In regard to our suggestion the latest move against Damascus was predominantly a UK project, a link was sent to us today to an article by Thierry Meyssan on Voltairenet that’s certainly interesting.
Published March 20 it puts forward the idea the Skripal affair was a false flag intended to be the launch pad for a wholesale diplomatic attack on Russia that Meyssan suggests would initiate a “new cold war.”
While it’s possible to question this terminology (many would suggest we already have a “new cold war” and are on the verge of it becoming hot), his narrative offers a valid interpretation of recent events, and indeed looks more persuasive today that when it was written.
What Meyssan suggests is as follows:
Back in March a projected coup was planned between the UK government and the neocons in Washington to create an irresistible drive to a) launch a full blown assault on Damascus and b) get Russia removed from the UN Security Council.
The means was to be first the Skripal incident and immediately thereafter a large scale false flag chemical weapon attack on Ghouta.
Rex Tillerson, then US Secretary of State, was involved in this plan.
However by some means (Meyssan doesn’t say how) the Syrian and Russian intelligence services became aware of the plan, and realised it was not the Pentagon behind it, but “some other agency.”
The Russians immediately alerted the media to a possible false flag.
At the same time, bypassing diplomatic channels (because he was concerned to avoid others who were siding with the “plotters”), Russian Chief of Staff, General Valeri Gerasimov contacted his American counterpart General Joseph Dunford to inform him of his fears of a game-changing intel-sponsored event in Syria. Dunford in turn informed Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, who told Trump.
Since this apparent plot was going on without the knowledge of the White House & Pentagon, Trump then told Mike Pompeo, the head of the CIA, to investigate.
As a result Trump became convinced Tillerson was involved and soon after, fired him.
This in essence is Meyssan’s story. He cites no source for the claims about back-channel communications, and we can’t verify them even slightly. But we all know Russia did indeed warn of a pending false flag in Syria several times throughout March, and developments since the time of Meyssan’s writing lend credence to the broad thrust of interpretation.
The orchestrated & hysterical response of the UK state machine to the Skripal event doesn’t just hint at agenda rollout, it shouts it. The idea this was indeed the first act of a make or break plan is certainly more than believable. Indeed we all heard the suggestion about removing Russia from the UNSC repeated in the media at the height of the hysteria.
Whether Meyssan is right or wrong, we absolutely did just see an orchestrated, high level operation unfold, apparently designed to discredit Russia finally and forever.
It suggests new levels of idiot-insanity going on. Not only is such a plan amateurish in conception (kicking Russia off the UNSC, even if achievable, is not going to suddenly neutralise their political and military power), it would seem to have been doubly so in execution.
The Skripal story is a farce. But the apparent attempts to go forward with the “chemical attack” when all rationale for it was gone and when Douma itself was about to fall, shows stupidity beyond comprehension. If this was the UK, as the Russians claim, rather than rescuing themselves they simply added another embarrassing failure to the list, and dug themselves even deeper into easily-exposed crime.
The entire situation must be a warning, and not just the usual cliché about the US being a danger to world peace.
It’s not “the US”, it’s an international grouping of ideologues and other cranks, focused as much, maybe even more, in the UK as in America. If Meyssan is right these people are highly placed, but operating subversively within their own governments. Of course we have always known these thing are true to some extent, but this latest event seems to be taking this subversion to a new level.
Seventeen years ago a small group of highly placed individuals in the US government may have engineered or at very least allowed 9/11 to happen for their own geopolitical ends. We’d be naive to consider a second such event to be impossible.
It also seems clear those enacting this plan initially had little idea how dangerous it really was, and were to some extent astounded by the Russian reaction, and the horror expressed by the more sane elements in international government. This is also significant.
It’s a cliché in some alt media now to say the elites want WW3 and to talk about “population reduction” or some other meme. But, while it’s certainly true there is a strong eugenicist de-population cult in the upper echelons, it’s highly improbable any of them would choose a thermonuclear war as a viable method.
The real danger isn’t that a group of ubermenschen or Bond-villains want to incinerate humanity for vague and unspecified reasons, it’s that the deep heart of the Russophobic cabal is too dogma-driven and infested with idiots to understand the real world results of their plans. We can be sure they won’t have leaned from this and won’t be deterred from more of the same or worse in future. And if their next remedial scheme doesn’t get stymied by circumstance or nifty footwork, no one will be more surprised than they are when it kicks of WW3.
But they do have some opposition within the state machine, and always have. There were people in the US and UK intelligence agencies who didn’t want to lie about WMDs, and there are people today in the UK FCO who off-record told Craig Murray about the lies being forced on them regarding the Skripal case. These are people with enough smarts to want to avoid real confrontation with Russia, however prepared they are to play the public word games.
I think it’s important we address this more nuanced reality rather than opting for the security of familiar memes.