Quote:Fake BBC Video

by craig on October 7, 2013 11:35 am in Uncategorized
Irrefutable evidence of a stunning bit of fakery by the BBC:
In this version the medic being interviewed says about the 2 minute mark:
"..It's just absolute chaos and carnage here, erm we've had a massive influx of
what looks like serious burns, er seems like it must be some sort of chemical
weapon, I'm not really sure.."
In this version she says it is at about 2 mins 20 seconds in this edit:
"..It's just absolute chaos and carnage here, erm we've had a massive influx of
what looks like serious burns, er seems like it must be some sort of, I'm not
really sure, maybe napalm, something similar to that.."
The disturbing thing is the footage of the doctor talking is precisely the same each time. It is edited so as to give the impression the medic is talking in real time in her natural voice there are none of the accepted devices used to indicate a voiceover translation. But it must be true that in at least one, and possibly both, the clips she is not talking in real time in her own voice. It is very hard to judge as her mouth and lips are fully covered throughout. Perhaps neither of the above is what she actually said.

Terrible things are happening all the time in Syria's civil war, between Assad's disparate forces and still more disparate opposition forces, and innocent people are suffering. There are dreadful crimes against civilians on all sides. I have no desire at all to downplay or mitigate that. But once you realise the indisputable fact of the fake interview the BBC has put out, some of the images in this video begin to be less than convincing on close inspection too.

Magda Hassan Wrote:Some very interesting information on media manipulation, non disclosure and possible BBC complicity in advocating for a Syria attack in support of the FSA. Some information comes from Peter Presland's Wikispooks page on Dr Rola. Some considered speculation below that.

Quote:Who is Dr Rola?


Dr Rola - BBC Newsnight, 30 August 2013


Dr Rola Hallem MBBS, BSc, FRCA

From her 'role of honour' entry on the ATFAL website:

Rola is a doctor in anaesthesia and intensive care, with a passion for education, child and global health. Drawing on her previous charitable work in sub-Saharan Africa, Rola has been working since the beginning of the Syria crisis on delivery of aid to Syria, raising awareness and advocacy.

Dr Rola Alkurdi FRCA

This page suggests Dr Rola Alkurdi, "Education Fellow + Registrar in Anaesthesia"[SUP][1][/SUP].
Appearances

BBC Newsnight on 30 August 2013

Introduced to BBC Newsnight viewers as "A British Doctor just back from volunteering in Syria who wants to be called 'Dr Rola'" an attractive thirty-something lady described her experience of an alleged napalm attack in Aleppo, Syria as "...one of the most horrific few hours of my life". Speaking in an educated English - with just a trace of East Midlands - accent, she gave a bravura, restrained-emotional performance describing the horrors she had witnessed and advocating Western military intervention in support of Syrian anti-government forces. It is not too much of a stretch to say that, had her interview been broadcast before the UK House of Commons vote which had declined military action a few hours earlier, the outcome may well have been different. Her performance was that persuasive. Her access to funding for her cause is clearly no problem because, during the interview she pointedly offered to host a 7 day visit by Ed Milliband and his family to Aleppo "... to see for himself and at my expense" [SUP][2][/SUP]
BBC Panorama Footage

In separate BBC Panorama footage which included video described as 'unverified' but shown nonetheless, a female introduced as "An English Doctor" was filmed in Aleppo in the claimed aftermath of the alleged attack. In a related Daily Telegraph article she was again described as an 'English Doctor working at a London Hospital' and volunteering for relief work in Syria through 'Hand-in-Hand-for-Syria' [SUP][3][/SUP]. Towards the end of the video she opined in an impeccably Estuary English accent "The whole world has failed our nation" - so, is she Syrian or English?
Although not explicitly stated, the strong impression conveyed in the Newsnight piece is that these two women are one and the same person, but the video clearly shows that they are different people. So who is she? because she is certainly NOT the Newsnight Dr Rola.
The Nurse Nayirah affair

To those who remember the run-up to the first Iraq war in 1990, it carried disturbing echoes of the Nurse Nayirah episode, in which the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the US, anonymously and fraudulently claimed that she had witnessed Iraqi troops "throwing new-born babies from incubators and leaving them to die on the cold floor". She had been coached by the US PR firm Hill & Knowlton, retained by the Kuwait government to make the case for war, and her father sat behind her as she delivered her testimony (as simply a volunteer 'student nurse' who, for security reasons, wished to remain anonymous) before the US Congress.
Public right to know

You do not volunteer to appear on the flag-ship BBC Politics TV program advocating for a military bombing campaign with any realistic expectation - let alone right - to remain anonymous.
The use of medical, charitable and otherwise altruistic credentials as qualifications to advocate for military intervention of ANY kind - let alone the sort of cowardly stand-off high-tech carnage Dr Rola was effectively shilling for on BBC Newsnight is, by any civilised standard, deeply offensive behaviour.
In the fraught circumstances of a rising drum-beat crescendo for military intervention in Syria, the public has an absolute right to know exactly who Dr Rola is and what her connection are.
Request for information

Please send any relevant information to:

• admin[at]wikispooks.org - PGP public key or
  
• use the anonymous upload/contact form
  
• Twitter hash-tag #WhoIsDrRola
  

Anti-Israeli Torture Letter

Dr Rola Alkurdi was one of 725 doctors who signed a 2009 open letter demanding the dismissal of newly-appointed WMA president, Dr Yoram Blachar because of Israeli doctors complicity in the torture of Palestinians [SUP][4][/SUP]


See Also

• Nurse_Nayirah
  
• Hand in Hand for Syria
  

References

• ↑ UCL Staff page
  
• ↑ Syria crisis: Doctor criticises Miliband over MPs' vote - BBC News 31 August 2013
  
• ↑ Syria: BBC Panorama films 'napalm' attack on school - Telegraph Friday 30 August 2013
  
• ↑ Torture-row doctors stick the knife in
  

Deputy leader of Free Syrian Army is Colonel Malik al-Kurdi. Same name as the doctor in the BBC Panorama and Newsnight. Is the BBC not disclosing family connections? Dr Rola is not responding to emails nor is the BBC producer or camera man. Is the BBC being used by some in the UK government to promote a war with Syria by using staged interviews with players who seek and will personally benefit from a war? A la Kuwait and the 'incubator babies story' Shocking abuse of medical and charitable goodwill if this is the case.

Interestingly the Free Syrian Army was formed in July/August 2011. Its founding statement said that it sought to "...work hand in hand with the people to achieve freedom and dignity,topple the regime, protect the revolution and the country's resources and stand up to the irresponsible military machine which is protecting the regime."Is the use of the phrase "hand in hand" in the name of the UK registered charity that Rola works for a coincidence?

In the latest Panorama film clip about this story http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-23892594 it was supposed to be the school holidays (which runs from 27 June to 1 September) why were the children at school during the Syrian school holidays? No response from any one at BBC or the doctor.

Someone else we would like to know more about is Saleyha Ahsan who is a filmmaker, doctor and graduate of Sandhurst military college. Served in Bosnia. Left military in 2000 still likes to go to conflicts. She has also appeared in the most recent BBC Panorama programme on Syria. Her media managers here: http://knightayton.co.uk/female-presenters/saleyha-ahsan
http://oneworldaction.wordpress.com/100-unseen-powerful-women/arts-and-media/saleyha-ahsan/

Ralph Peters

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


This article is about the military officer, novelist and essayist. For the president of the Long Island Rail Road, see Ralph Peters (LIRR).
[TABLE="class: infobox biography vcard, width: 22"]
[TR]
[TH="colspan: 2, align: center"]Ralph Peters[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Born[/TH]
[TD]April 19, 1952 (age 61)
Pottsville, Pennsylvania, US[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Nationality[/TH]
[TD="class: category"]United States[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Ethnicity[/TH]
[TD="class: category"]Welsh and German[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Citizenship[/TH]
[TD="class: category"]United States[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Education[/TH]
[TD]St. Mary's University, Texas,[SUP][1][/SUP]M.A. (international relations), 1988[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Alma mater[/TH]
[TD]Pennsylvania State University[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Occupation[/TH]
[TD="class: role"]Retired U.S. Army officer
Military analyst, writer[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Home town[/TH]
[TD]Schuylkill Haven, Pennsylvania, U.S.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Political party[/TH]
[TD="class: org"]Independent[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Spouse(s)[/TH]
[TD]Janice (nee Stickler) Peters (divorced)
Marion Ann Martin (divorced)
Katherine McIntire (June 4, 1994 present)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Parents[/TH]
[TD]Ralph Heinrich Peters
Alice Catherine (née Parfitt) Peters[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Ralph Peters (born 1952) is a retired United States Army Lieutenant Colonel and author. As a novelist he has sometimes written under the pen name Owen Parry.

Contents

[hide]

• 1 Personal
  
• 2 Military career
  
• 3 Writing career
  
• 4 Views
  • 4.1 Role of United States military
    
  • 4.2 Iraq war
    
  • 4.3 Redrawing borders and regime change
    
  • 4.4 Afghanistan
    • 4.4.1 Bowe Bergdahl
      
    
    
  • 4.5 Donald Rumsfeld
    
  • 4.6 WikiLeaks
    
  
  
• 5 Awards
  
• 6 Books
  • 6.1 Novels
    
  • 6.2 Nonfiction
    
  
  
• 7 References
  
• 8 External links
  

Personal[edit]

Peters was born in Pottsville, Pennsylvania and grew up in nearby Schuylkill Haven. His father was a coal miner and unsuccessful businessman. His wife, Katherine McIntire Peters, is a reporter for Government Executive magazine (a property of National Journal Group, Inc.).

Military career[edit]

Peters enlisted in the Army in 1976, after attending Pennsylvania State University.[SUP][2][/SUP]
Peters' first assignment was in Germany. After returning from Germany, he attended Officer Candidate School and received a commission in 1980.[SUP][3][/SUP][SUP][4][/SUP] Subsequently, he served with 1st Battalion, 46th Infantry Regiment, then part of the 1st Armored Division.[SUP][5][/SUP]
Peters spent ten years in Germany working in military intelligence. He later became a Foreign Area Officer, specializing in the Soviet Union. He attended the Command and General Staff College. His last assignment was to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence. He retired in 1998 as a Lieutenant Colonel.

Writing career[edit]

Peters's first novel was Bravo Romeo, a spy thriller set in West Germany, and was published in 1981. Since then his novels progressed from futuristic scenarios involving the Red Army to contemporary terrorism and failed state issues. His characters are often presented as military mavericks who have the knowledge and courage to tackle problems others cannot or will not. His novel, The War After Armageddon, was released in 2009. In 2008 he published the non-fiction Looking for Trouble: Adventures in a Broken World. He is a regular contributor to the military history magazine, Armchair General Magazine, and he also serves on its Advisory Board.[SUP][citation needed][/SUP]
He has published numerous essays on strategy in military journals such as Parameters, Military Review, and Armed Forces Journal, reports for the United States Marine Corps (see Center for Emerging Threats and Opportunities), formerly wrote a regular opinion column for theNew York Post, and has written essays and columns for USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, Newsweek, The Weekly Standard, The Washington Monthly and Army magazine. Peters is a member of the Board of Contributors for USA Today's Forum Page, part of the newspaper's Opinion section.

Views[edit]

Role of United States military[edit]

Peters' 1997 article "Constant Conflict"[SUP][6][/SUP][SUP][7][/SUP] stated: "There will be no peace. At any given moment for the rest of our lifetimes, there will be multiple conflicts in mutating forms around the globe. Violent conflict will dominate the headlines, but cultural and economic struggles will be steadier and ultimately more decisive. The de facto role of the US armed forces will be to keep the world safe for our economy and open to our cultural assault. To those ends, we will do a fair amount of killing."

Iraq war[edit]

Peters was a strong supporter of the 2003 invasion and ongoing war in Iraq. Defending the war from critics who claimed that Iraq was descending into civil war, he authored a March 5, 2006 piece in the New York Post, entitled "Dude, Where's My Civil War?", in which he wrote: "I'm looking for the civil war that The New York Times declared. And I just can't find it (...) The Iraqi Army has confounded its Western critics, performing extremely well last week. And the people trust their new army to an encouraging degree."[SUP][8][/SUP] Claims that Iraq was descending into civil war, he wrote, were the politically motivated claims of "irresponsible journalists" who have "staked their reputations on Iraq's failure". By August 2006, Peters had turned more pessimistic on Iraq, stating in an interview with FrontPageMagazine.com that "civil war is closer than it was (...) The leaders squabble, the death squads rule the neighborhoods." He said that while it would be "too early to walk away from Iraq", the fate of the country was threatened by the US's failure after the invasion to provide adequate troop levels to maintain order, as well as "the Arab genius for screwing things up."[SUP][9][/SUP]
On November 2, 2006, he wrote in USA Today: "Iraq is failing. No honest observer can conclude otherwise. Even six months ago, there was hope. Now the chances for a democratic, unified Iraq are dwindling fast (...) Iraq could have turned out differently. It didn't. And we must be honest about it. We owe that much to our troops. They don't face the mere forfeiture of a few congressional seats but the loss of their lives. Our military is now being employed for political purposes. It's unworthy of our nation." In this piece he speculated that "only a military coup which might come in the next few years could hold the artificial country together" and that "it appears that the cynics were right: Arab societies can't support democracy as we know it."[SUP][10][/SUP]
Following the 2006 US Congressional election, Peters wrote: "It's going to be hard. The political aim of the Democrats will be to continue talking a good game while avoiding responsibility through '08. They'll send up bills they know Bush will veto. And they'll struggle to hide the infighting in their own ranks Dem unity on this war is about as solid as the unity of Iraq. Now that they've won on the issue, the Dems would like Iraq to just go away. But it won't. And they've got to avoid looking weak on defense, so the military will get more money for personnel, at least. But we won't get a comprehensive plan to deal with Iraq or, for that matter, our global struggle with Islamist terrorists. No matter how many troops we send, we're bound to fail if the troops aren't allowed to fight under the leadership of combat commanders, not politically attuned bureaucrats in uniform. At present, neither party's leaders want to face the truth about warfare that it can't be done on the cheap and that war can't be waged without shedding blood."[SUP][11][/SUP]
Peters was opposed to what became the Iraq War troop surge of 2007 when it was first proposed. In October 2006 he wrote, "the notion of sending more U.S. troops is strategic and practical nonsense. Had the same voices demanded another 100,000-plus troops in 2003 or even 2004, it would have made a profound, positive difference. Now it's too late."[SUP][12][/SUP] By July 2007, he had changed his mind, writing that U.S. troops were making "serious progress against al-Qaeda-in-Iraq and other extremists", and that while "Iraq's a mess", "we've finally got a general in Baghdad Dave Petraeus who's doing things right."[SUP][13][/SUP]
In January 2008, on the first anniversary of the troop surge, he wrote that "the political progress has been remarkable", adding: "Determined to elect a Democrat president, the 'mainstream' media simply won't accept our success. 'Impartial' journalists find a dark cloud in every silver lining in Iraq. And the would-be candidates themselves continue to insist that we should abandon Iraq immediately as if time had stood still for the past year while hoping desperately for a catastrophe in Baghdad before November. These are the pols who insisted that the surge didn't have a chance. And nobody calls 'em on it."[SUP][14][/SUP]
By 2009, Peters again became optimistic about Iraq. In July 2009, a day before the Iraqi Kurdistan legislative election he wrote, "for all of Iraq's remaining problems and they're vast it looks more and more as if 'Bush's Folly' may work out." He added, "We've all come a long way since the dark days of 2006." He also praised Jawad al-Bolani, head of the Interior Ministry, whom he called, "in the context of Iraq... a miracle worker." He praised the Kurdistan election, calling it "a horse-race toward accountability and transparency."[SUP][15][/SUP]

Redrawing borders and regime change[edit]

Before and after maps from "Blood borders: How a better Middle East would look", Armed Forces Journal, June 2006.

In a February 2008 column, Peters called for giving the majority-Serb enclave in northernKosovo to Serbia, calling it a "cancerous issue" that "just promises further conflict down the road like forcing an ex-husband and -wife to share an apartment after a savage divorce."[SUP][16][/SUP] Regarding Iraq, he wrote, "might it not have been wiser as several of us suggested in 2003 to shake off Europe's vicious legacies and give Kurds their state, Iraqi Shias their state, and the country's Sunni Arabs a rump Iraq to do with as they wished?" Regarding all these countries, he wrote, "We needn't launch an endless war to fix the mess Europeans in pinstriped trousers left us but we'd damned well better accept that, when we expend blood and treasure to prop up phony states, we're standing on the tracks in front of the speeding train of history."[SUP][16][/SUP]
In a column for Armchair General Magazine, he wrote in support of regime change in Syria, Iran and Pakistan: "Syria's determination to develop nuclear weapons apes Iran's and North Korea's nuke programs, as well as Pakistan's successful bid to join the club of nuclear powers ... Given a choice between taking out Osama Bin Laden and his entire leadership network and eliminating renegade nuclear engineers, the latter option might do far more for our long-term security."[SUP][17][/SUP]

Afghanistan[edit]

In February 2009 Peters called for U.S. troops to be pulled out of Afghanistan, writing, "we've mired ourselves by attempting to modernize a society that doesn't want to be and cannot be transformed." He continued, "We needed to smash our enemies and leave. Had it proved necessary, we could have returned later for another punitive mission. Instead, we fell into the great American fallacy of believing ourselves responsible for helping those who've harmed us."[SUP][18][/SUP]

Bowe Bergdahl[edit]

Peters expressed sympathy for POW Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl's family, but speculated (Fox News, July 19, 2009) that Bergdahl might be "an apparent deserter ... if he walked away from his post and his buddies in wartime I don't care how hard it sounds as far as I'm concerned the Taliban can save us a lot of legal hassles and legal bills." He characterized Bergdahl's description (in the Taliban produced video) of U.S. military behavior in Afghanistan as collaboration with the enemy, even if coerced.[SUP][19][/SUP] Peters hoped Bergdahl would be reunited with his family, but argued that the media had glorified one captured soldier who Peter's claimed had shamed his unit and lied, while ignoring genuine heroes and casualties (The O'Reilly Factor, July 21).[SUP][20][/SUP]

Donald Rumsfeld[edit]

Peters was quoted as saying, in regards to former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld: "I am allergic to Rumsfeld. We did a great thing in Iraq, but we did it very badly. He is an extremely talented man but he has the tragic flaw of hubris. His arrogance is unbearable. My friends in uniform just hate him."[SUP][21][/SUP]

WikiLeaks[edit]

In view of WikiLeaks' release of United States diplomatic cables in late 2010, Peters called for the assassination of Julian Assange on FOX News, accusing him of being a cyber-terrorist guilty of crimes against humanity. In this context he claimed that WikiLeaks puts aid workers, human rights workers, journalists and dissidents at risk of torture, assassination and rape.[SUP][22][/SUP]

Magda Hassan Wrote:An old tried and true tactic called Balkanisation. Divide and conquer.

Quote:

The Ghouta chemical weapons came from the Turkish Army




VOLTAIRE NETWORK | 17 SEPTEMBER 2013 FRANÇAIS ESPAÑOL DEUTSCH РУССКИЙ عربي ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΆ

The TV channel Al-Ikbariya broadcasted, on Sunday the 15th of September 2013, a long interview of a prisoner reporting on the way that he had transported chemical weapons from a Turkish military base to Damascus.According to his report, the Turkish army was aiming to provoke an international intervention against Syria.This limited bombing would have been accompanied by a vast communication campaign.This broadcast was followed by a debate between general Ali Maksoud and the political specialist, Thierry Meyssan, regarding Turkey's implication in the conflict and Russia's proposal that Syria should sign the Convention against the use of chemical weapons.
Translation
Alizée Ville

Magda Hassan Wrote:Peter P, don't know if you had something to do with bringing this to Craig's attention but he is on to it as well Though there have been several other instances of video fakery as in Libya too.

Magda Hassan Wrote:Some very interesting information on media manipulation, non disclosure and possible BBC complicity in advocating for a Syria attack in support of the FSA. Some information comes from Peter Presland's Wikispooks page on Dr Rola. Some considered speculation below that.

Quote:Politics / GeoPolitics Sep 29, 2013 - 10:26 AM GMT By: Ron_Holland

"They are living beyond their means and shifting a part of the weight of their problems to the world economy. They are living like parasites off the global economy and their monopoly of the dollar. If [in America] there is a systemic malfunction, this will affect everyone. Countries like Russia and China hold a significant part of their reserves in American securities. There should be other reserve currencies." Vladimir Putin in 2011

While I hate to give such praise to a foreign leader, Putin has undoubtedly run rings around the moribund and bureaucratic incompetence of the Laurel and Hardy-style Obama and Kerry team on Syria. Putin diplomatically has the swiftness and stealth of the South's Stonewall Jackson and Germany's Erwin Rommel, probably the two greatest military commanders in world history.

What Really Happened on the Night of Friday, August 30th?

"At one point last week in the charade known as 'the Syria peace negotiations', John Kerry, the US Secretary of State, announced solemnly, 'This is not a game.' Well, he was wrong there. This certainly is a game: the trouble is that Barack Obama is trying to pretend that it's chess, while Vladimir Putin plays hard-faced poker." Janet Daley
My question is: What motivated the sudden, overnight change of mind by Obama himself seemingly only hours away from a military strike on al Assad and Syria? It appears to have caught his advisors and the military totally by surprise.
Yes, thanks to the Internet Reformation, the administration was not able to manipulate public opinion and the people and Congress were increasingly opposed to the minimal military action, though this has never stopped a Washington attack before. Even the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) efforts came to naught and the US backed down from the attack. I believe both Russia and China covertly played the Treasury debt card in order to protect their client states, Syria and Iran, from the impending US invasion. An attack would undoubtedly have escalated with troops on the ground, opening the way for a land assault against Iran, the ultimate real target. After all, the gas pipeline for Washington's Sunni client states that even offering to pay for the military action is far less important than taking Iran down.

But Putin Always Wins

"Though fraud in all other actions be odious, yet in matters of war it is laudable and glorious, and he who overcomes his enemies by stratagem is as much to be praised as he who overcomes them by force." Niccolo Machiavelli

If you follow Putin's career it is apparent that he overcomes difficulties often through strategy rather than direct force. I'll bet he has Machiavelli's The Prince in his personal library. Russia, China and Putin had a lot to lose if the US had engaged and been drawn into occupying Syria proper.

First, Iran would have been open for land invasion, as northern Iraq is under Kurdish control and the Kurds would have welcomed a US ground attack targeting Tabriz and northern Iran, freeing their brother Kurds there and helping to expand and create ultimately a Kurdistan state.

Second, this would put the American forces on the border of the former Soviet republics of Azerbaijan and Armenia, thus threatening Russian influence in the area.
Third, unlike the United States with hundreds of bases around the world, Russia has only one base outside the old Soviet republics and sphere of influence and this is a naval base in Tartus, Syria. The loss of this base would result in a tremendous decline of prestige and influence in the Arab world, a region where both Russia and China seek to gain influence to counter the American occupation and control of the oil and gas resources there.

My Scenario

"At this point, China owns approximately 1.275 trillion dollars of our debt, and Russia owns approximately 138 billion dollars of our debt." Michael Snyder

Remember, national leaders never threaten other nations or leaders directly because all major political leaders and politicians require plausible deniability if things go wrong. They need the ability to deny blame, knowledge and responsibility for a failure but still have the opportunity to get the job done and when helpful take credit for a success or victory. Giving the responsibility for communication or action to a lower level bureaucracy or individual where instructions are verbal or inaccessible takes care of the problem.

Although I have no proof, I believe it is likely that financial intermediaries or lower level central banking contacts dropped the hint to their American counterparts that China and Russia were likely to begin liquidating Treasury obligations should Washington go ahead with it's planned military adventure against Syria.

This is best explained in Michael Snyder's September 6 article at The Economic Collapse, "Who Is Going To Buy Our Debt If This War Causes China, Russia And The Rest Of The World To Turn On Us?"

I would suggest that Putin's apparent last minute Chemical Weapons "deal" was just a face-saving gift for the Obama Administration in order to provide cover and a reasonable excuse for the sudden change of orders to halt the Syria attack. I'll also bet that this deal had been worked out long before it was offered to Obama. I will discuss more about Putin's Debt Card at the upcoming High Alert Investment Conference in October (see highalertconference.com).

Putin wins again. He gets the credit for stopping the US; Russia, as usual, never fires a shot and Washington retreats. You'll know whether I'm right on Putin playing the debt card if on occasion, with very important questions on global affairs and diplomacy, America begins to slowly retreat as do all empires when they overreach economically and begin to decline militarily.

I'm sure Putin also reads Sun Tzu and his ancient Chinese military treatise, The Art of War, so read the two quotes below and tell me what you think.

"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting."

"Build your opponent a golden bridge to retreat across."

In closing, a word of advice to Obama and the elites of both the Democrat and Republican parties: You play poker with Vladimir Putin at your peril and that of our nation.

Quote:

the theatre of war

by craig on october 8, 2013 9:14 pm in uncategorizedmy last post on the bbc footage of syrian casualties and the different versions of what the doctor said has brought me a deluge of emails, not least from the guardian who have been in touch with the bbc and, if the guardian can get over its phobia at ever mentioning me at all, will doubtless produce a "craig murray is a conspiracy theorist" piece. It would be unethical for me to reveal what the bbc said ahead of the guardian, but i might point out that in a large amount of verbiage they completely failed to address or admit the point that they showed two different versions of what the doctor said.
Close inspection of the two different versions, by numerous commenters and for which i am grateful, reveals that there were actually two or more takes of this scene. The easiest tell is the arm position of the man in the fluorescent jacket next to the doctor.
Actually, that is much worse than if it were overdubbing. What this means is, that what is portrayed as a live action piece with casualties being rushed in, was actually a rehearsed piece of which several takes were done. Rehearsed because, with the exception of the words napalm and chemical weapons, the words are precisely the same, which is not easy spontaneously especially under that kind of stress.
This raises some even weirder questions. In a hospital where dozens of desperately wounded casualties are at that moment being rushed in for life-saving treatment, this british doctor not only has time to talk to the bbc, but to do several takes? Is that not extremely strange? Furthermore, nobody else in the courtyard is wearing a face mask. If the doctor has time to do several takes with the bbc, why on earth has she not slipped off her mask to talk? Is it for theatrical effect, to give the impression of someone just rushed from the theatre, as opposed to someone doing several takes for the bbc?
The bbc report says specifically the doctors were "overwhelmed". In which case how on earth could the bbc even ask them to do several takes of an interview in the middle of the crisis? And why would they agree?

Quote:Lauren Johnson: Did Putin Quietly Play the Debt Card Over Syria?