By John Vibes | TheFreeThoughtProject | April 17, 2018

During a solo concert this week in Barcelona, Pink Floyd frontman Roger Waters took a moment to address the audience about the recent bombing of Syria. Waters said he was approached by someone before the concert who wanted to get onstage and speak on behalf of the White Helmets about the alleged chemical attacks in Douma.

Instead of bringing the anonymous man onstage, Waters addressed the crowd on the issue himself, saying that he believes the White Helmets are a propaganda organization on a mission to justify western intervention in the region. Waters said he believes that the person who wanted to make a statement was well-intentioned, but misled, and then offered his opinion to the audience.

The White Helmets is a fake organization that exists only to create propaganda for jihadists and terrorists,” Waters said. “That’s my belief. We have opposing beliefs. If we were to listen to the propaganda of the White Helmets and others, we would be encouraged to encourage our governments to start dropping bombs on people in Syria. This would be a mistake of monumental proportions for us as human beings.”

What we should do is go and persuade our governments not to go and drop bombs on people. And certainly not until we have done all the research that is necessary so that we would have a clear idea of what is really going on. Because we live in the world where propaganda seems to be more important than the reality of what is really going on,” he added.

The White Helmets have been known to work with terrorists to achieve regime change in Syria. The white helmets were also caught staging videos of atrocities in an attempt to bait western powers into war and were later forced to apologize.

The group also came under fire last June when video surfaced that showed members assisting in disposing of the dead bodies of Syrian soldiers. The US-backed “aid workers” were seen celebrating their kill whilst holding the heads of the dead.

As it stands, the White Helmets are heavily funded by the U.S. and the UK, as well as many other international entities. That may be the reason they always worked in rebel-held areas of the greater Syrian conflict. The WH serve as a de facto propaganda wing of the West to sway public opinion into supporting regime change in Syria.

As proof, one only has to look to the story of Omran Daqneesh, a Syrian boy reportedly pulled from the rubble of a bombed out building. Daqneesh’s image was broadcast around the world and used as a propaganda tool against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The truth was later revealed by The Free Thought Project and others that it is highly likely the opposition itself destroyed the very building in which Daqneesh was residing, then used his image to promote the myth that he was attacked by Syrian forces.

According to The New York Times, Mr. Daqneesh told the real story of what happened immediately following the bombing. He never supported the opposition and appeared on Syrian state-run media to proclaim his support for Assad. He described how the White Helmets used his son as a propaganda tool without his permission.

”They took Omran, got him to the ambulance, where they filmed him. It was against my will. I was still upstairs in the house,” Mr. Daqneesh said, adding that he was pressured, and even offered money to use his son as a pawn in propaganda against the Assad regime.

Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters has been consistently anti-war throughout his entire career and is no stranger to controversy. As The Free Thought Project reported in 2016, Waters made some bold statements about the war crimes of Israel in an interview with The Independent. He explained how artists are discouraged from speaking out about the atrocities taking place at the hands of the Israeli military.

“The only response to BDS is that it is anti-Semitic, I know this because I have been accused of being a Nazi and an anti-Semite for the past 10 years. My industry has been particularly recalcitrant in even raising a voice [against Israel]. There’s me and Elvis Costello, Brian Eno, Manic Street Preachers, one or two others, but there’s nobody in the United States where I live. I’ve talked to a lot of them, and they are scared s***less….” he said.

“If they say something in public they will no longer have a career. They will be destroyed. I’m hoping to encourage some of them to stop being frightened and to stand up and be counted because we need them. We need them desperately in this conversation in the same way we needed musicians to join protesters over Vietnam,” Waters added.

If propaganda is what the establishment uses to create a culture of war, then art is what the average person can use to create a culture of peace.

In times of oppression, it is very difficult for people to speak out against the constant tyranny, and when they do it can be even more difficult to get others to listen. Art is a subtle way of getting the message out to the masses. This is useful because a lot of times people are so entrenched in the mainstream culture that they will become defensive when they come face to face with facts that call their worldview into question. However, if these same ideas are presented in the form of art, people are much less defensive and are more willing to approach the information with an open mind. Art is also used by activists who want to send a message but still remain under the radar.

If you really examine some of the greatest works of art in history, you will find that the vast majority of the time, the artist was motivated by some kind of social cause. The art that really moves people and leaves a lasting impression is rarely made with the thought of making a buck or climbing the social ladder. In today’s culture, massive advertising schemes and flashy graphics are enough to catch most people’s attention long enough to make a purchase, but you’ll find that the works of art with real staying power are typically sending some kind of social message.


Contributed by John Vibes of TheFreeThoughtProject.com where this article was originally published.

John Vibes is an author and researcher who organizes a number of large events including the Free Your Mind Conference. He also has a publishing company where he offers a censorship free platform for both fiction and non-fiction writers. You can contact him and stay connected to his work at his Facebook page. John just won a 3-year-long battle with cancer, and will be working to help others through his experience, if you wish to contribute to his treatments consider subscribing to his podcast to support .


SHARE:

Mac Slavo | SHTFplan | April 17, 2017

Elevating fears of a third world war even higher, an ex-Soviet general has come forward declaring a nuclear war between the United States and Russia is unavoidable and “inevitable.” Evgeny Buzhinskiy, a former Lieutenant-General under the Soviet Union says that Russia will never accept “any kind of defeat.”

Because Russia is “lagging behind” the US in terms of military power, Putin would rather order a nuclear strike than accept defeat on the battlefield, Buzhinskiy said. Buzhinskiy, who joined the USSR’s armed forces in 1968, said the increasingly acrimonious standoff between Russia and the US is “worse than the Cold War.”

“Russia will not accept any kind of defeat, so the involvement of nuclear weapons is inevitable,” he told Channel 4 News. 

US President Donald Trump ordered his military to launch almost 100 missiles at alleged chemical weapons facilities across Syria in response to the “toxic” attack.   Britain and France also took part in the “perfectly executed strike” that Trump declared “could not have had a better result”, tweeting: “Mission accomplished.” But the strike against Bashar al-Assad, whose government has the backing of Putin, has plunged Russian-US relations to new lows, with both sides exchanging fierce rhetoric.

“I think it’s worse than the Cold War, which we have been waging for 40 years after the Second World War,” he said, speaking to presenter Matt Frei, according to The Daily Star. “In the Cold War time I was in the armed forces and I was quite comfortable I’d say. There were definite duels and definite red lines – everybody knew what to do. There were no threats, no sanctions, no isolation, no cornering, no nothing. There was just ideological confrontation, but people on both sides knew how far they could go.”

Former Russian general: Use of nuclear weapons is inevitable

Play

0:36

/

2:00

Loaded: 0%

Progress: 0%

Captions

Fullscreen

Facebook

Twitter

Share

Buzhinskiy admits, that as a grandfather, he’s scared of what could happen as this conflict with Russia escalates driven by false flags.

When asked if the US and Russia might “face off against each other” with nuclear weapons, he replied: “Of course. I repeat: you cannot control military confrontation between Russia and the United States.”

Last week Buzhinskiy warned that Putin would respond in kind if “Russian blood is spilled” during the US-led Syria strike.   “We have several thousand advisers in all military installation in all military units,” he said. “If Russian blood is shed then Russia will retaliate.”

Sleep tight, everyone.


Contributed by Mac Slavo of SHTFplan.com where this article was originally published.


SHARE:

By Eva Bartlett | RT.com | April 16, 2018

The US, Britain and France trampled international law to launch missiles against Syria, claiming to have “evidence” of the government’s use of chemical weapons. That evidence is based on terrorist lies.

After a week of outrageous tweets and proclamations by POTUS Trump, which included continued accusations that Syria’s president ordered a chemical weapons attack on civilians in Douma, east of Damascus, with Trump using grotesque and juvenile terminology, such as “animal Assad,” the very evening before chemical weapons inspectors of the OPCW were to visit Douma, America and allies launched illegal bombings against Syria. The illegal bombings included 103 missiles, 71 of which Russia states were intercepted.

For the past week, we were told that the US had ‘evidence’ and the UK had ‘evidence’ that Syria had used chemicals. The ‘evidence’ largely relied on video clips and photos shared on social media, provided by the Western-funded White Helmets (that “rescuer” group that somehow only operates in Al-Qaeda and co-terrorist occupied areas and participates in torture and executions), as well as by Yaser al-Doumani, a man whose allegiance to Jaysh al-Islam is clear from his own Facebook posts, for example of former Jaysh al-Islam leader, Zahran Alloush.

This, we were told, was ‘evidence.’ This and the words of the highly partial, USAID-funded, US State Department allied Syrian American Medical Society, which, like Al-Qaeda’s rescuers, only supports doctors in terrorist-occupied areas.

On April 12, even US Secretary of Defense James Mattis told the House Armed Services Committee that the US government does not have any evidence that sarin or chlorine was used, that he was still looking for evidence.

Syria, finding the claims to be lies and the sources tainted, requested that the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) immediately come to Syria to investigate the claims. Accordingly, the OPCW agreed to send a team—the visas for which Syria granted immediately—which arrived in Damascus on April 14.

President Trump, instead of waiting for an investigation to confirm his ‘evidence,’ chose the very night before this investigative team would arrive in Syria to inspect the allegations, to bomb Syria. The timing of the attacks is more than just a little timely. And the bombings were illegal.

General Mattis tried to dance around the legality, stating“the president has the authority under Article II of the Constitution to use military force overseas to defend important United States national interests.”

But he is wrong, this does not permit the US to illegally bomb a sovereign nation, and he knows it. So does Russia. In a statement on April 14, Russian President Vladimir Putin declared the attacks as illegal, noting:

“Without the sanction of the Security Council of the United Nations, in violation of the UN Charter, norms and principles of international law, an act of aggression against a sovereign state that is at the forefront of the fight against terrorism has been committed.”

What if chemicals had been at targeted locations?

In the same Pentagon briefing, General Joseph Dunford specified the US and allies’ targets in Syria, alleging they were “specifically associated with the Syrian regime’s chemical weapons program.” One target, at which 76 missiles were fired, was the Barzeh scientific research centre in heavily-populated Damascus itself, which Dunford claimed was involved in the “development, production and testing of chemical and biological warfare technology.”

This ‘target’ is in the middle of a densely-inhabited area of Damascus. According to Damascus resident Dr. (of business and economy) Mudar Barakat, who knows the area in question, “the establishment consists of a number of buildings. One of them is a teaching institute. They are very close to the homes of the people around.”

Of the strikes, Dunford claimed they “inflicted maximum damage, without unnecessary risk to innocent civilians.”

If one believed the claims to be accurate, would bombing them really save Syrian lives, or to the contrary cause mass deaths? Where is the logic in bombing facilities believed to contain hazardous, toxic chemicals in or near densely populated areas?

Regarding the actual nature of the buildings bombed, Syrian media, SANA, describes the Pharmaceutical and Chemical Industries Research Institute as “centered on preparing the chemical compositions for cancer drugs.” The destruction of this institute is particularly bitter, as, under the criminal western sanctions, cancer medicines sales to Syria are prohibited.

Interviews with one of its employees, Said Said, corroborate SANA’s description of the facility making cancer treatment and other medicinal components. One article includes Said’s logical point: “If there were chemical weapons, we would not be able to stand here. I’ve been here since 5:30 am in full health – I’m not coughing.”

Of the facility, the same SANA article noted that its labs had been visited by the OPCW, which issued two reports negating claims of any chemical weapons activities. This is a point Syria’s Ambassador al-Ja’afari raised in the April 14 UN Security Council meeting, noting that the OPCW “handed to Syria an official document which confirmed that the Barzeh centre was not used for any type of chemical activity” that would be in contravention to Syria’s obligations regarding the OPCW.

Bombings based on Al-Qaeda and Jaysh al-Islam Claims

The entire pretext of the US and allies’ illegal bombings of Syria is immoral and flawed. There is no evidence to the claims that Syria used chemicals in Douma. Numerous analysts have pointed out the obvious: that Syria would not benefit from having used chemical weapons. But America, Israel and allies would benefit from staged attacks.

The website Moon of Alabama noted discrepancies in the videos passed around on social media as “evidence” of Syria’s culpability, including the following:

“The ‘treatment’ by the ‘rebels’, dousing with water and administering some asthma spray, is unprofessional and many of the ‘patients’ seem to have no real problem. It is theater. The real medical personnel are seen in the background working on a real patient.”

Russia’s Defense Ministry has released interviews with two men who were included in the footage alleging a chemical attack has occurred. One of the men, Halil Ajij, said he worked in the hospital in question, they had treated people for smoke poisoning, saying: “We treated them, based on their suffocation,” also noting: “We didn’t see any patient with symptoms of a chemical weapons poisoning,” he said.

In an April 14 interview on Sky News, the former British Ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford, argued that the most elementary stage in the accusations game is to allow the actual inspection to occur.

“The evidence that chemical weapons were dropped is non-existent. Let the inspectors go in and possibly within days we will have a verdict but the jury is still out. …I’m totally confident that the inspectors will not produce one shred of evidence to back up the assertions of the Americans. If the Americans had proof, they’d have brought it forward. What they’re saying and what Mrs. May is saying, is just ‘take our word for it, trust us’. There’s not even a dodgy dossier this time.”

Israel and America benefit from the attacks… and are guilty of chemical weapons use

While the world’s eyes have been glazed over by chemical weapons script-reading journalists of corporate media, little notice is given to the ongoing Israeli slaughter and maiming of Palestinian unarmed demonstrators, targeted assassinations that last re-began with the March 30 murders of at least 17 unarmed Palestinians protesting in Gaza’s eastern regions. Israel’s murder of these unarmed youths, women and men got only mild tut-tuts from the UN, and was relegated to “clashes” by slavish corporate media. Israel is literally getting away with murder, as eyes are turned elsewhere.

According to Secretary Mattis, the US-led illegal attack on Syria “demonstrates international resolve to prevent chemical weapons from being used on anyone under any circumstances in contravention of international law.”

The irony? Both America and its close ally Israel have used chemical weapons on civilians. The US has attacked civilians in Vietnam and Iraq, to name but two countries, with chemical weapons.

In 2009, I was living in Gaza and documenting Israel’s war crimes when Israel bombed civilians all over Gaza with white phosphorous. These were civilians with nowhere to run or hide, including civilians who had fled their homes and taken shelter in a UN-recognized school. I myself documented numerous instances of Israel’s use of white phosphorous.

If this doesn’t outrage American citizens, the billions of US taxpayers’ dollars sent to Israel and spent on the bombing of sovereign nations — and not on America’s impoverished, nor on affordable health care — should outrage.

However, as author Jonathan Cook noted, the issue is not merely Trump’s threats to Syria:

“There is bipartisan support for this madness. Hillary Clinton and the Democratic leadership in the US, and much of the parliamentary Labour party in the UK, are fully on board with these actions. In fact, they have been goading Trump into launching attacks.”

By not attacking Russian forces in Syria this time, the US narrowly avoided a direct military confrontation with Russia, one which would have had global ramifications, to say the least.

The question now is: will the regime-change alliance be stupid and cruel enough to support yet another false flag chemical attack in their unending efforts to depose the Syrian president, or will they give up the game and allow Syria’s full return to peace? The US and allies claim their concern for Syrian civilians, but do everything in their power to ensure civilians suffer from terrorism and sanctions.


Eva Bartlett is a freelance journalist and rights activist with extensive experience in the Gaza Strip and Syria. Her writings can be found on her blog, In Gaza.


SHARE:

By Alex Christoforou | The Duran | April 14, 2018

Retired U.S. Army Colonel, Douglas Macgregor was on Tucker Carlson Tonight dropping some powerful truth bombs minutes before Trump’s real bombs were launched against Damascus.

Col. Macgregor made some stunning statements about America’s war machine, and lifted much of the fog surrounding the current war in Syria.

◦ He [Trump] seems to be in the grip of the globalists, you know the global nannies that want to run around in Madeleine Albright’s world and punish evildoers for reasons that don’t make any sense to me since we had no real interest in Syria and the war there is effectively over.

◦ Recall that last year we fired 60 some cruise missiles…they landed in the dirt, exploded nicely, everyone congratulated themselves, and we walked away and nothing happened.

◦ If all we’re doing is expressing our righteous indignation, at the alleged use of a chemical weapon, we’re kidding ourselves. There are no good guys on the ground in Syria…any number of people could have done this.

◦ Routinely again it’s back to the Globalist versus the Nationalists. He [Trump] seems to have lots of globalists around him. I’m sure John Bolton is excited at the prospect of bombing somebody somewhere. I suspect that he’s being supported in the Pentagon as well.

◦ The president seems to be on his own if he’s still the nationalist that he said he was.

◦ The left/right dichotomy is very misleading in this town. I think you have nationalists and you have globalists. The globalists dramatically outnumber those of us who are pre-eminently concerned about what’s in the interests of the United States.

◦ They’re living in Madeleine Albright’s world and the president is in danger of joining the likes of LBJ and George W Bush…failed president’s, failed administrations, involved in failed wars.

◦ I think there is an enormous amount of support and interest inside the United States in Washington, in the Department of Defense, in the State Department, to keep us in Syria.

◦ The swamp seems to be everywhere.


Alex Christoforou is president and writer for The Duran, where this article was originally published.


SHARE:

By JD Heyes | Natural News | April 15, 2018

So far in his presidency Donald J. Trump has managed to outsmart the politicos and the media hacks, remaining several steps ahead of them as they work daily to obstruct his progress and tear down his administration.

But when it comes to dealing with the Deep State — that combo of media elites, party bosses, the intelligence community and the military-industrial complex — the president seems less sure of himself.

That may help explain why he may have been duped into launching — with British and French assistance — his latest attack on Syria under the guise of President Bashar Assad’s use of chemical weapons against a rebel faction last week.

Few are disputing that an attack occurred; where the dispute lies is in who is responsible for it.

Trump says he is as certain this time as he was last year when he ordered strikes against Assad for a separate chemical attack. The French have said they have the evidence as well. So what’s the problem?

The problem is none of this really adds up.

Few dispute the 2017 chemical attack, and most believe that Trump was correct to ‘punish’ Assad for it. But this time is different.

For one, Assad has all but won the seven-year civil war. ISIS has been beaten back, most rebel groups have been defeated or marginalized, thanks to the assistance he was given by Russia and Iran, and the U.S. has backed away from regime change as its primary objective in the country (focusing instead only on ISIS). Heck, Trump even said in recent days he’d like to get all U.S. forces out of Syria within months.

So why would Assad risk global condemnation when victory is well within his grasp and the Americans are looking for the exit sign?

Also, there is this. Last week The National Sentinelreported that British journalists in Syria were implicating rebels, not Syrian government forces, in the latest poison gas attack. They claimed that the Syrian rebels in Douma were “staging” the corpses of dead children in order to stoke emotions in the West and provoke precisely the strikes against Syrian government installations that Trump agreed to and ordered early Saturday.

One BBC reporter, Riam Dalati, even tweeted, “Sick and Tired of activists and rebels using corpses of dead children to stage emotive scenes for Western consumption.” He eventually took it down but a former Scotland Yard detective and counterterrorism officer preserved the tweet and tweeted out his own warning about the rebels and staging.

“Yesterday a BBC journalist (see above) posted a rare admission that #Syria rebels & activists are manipulating photos of dead #Douma children for western media propaganda purposes. Today the BBC journalist has deleted his tweet but, for the record, a screen shot of it is here,” Charles Shoebridge wrote.

He added: “As always, US UK funded #Syria#WhiteHelmets ‘rescuers’ the primary news source.”

The White Helmets are, according to the group’s website, a civil defense and rescue organization. And while there is little evidence to suggest this organization is anything other than what it claims to be, it’s hard to simply discount what these British witnesses are saying. They are, after all, on the ground in the war-torn country.

We may never know. But for now, what we do know is that America appears to be sleepwalking into yet another conflict in the Middle East.

As such, his once-staunch supporters — including Alex Jones, Michael Savage, Ann Coulter, and others — are publicly denouncing the president. Because this is not what he ran on.

Just a week or so ago Trump was saying he wants U.S. troops out of Syria soon. He said he wants to focus on rebuilding America. He said the U.S. has spent $7 trillion on wars in the Middle East and Afghanistan in 17 years.

Upping the ante with a massive missile strike over a controversial chemical attack doesn’t sound much like pulling out.


J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com, where this article was originally published, and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.


SHARE: