TERRORISM? WHO IS REALLY BEHIND IT ALL?
by Steve, author of this website:
The following is a comprehensive study of the CORRUPTION OF WESTERN GOVERNMENTS, WHICH MAKE THE RECENT MANCHESTER BOMBING, LOOK VERY MINOR BY COMPARISION
TO THE TERRIBLE CARNAGE BEING WREAKED ON A WORLD WIDE SCALE BY THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX & YET IGNORED BY ALL THE MAIN MEDIA, AS THEY PUT 99.99% OF THE WESTERN
POPULATION TO SLEEP, & PRETEND TO REALLY CARE ABOUT A LOCAL DISASTER IN MANCHESTER; AND YET SAY NOTHING OF ALL THE OTHER BOMBINGS PERPORTRATED BY WESTERN GOVERNMENTS
ON THE INNOCENT MEN WOMEN AND CHILDREN OF SYRIA & OTHER MIDDLE-EAST COUNTRIES. A very thorough article, howbeit very sad and tragic:-
by Raul Ilargi Meijer via The Automatic Earth blog,
There are times when you have to talk about things when it appears most inopportune to do so, because they’re the only times people might listen.
Times when people will argue that ‘this is not the right moment’, while in reality it’s the only moment.
A solid 99% of people will have been filled, and rightly so of course, with
a mixture of disgust, disbelief and infinite sadness when hearing of yet another attack on civilians in Europe, this one in Manchester. An equally solid 99% will have failed to recognize that
while the event was unique for the city of Manchester, it was by no means unique for the world, not even at the time it happened.
Though the footage of parents desperately trying to find their children, and the news that one of the dead was just 8 years
old, touches everyone in more or less the same place in our hearts, by far most of us miss out on the next logical step. In a wider perspective, it is easy to see that parents crying for missing children, and children killed in infancy, is
what connects Manchester, and the UK, and Europe, to parents in Syria, Libya, Iraq.
What’s different between these places is not the suffering or the outrage, the mourning or the despair, what’s different is only the location
on the map. That and the frequency with which terror is unleashed upon a given population. But just because it happens all the time in other places doesn’t make it more normal or acceptable.
It’s the exact same thing, the exact same experience, and still a vast majority of people don’t, choose not to, feel it as such. Which is curious when you think about it. In
the aftermath of a terror attack, the mother of a missing, maimed or murdered child undergoes the same heartbreak no matter where they are in the world (“I hope the Russians love their children too”). But the empathy, the compassion, is
hardly acknowledged in Britain at all, let alone shared.
Not that it couldn’t be. Imagine that our papers and TV channels would tell us, preferably repeatedly, in their reports in the wake of an attack like the one in Manchester how eerily
similar the emotions must be to those felt in Aleppo, Homs and many other cities. That would change our perception enormously. But the media choose not to make the connection, and the people apparently are not capable of doing it themselves.
of that changes the fact, however, that British lives are not more valuable than Syrian and Libyan ones. Not even when we’ve gotten used to ‘news’ about bombings and drone attacks executed for years now by US-led coalitions,
or the images of children drowning when they flee the area because of these attacks.
The overall theme here is that 99.9% of people everywhere in the world are innocent, especially when they are children,
but their governments and their societies are not. That doesn’t justify the Manchester attack in any shape or form, it simply lays equal blame and condemnation for western terror attacks in the Middle East and North Africa, perpetrated
by the people we elect into power.
This is something people in the west pay no attention to. It’s easier that way, and besides our media with great enthusiasm pave the way for our collective ignorance, by calling some other group of people ‘terrorists’,
which while they’re at it is supposed to justify killing some other mother’s child.
There’s another thing that is also different: they didn’t start. We did. The British and French terrorized the region for many decades, since
the 19th century, even way before the Americans joined in. The presence of oil, and its rising role in our economies, caused them to double down on that terror.
Yes, it’s awkward to talk about this on the eve of a deadly attack, and it’s
easy to find arguments and rhetoric that appear to deflect responsibility. But at the same time this truly is the only moment we can hope that anyone will listen. And lest we forget, the UK carries an outsized share of the responsibility in this tragedy, both
historically and in the present.
You can say things about the city coming together, or the country coming together, or “not allowing terrorists to affect our way of life”, but perhaps it should instead really be all the mothers
who have children missing or dying, wherever they live, coming together. They all see their ways of life affected, and many on a daily basis.
Those mothers in Syria and Libya, who have been through the same hellhole as those in Manchester,
are a lot closer to you than the politicians who send out jet fighters to bomb cities in the desert, or sell arms to individuals and organizations to control these cities for their own narrow personal gain, such as the governments of Saudi Arabia and Turkey.
The traumatized mothers in the desert are not your enemies; your enemies are much closer to home. Still, most of you will tend to react to fear and panic by looking for protection in exactly
those circles that are least likely to provide it. The UK government under Theresa May, like those of Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron before, is as cynically eager as their predecessors to send bombers into the desert, and sell arms to those living
We can illustrate all this with a few bits of news. First, the US-led coalotion, of which the UK is a substantial part, killed more civilians in Syria than at any time since they
started bombing the country almost 3 years ago. They keep saying they don’t target civilians, but to put it mildly they don’t appear to go out of their way not to hit them. For instance, a single attack on Mosul, Iraq in March killed over 105 civilians.
‘Collateral damage’ in these cases, and there are hundreds by now, is a very disrespectful term. Moreover, the files released by Chelsea Manning show US soldiers killing people ‘with impunity’.
Deadliest Month For Syria Civilians In US-Led Strikes
And it’s not as if the British didn’t or couldn’t know what was going
on. That was clear as early as 2003, when Tony Blair couldn’t wait to join the Bush coalition to invade Iraq on the false premise of weapons of mass destruction. Before Libya was invaded, which led to Hillary’s disgusting ‘we came
we saw he died’, Gaddafi, the one who did die, warned Blair about what would happen. It indeed did, which makes Blair a guilty man.
Gaddafi Warned Blair His Ousting Would ‘Open Door’ To Jihadis
What they are guilty of is no more and no less than Manchester. No hyperbole, but a warning from Blair’s
own intelligence services back in 2003. The real weapons of mass destruction were not in Iraq, but in the White House and Downing Street no. 10. The CIA issued warnings similar to this.
British Intelligence Warned Tony
Blair Of Manchester-Like Terrorism If The West Invaded Iraq
Not long behind Blair came David Cameron, a man after
Cameron Brags Of ‘Brilliant’ UK Arms Trade As
EU Embargoes Saudi Arabia
British MPs from Cameron’s own party didn’t like it either, but what meaning does that have if it takes 5 years to issue a report, and moreover he can simply refuse to
MPs Deliver Damning
Verdict On David Cameron’s Libya Intervention
It seems obvious
that if there were an impartial international body with the power to prosecute, Bush, Cheney, Blair, Cameron, Hillary etc. etc. (don’t forget France) would be charged with war crimes. And Obama too: his ‘shitshow’ comment
must be seen in light of the ‘we came we saw he died’ comment by Hillary Clinton, his Secretary of State. Think he didn’t know what was happening?
Another person who should be charged is Theresa May, Cameron’s Home Secretary
from May 2010 till July 2016, and of course Britain’s present PM, who sells as much weaponry to Saudi Arabia as she possibly can while the Saudi’s are shoving the few Yemeni’s they leave alive back beyond the Stone Age. And then May has the
gall to talk about humanitarian aid.
Theresa May Defends UK Ties With Saudi Arabia
The one person who would probably not be in front of such a court is Jeremy Corbyn, opponent of May’s in the June 8 elections. Though there is the issue that he never protested in much stronger terms as an MP. Still, if you have to pick
one of the two, what is not obvious?
Theresa May Claims Selling Arms To Saudi Arabia Helps ‘Keep People On The Streets Of Britain Safe’
May’s, and Britain’s, utterly mad stance in this is perhaps best exemplified, in one sentence, by her comments during the speedy trip
she made to Turkey, again to sell more arms to an at best highly questionable regime. Why do it, why drag your entire nation through the moral gutter for $100 million or a few billion? The military industrial complex.
Theresa May Signs £100m Fighter Jet Deal With Turkey’s Erdogan
And once again, no, none
of this justifies the Manchester bombing. Neither a government nor an extremist movement has any right to kill innocent people. But let’s make sure we know that neither does.
aspect to the story. MI6 had close links to the Libyan community in Manchester.
‘Sorted’ by MI5: How UK Government Sent British-Libyans To Fight Gaddafi
Torture one day, passports the other. Lovely. And it still gets better: MI6 didn’t just have close contacts with Libyans in Manchester, it knew the alleged perpetrator’s family,
and used his father multiple times as on operative:
Manchester Attack as MI6 Blowback
Luckily, perhaps the Brits are not that stupid:
Half of Britons Blame UK’s Foreign Wars for Terror Attacks at Home
If that is true, Theresa May obviously should have no chance of winning. May can and will try to use the horror of Manchester, and the subsequent pause in the campaign,
to strengthen her position in the upcoming election, by playing on people’s fear and making them believe she’s in control. Even if the very attack itself makes clear that she’s not. The Tories have already attacked Corbyn for saying their
policies have failed; it was the wrong time to say that, according to them.
But it’s not. It’s the very best time. This is when people pay attention. And having this discussion doesn’t
disrespect the victims of Manchester. If anything, it shows more respect than not having the discussion. Because you want to make sure this doesn’t happen again, neither here nor there. And to achieve that, you have to look at why these
An 8-year old child in Manchester, just like one in Mosul or Aleppo, is innocent. Yourself, perhaps not so much. The politicians you vote into power, and the media you read and watch to
inform you, not a chance. Guilty as hell.