info he might have knowledge of that the government wouldn’t want the world to know.

Obviously this is all conjecture and speculation and here lies the problem of conspiracy based crimes. We are dealing with a type of criminal who specialises in misdirection, false flag, patsies and suicides. Therefore if one did find a neat little trail of evidence back to MI6 HQ on the Thames you would only be sure of one thing and that would be the involvement of any other agency apart from MI6.

Usually it’s the suicides that involve multiple gunshots to the head that arises ones suspicion but here we have similar medical based inconsistencies. Add to that the unique political context of the crime and the “cover up” Hutton enquiry which ignored every piece of contradictory evidence and there seems to be enough weight to make a logical conclusion that the death wasn’t a suicide at least.

Today’s revelation that those in the intelligence community already know this is no surpise and lends credence to the assassination and cover up argument. We may not have the evidence yet to accurately point the finger with 100% certainty but one thing is known for sure and that is our government is perfectly capable of carrying out such a crime on one of it’s own citizens and history backs up this point of view. Anyone who believes anything different should have their head examined.

Bush knowingly kept innocent detainees at Gitmo

April 9, 2010

By Dark Politricks

Today’s article in the Times doesn’t surprise me in the slightest. Apparently Bush and Cheney knowingly kept children as young as 12 and OAP’s as old as 93 locked up at Gitmo and refused to released them in case it showed to the world what a shambles their terrorist detention scheme actually was.

Most of the innocent’s were sold to the Americas for fees of up to $5,000 which is obviously a lot of money to people in Afghanistan and Pakistan so it’s no surprise that ruthless elements of society in the aftermath of invasion managed to round up and sell on to the Americans people who had nothing to do with the “war on terror”. The USA obviously wanted to show to the world how well they were doing in rounding up the terrorists behind 9/11 so it matter little whether the prisoners were real terrorists or just taxi drivers. I can just imagine Dubya sitting there with Cheney being told about the number of innocents and him chuckling “So what, they all have brown skin and funny sounding names, Fuck em!”.

Today’s claim however is unusual in that it actually comes from an ex member of Bushes government, a Colonel Wilkerson, who was General Powell’s chief of staff when he ran the State Department. He has decided to support a lawsuit filed by an Guantánamo detainee, Adel Hassan Hamad, who is trying to sue the American government for his detention and torture at Guantánamo Bay from March 2003 until December 2007.

Referring to Mr Cheney, Colonel Wilkerson, who served 31 years in the US Army, asserted:

“He had absolutely no concern that the vast majority of Guantánamo detainees were innocent … If hundreds of innocent individuals had to suffer in order to detain a handful of hardcore terrorists, so be it.”

Apparently the innocent men and children’s detention was all worthwhile and necessary as long as a few genuine terrorists were captured as well. It seems that in the desire for war with Iraq the Bush regime would go to any lengths necessary to find any link, no matter how flimsy or coincidental between Saddam and the 9/11 attacks. As long as they could spin the tortured evidence in such as way as to “prove” to a gullible public and bought and paid for press that the Middle East’s then bad boy was actually behind the 9/11 attacks it was all gravy. They didn’t care whether the “facts” didn’t fit they just wanted some justification for their long-planned Iraqi war of aggression which reminds me of the famous quote by Albert Einstein: “If the facts don’t fit the theory, change the facts”.

Nothing surprises me much any more and I would expect nothing less from the Bush regime who seemed to have been nothing more than a cabal of right wing loons and Christian fundamentalists. They claimed to be on a mission to save the world for democracy, the problem is they killed, maimed and fucked up a lot of that world on the way.

You can read the full Times article here.

As expected the neo-cons are already defending the massacre of civilians

April 6, 2010

By Dark Politricks

I expect nothing less from those who see war in gold tinted lenses and who wish for nothing less than for the US military to conquer the whole of the Middle East either for the glory of the homeland, to help hasten the return of Jesus or to keep their Israeli controllers happy. However its still quite sickening to watch the neo-cons come out and attack WikiLeaks for showing the video of the US troops massacring civilians, reporters and young girls as “evil” as the writer of the following blog post writes:

A crowd of men surround at least two armed insurgents. The voices indicate that a Bradley and some Humvees are headed in the direction and that a recent engagement has taken place.

So, the helicopter pilot and ground controllers see armed men with a convoy approaching and taking fire and …. Wiki Leak has the nerve to call this murder?

They’ve even embedded it on a site they call “Collateral Murder.”

These people are beyond stupid, they’re evil.

Worst case scenario this is a few innocent being accidentally killed in the fog of war.

The writer a Mr Rusty Shackleford phd, who must have got his doctorate at the university of psychopathic tendencies, obviously believes that the playstation-esque massacre of a group of men who were posing no threat whatsoever to the helicopter, which can clearly be seen in the video, is well within the rules of combat.

He also sees nothing wrong with the worst part of the event by far which was when an ambulance arrives to help the sole remaining survivor of the first attack.

This is a man who is barely alive and poses no threat to anyone due to the numerous bullets already riddling his body and who is slowly dying and barely crawling along the ground trying to get to safety.

The van arrives and two men get out and try to help the injured reporter by carrying him to what they perceive to be safety i.e the back of the vehicle. All the while the blood thirsty pilots in the helicopter are itching to be given another order to fire and you can hear one pilot just begging for the near dead sole survivor to “just pick up a weapon” so that they could shoot again without requiring a further order.

When the order to fire does come from some far away camp, given by a soldier who could not know the true nature of the situation, the pilots almost come in their pants at the opportunity to once again open fire on far away figures as if it was an arcade game they were playing with their friends. The circle the building and open fire killing the remaining survivor and his two helpers as well as injuring a young girl who is in the ambulance.

Rusty obviously believes this act was well within the call of duty and a task befitting for heroes and he has no time for those who dare help their fellow injured man saying that they deserve to die.

As for those who went in to pick up the bodies? Perhaps they were innocents. I’ve no idea.

But you drive your van into an active military engagement? What the hell were you thinking?

You are stupid. Innocent, but stupid. You’re asking to be killed.

I thought the initial video was enough to ruin my day but reading what some pro-war commentators think about this act is even worse. Some people have no shame.

If you haven’t seen the massacre video yet then I suggest you hold your stomach and watch it now and then forward it on to everyone you know.