Wednesday, April 11, 2018

The idiocy of Trump, French president Macron, and UK prime minister May may be bringing the end of the world.

Idiocy Is Bringing The End Of The World

Idiocy Is Bringing The End Of The World

Paul Craig Roberts

Here is Jason Ditz on the coming end of the world: 

Vladimir Soloviev explains the failure of Putin’s policy of appeasement: 

If you were the president of France or the prime minister of the UK, would you permit criminally insane Washington to drag you into military conflict with Russia?
I didn’t think so. I wouldn’t either. So what’s with Macron and May? What’s with the French and British governments? What’s with the French and British media? I read recently that former UK Labour prime minister Tony Blair is now worth $100 million, his payoff for lying to the UK government and people in order to support the George W. Bush regime’s invasion of Iraq. Have Macron and May been promised the same?

It makes no sense for the UK and French governments to make themselves targets of a military power against which they have no possibility of defense. It makes no sense that their peoples and media sit silently while one French president and one British prime minister endanger not only France and the UK but the entirety of Europe. What’s with the European Union? There is only silence as Europe, and the world with it, are taken to the brink of annihiliation. This makes no sense. 

People in Ghouta, doctors in Ghouta, and Russian experts who have arrived on the scene report that there is no sign of any chemical attack. Not only did Syria not use chemical weapons against the civilians that it liberated, there was no chemical attack, not even a false flag one staged by the US supported mercenaries who have been driven out of Ghouta by the Syrian Army. In other words, the chemical attack is entirely a hoax.

To keep the hoax from being confirmed by independent investigation, Washington vetoed a UN Security Council resolution to send in neutral experts to evaluate the claim of chemical attack. Why would Washington prevent an investigation that would prove Washington’s allegation? Clearly, Washington would only prevent an investigation that would disprove the false allegation. There is no doubt whatsoever that Washington’s allegation is false and is being used as an excuse to force Russia to fight or to accept Washington’s hegemony in the Middle East.

What if there was a chemical attack? Why does it matter to people who are killed whether it was by bullets, bombs, missiles, or chemicals? Why is it so bad to use chemicals instead of Hellfire missiles? Why is it OK for Washington and Israel to blow up schools, hospitals, weddings, funerals, market places, and homes full of women and children with missiles, but not OK to kill people with chemicals? Why is it worth starting World War 3 over a hoax chemical weapons attack or a real one?

Americans, for the most part a clueless people, have no awareness of the risk that the criminally insane government in Washington is taking with their lives. What if the Russians mean what they say and do not again turn the other cheek and back down? What happens if Russia replies to force with force? 

Why is it that only a few Internet sites are asking this question?

1 comment:

Ryszard Ewiak said...

Secretary of Defense James Mattis pointed out the US doesn’t have evidence that Syria carried out a chemical attack in its own territory earlier this week. Former UK Ambassador to Syria Peter Ford told BBC Radio Scotland on Tuesday it makes no sense for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to gas his own people and warned a US strike on Syria could kill "scores" of Russian soldiers and trigger World War 3. Ford said the military action we’re on the brink of taking is "risking our own safety" and it’s likely we’re being played by Jihadists who staged the attack to "produce hysteria" and trigger Western intervention. "What the Jihadis have done is jerk our leash," he said.

The entire world knows it’s a false flag. Unfortunately, many politicians are pushing Donald Trump to war. Why are they supporting terrorists? Here, in Syria there is a fight for influence. This is not the only flash point between Russia and the West. What will this fight lead to?

The Book of Revelation warns: "And another horse, fiery red, came out, and the one who rode it was granted permission to take peace from the earth, so that people would butcher one another, and he was given a huge sword." (6:4) What does it mean? Jesus gave many important details: "Terrors both and unusual phenomena from sky powerful will be." (Luke 21:11) Some ancient manuscripts contain the words "and frosts" (we call this today "nuclear winter"), and in Mark 13:8 "and disorders" (in the sense of confusion and chaos). There will be also significant tremors (caused by the use of this weapon), food shortages and epidemics along the length and breadth of the regions.

This weapon will also cause climate change, catastrophic drought and global famine. (cf. Revelation 6:5, 6) So here we have a complete picture of the consequences of the global nuclear war. No doubt this detailed and richly illustrated picture corresponds only to this war. Jesus also stated: "All these are but the beginning of the birth pains". (Matthew 24:7, 8)

When and how will this happen? Let me remind here a fragment of an ancient vision: "And [the king of the north] will go back (to) his land with great wealth [1945. This detail indicated that Hitler will attack also the Soviet Union and will fight to the bitter end]; and his heart (will be) against the holy covenant [Soviet Union introduced state atheism and believers were repressed]; and will act [it means activity in the international arena]; and go back to his own land [1991-1993. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. Russian troops returned to their country]. At the appointed time [he] will return back [it also means the breakup of the European Union and NATO. Many countries of the former Eastern block will return to a military alliance with Russia], and will enter into the south [this can be Georgia], but it will not be as the former [2008 - Georgia] or as the latter [Ukraine], for the dwellers of coastlands of Kittim [USA, in the beginning without Britain] will come against him, and he will be dejected, and will go back." (Daniel 11:28-30a)

What will induce the "king of the north" to enter into the south? Jesus said: "For nation will rise against nation", as in 2008 in Georgia, and then Americans will attack unexpectedly.