This is the real reason why western mainstream media vilified Assad and it isn’t about Syrian democracy

Atta Kenare/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

 

“The people will believe what the media tells them they believe.” 

George Orwell

 

The war in Syria started way back in 1971 when President Nixon decided to no longer back US$ with the federal gold reserves, circulating additional money that was required to support the Vietnam War.

During the Falklands War, Argentina adopted the same practice, turning its currency into a worthless piece of paper.

That did not happen to the American currency US$ because Kissinger successfully negotiated with leaders of major oil-producing countries to trade their liquid commodities solely in the US$.

For as long as there is a demand for oil, there is also a demand for US$, thus preserving the value of the American currency.

This strategy worked well for the USA and the rest of the world.

The stability of the US$ ensured a stability of oil prices and consequently a global economic stability.

However, looking ahead into the future, the depletion of world’s oil reserves by 2070, severely threatens the stability of US$.

“BP’s annual report on proved global oil reserves says that as of the end of 2013, Earth has nearly 1.688 trillion barrels of crude, which will last 53.3 years at current rates of extraction. This figure is 1.1 percent higher than that of the previous year. In fact, during the past 10 years proven reserves have risen by 27 percent, or more than 350 billion barrels.”

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/BPs-Latest-Estimate-Says-Worlds-Oil-Will-Last-53.3-Years.html

Depletion of world’s oil reserves will bring an end to the American currency, economy, its capitalism and consequently destabilise the entire world.

Therefore, to preserve the value of its currency, USA needs a new source of energy to be traded in US$, and the world’s largest liquefied natural gas reserves are located in the Persian Gulf, stretching beneath the territorial waters of Iran and Qatar.

Qatar has already undertaken substantial negotiations with neighbouring countries to allow the construction of its new gas pipeline to supply Europe through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and Turkey.

“Qatar has proposed a gas pipeline from the Gulf to Turkey in a sign the emirate is considering a further expansion of exports from the world’s biggest gasfield after it finishes an ambitious programme to more than double its capacity to produce liquefied natural gas (LNG).”

https://www.thenational.ae/business/qatar-seeks-gas-pipeline-to-turkey-1.520795

However, in late 2010, instead of the proposed Qatar gas pipeline, President Assad signed an agreement with Iran and Iraq to construct a new gas pipeline that would supply Europe with gas extracted from Iran.

“More than a year ago, a $10 billion Pipelineistan deal was clinched between Iran, Iraq and Syria for a natural gas pipeline to be built by 2016 from Iran’s giant South Pars field, traversing Iraq and Syria, with a possible extension to Lebanon.”

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/08/201285133440424621.html

After he signed the deal to construct the Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline, the western mainstream media instantly began vilifying President Assad, portraying him as a dictator who needs to be replaced. 

“In 2009 – the same year former French foreign minister Dumas alleges the British began planning operations in Syria – Assad refused to sign a proposed agreement with Qatar that would run a pipeline from the latter’s North field, contiguous with Iran’s South Pars field, through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey, with a view to supply European markets – albeit crucially bypassing Russia.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/aug/30/syria-chemical-attack-war-intervention-oil-gas-energy-pipelines

Within three months from signing the Russian backed Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline, which was due to be completed in 2016, BBC reported on the first democratic protests in Syria, demanding President Assad’s resignation.

Consequently, in December 2011, US troops pulled out of Iraq, which enabled the establishment of ISIS, a terrorist organisation set out to destroy the USA that purchased weapons and vehicles that were produced by their enemy.

However, ISIS was a unique kind of terrorist organisation, Islamic State organisation with a mission to undermine the efforts of another Islamic State, by:

  • Fighting Assad’s forces;
  • Intercepting Assad’s support from Iran: and
  • Preventing the construction of the Iranian gas pipeline through Iraq.

Therefore, if actions speak louder than words, the enemies of Iran and Russia were the ones who benefited most from ISIS.

Whereas the White House was keen to begin trading gas resources from Qatar exclusively in US$, Kremlin wanted to protect its future economic existence by keeping its gas monopoly over Europe.

When economic stability of the two superpowers is dependant on who gets to supply Europe with natural gas, Qatar or Iran, a nuclear war between Russia and the USA is imminent.

Hillary wanted Assad to go, and if she were to become the next President, to protect USA’s international reputation of winning wars against oppressive regimes, she would have had to keep her word and prolonged until Assad is removed, which required taking out Russia first.

Therefore, instead of Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump became the 45th US President.

Replying to ABC News’ allegations about illegal votes that secured him the presidency, Donald Trump said:

“We’re gonna find out. And — and, by the way, when I say you’re gonna find out. You can never really find, you know, there are gonna be — no matter what numbers we come up with there are gonna be lots of people that did things that we’re not going to find out about.”

https://www.google.com/amp/abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/transcript-abc-news-anchor-david-muir-interviews-president/story%3fid=45047602

It seems that to withdraw from the Syrian War and avert the World War III, lots of people that did things that we’re not going to find out about managed to get Donald Trump as the 45th US President.

Advertisements

Is Anti Tax Avoidance Directive the main reason we are leaving the EU?

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country… It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”

Edward L. Bernays

David Cameron wanted the Great Britain to remain in the European Union, however, his frail campaign failed because he never informed the British voters of the biggest advantage of staying, which is EU’s new Anti Tax Avoidance Directive.

To convince the British people to vote remain, Mr Cameron had to remind them that by staying in the EU, his government would have had to implement EU’s Anti Tax Avoidance Directive by the year 2019, by enacting new laws and collecting taxes from everyone, including our tax-dodging billionaires.

However, throughout his political career, Mr Cameron wasn’t keen on ending extreme austerity measures by collecting taxes from the wealthy elite registered in tax havens.

Every time the EU undertook momentous actions to end tax-avoidance amongst its member states, Mr Cameron responded by issuing his momentous announcements regarding the British EU referendum.

In January of 2013, Brussels produced a concrete action plan for a new EU directive that would end tax-avoiding practices amongst its member states, and within a month, Mr Cameron confirmed that he favours an EU-referendum, stating:

“And I want us to be pushing to exempt Europe’s smallest entrepreneurial companies from more EU Directives.”

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/eu-speech-at-bloomberg

Within that year, Mr Cameron undertook his first push to exempt Europe’s smallest entrepreneurial companies from more EU Directives, by requesting from the President of the European Council to exclude offshore trusts from the EU’s new Anti Tax  Avoidance Directive.

“David Cameron intervened personally to prevent offshore trusts from being dragged into an EU-wide crackdown on tax avoidance, it has emerged. In a 2013 letter to the then president of the European council, Herman Van Rompuy, the prime minister said that trusts should not automatically be subject to the same transparency requirements as companies.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/07/david-cameron-offshore-trusts-eu-tax-crackdown-2013

Mr Cameron announced the date for the EU referendum soon after the exact details of the EU’s AntiTax Avoidance Directive were revealed.

The European Commission presented its proposal for the AntiTax Avoidance Directive on January 28th of 2016, and within a month, Mr Cameron announced the date for the EU referendum.

Within minutes, Theresa Villiers, Priti Patel, Michael Gove, Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, and John Whittingdale appeared at the Vote Leave headquarters, holding a banner with a slogan “Let’s take back control”. Speaking on behalf of six Tory Brexiteers, Grayling explained that they want to restore the sovereignty of the British nation.

Backed by The SunDaily MailSunday Times, Daily Express and Telegraph, which are owned by tax-avoiding media tycoons, Tory Brexiteers managed to protect the sovereignty of our wealthy tax-dodgers from the new EU Anti Tax Avoidance Directive.

At Prime Minister’s Questions, Mr Cameron defended the offshore low tax rates, claiming:

“We’re happy to support blacklists but we don’t think we should draw up a blacklist solely on the basis of a territory raising a low tax rate – we don’t think that’s the right approach.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/international-blacklist-of-tax-havens-will-be-drawn-up-george-osborne-announces-a6986956.html

In fact, ever since he announced his U-turn on the EU-referendum in 2013, Mr Cameron spent his time exclusively in the company of executive officials of the British pro-Brexit press, which are owned by wealthy tax-avoiding billionaires who felt threatened by the new EU Directive intended to bring an end to their tax avoiding practices.

According to Press Gazette throughout 2013, 2014 and 2015, Mr Cameron and George Osborne intensified their discussions with the pro-Brexit press.

“Of the 23 meetings between October 2014 and September 2015, eight were with News Corporation executives, five with the BBC or BBC Trust and four with Telegraph Media Group.”

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/cameron-and-osborne-meetings-media-bosses-have-returned-pre-leveson-level/

As someone who campaigned to remain in the EU, one might have expected that Mr Cameron would coordinate his campaign and meet with the pro-EU press, such as the Independent, Guardian, Financial Times, etc. Instead, Mr Cameron spent most of his time in the company of the executive officials of the pro-Brexit press, as follows:

News Coorp., which controls The Times, The Sunday Times and The Sun

  1. February 2015, Mr Cameron met with Robert Thomson, News Corporation chief executive, general discussion
  2. July 2015 – Mr Cameron met with Robert Thomson, general discussion

Telegraph Media Group, which controls The Daily Telegraph and The Sunday Telegraph

  1. February 2013 –  Mr Cameron met with Murdoch MacLennan, Guy Black (with John Witherow and Lionel Barber), to discuss Leveson Report
  2. April 2013 –  Mr Cameron met with Aidan Barclay, general discussion
  3. September 2013 –  Mr Cameron met with Murdoch MacLennan (with Tony Gallagher and Ian MacGregor), general discussion
  4. November 2013 –  Mr Cameron met with Sir David Barclay, Telegraph owner, dinner
  5. May 2014 –  Mr Cameron met with Aidan Barclay, general discussion
  6. October 2014 – Mr Cameron met with Aidan Barclay (with Fizzy Barclay), dinner
  7. January 2015 –  Mr Cameron met with Aidan Barclay, general discussion

Express newspapers, which controls the Daily Star and Daily Express

  1. October 2013 –  Mr Cameron met with Richard Desmond, general discussion
  2. January 2015 –  Mr Cameron met with Richard Desmond, general discussion

Daily Mail

  1. October 2014 –  Mr Cameron met with Lord Rothermere (with Paul Dacre), chairman and owner of Daily Mail and General Trust, dinner

David Cameron is a classic Jekyll & Hyde example, publicly campaigning to remain in the EU and secretly spending most of his time with people who campaigned to leave the EU.

On March 25th of 2015, Members of European Parliament representing Mr Cameron’s party, UKIP and DUP voted against EU’s plans to crack down on corporate tax-dodging, by making companies report where they make their profits and pay taxes.

“From Britain, Conservative, Ukip, and DUP MEPs voted against the report, though many did not show up or not vote.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/these-are-the-british-meps-who-voted-against-plans-to-crack-down-on-corporate-tax-evasion-a6982271.html

Even Mr Farage’s UKIP, the party who rambled on as being the only UK party to speak out for Britain’s little people, in the European Parliament, instead of the people they pledged to represent, they voted to protect the vested interests of the wealthy elite, who refuse to pay their tax contributions.

Apparently, Mr Farage also tried to avoid paying his taxes through an offshore trust fund.

“The 49-year-old paid a tax adviser to create the Farage Family Educational Trust 1654 in the tax haven – which he intended to channel funds through.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ukip-leader-nigel-farage-admits-1972988

Reflecting on Supreme Court’s decision that the British Parliament must decide whether or not to trigger Article 50, Mr Farage revealed the crucial aspect of his Brexit campaign, stating:

“Well, we would be half-Brexiting is my guess – is that legally we may get out of some aspects of EU membership, but if we stay in the single market, we finish up with all our businesses being regulated somewhere else and indeed a court in Luxembourg that can overrule our own Supreme Court and if that happens it will a supreme act of betrayal.”

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-37861487

The European Court of Justice in Luxembourg is responsible for ensuring that EU directives are interpreted and applied in the same way in every member state, including EU’s Anti Tax Avoidance Directive.