Author: R J Adams

Mr John Kerry appears more than a little put out with a decision by the British Parliament not to support the US in what is likely to prove a premature decision to use military might against the Syrian regime.

In a speech today, the US Secretary of State made much of François Hollande’s decision to continue supporting the US in their proposed action, calling France, “the US’s oldest ally”. Apparently, this was a reference to the historical fact that America would never have won their War of Independence against Britain without the military support of the French. France’s lack of enthusiasm for the 2002 war in Iraq, which resulted in all American fast food establishments renaming, “French fries”, as, “Freedom fries”, has, it seems, been conveniently forgotten.

Mr Kerry failed to give Britain a mention, a snub that has engendered acute bowel dysfunction among certain British politicians, causing the Westminster lavatories to overflow, and a hasty call for Dyno-Rod to supply a plumbing fix.

According to the Guardian:

Defence secretary Philip Hammond has expressed apprehension about the future of Britain’s defence ties with the US. Hammond’s comments came as John Kerry, the US secretary of state, praised France as the oldest ally of the US and made no mention of Britain.

In an interview with Channel 4 News, the defence secretary showed how the Anglo-American special relationship had been shaken by the parliamentary defeat when he said that France’s renewed alliance with the US placed Britain in an “uncomfortable place”.

Hammond told Channel 4 News: “I am disappointed and I am slightly apprehensive. We have a very close working relationship with the Americans. It is a difficult time for our armed forces, having prepared to go into this action, to then be stood down and have to watch while the US acts alone or perhaps the US acts with France.”

Asked about the renewed Franco-American alliance, Hammond said: “It’s certainly a reversal of the usual position and it will be an uncomfortable place for many people in the British armed forces who are used to working alongside the Americans as an everyday, normal course of business.”^[1]

One can only speculate as to which members of the armed forces Mr Hammond is referring. While the Brigadiers and other of the military elite, used to quaffing club brandies alongside their bejeweled and tin-gong bedecked US equals, may find the situation somewhat of an embarrassment, it’s highly unlikely the ordinary British soldier, sailor, or airman, will be anything other than highly relieved that he/she isn’t going to be ordered to put their lives on the line, yet again, in some foreign war that’ll certainly prove another total, bloody waste of men, machines, money, and time.

Meanwhile, that excuse for a British socialist Labour Party leader, Mr Ed Milliband…

…following the Parliamentary vote, goes immediately, cap in hand, to lick America’s arse and declare undying devotion, should he and his party happen to win the next British general election:

Ed Milliband reached out to Washington by making clear that he still remains committed to the Anglo-American special relationship. In a Guardian article, Miliband also makes clear that the US will always play a leadership role in the world.

The Labour leader writes: “I believe the special relationship should and will endure. Our shared history, values and institutions require nothing less. And there is no solution to most of the problems of the world, whether it is the Middle East peace process, climate change or Syria, which does not go through the United States.”^[1]

And just maybe, Mr Milliband, that’s the problem. So far, the United States of America has miserably failed to reach any sort of Middle East peace agreement, despite decades of so-called ‘negotiations’; has ignored climate change for years while its own population burns, is flooded out, or whole communities decimated by super-tornadoes – and you expect them to solve the Syrian problem?

Do us all a favor, Mr Milliband, go stick your head up your backside and see if you can find any common sense up there, because for sure, none of it ever manages to find its way out of your mouth.

The US attack on Syria has been planned for months. Those who hold the reigns of US power have wanted shut of Assad for years. Like Iran, Syria is a thorn in America’s side because it refuses to do as it’s told. The only reason it wasn’t included in George W Bush’s ‘Axis of Evil’ is because he couldn’t count beyond three.

The US dilemma is: how to get rid of Assad without letting in al Qaeda and Co.. Now, America is going to prod things along a bit with a few missile strikes on Assad’s military hardware, to slow him down and give the rebels an edge.

The US media has been whipping up public venom for weeks with prejudiced reports and pictures of dead children, supposedly the victims of chemical weapon attacks. Even so, a majority of Americans aren’t in favor of intervention – unless, of course, no Americans are going to get hurt. That reassurance tilts the balance somewhat. It’s that old, well-known, American attitude, ‘I’m all right, Jack, and as long as me and mine aren’t in the firing line, my country can slaughter as many foreigners as it likes’.

Thankfully, unlike the war in Iraq, the British won’t be involved. The British people don’t get bitten twice, and frankly, don’t give a tinker’s cuss for any ‘special relationship’. It’s just seen as ‘politician’s speak’.

Though, it’s highly likely the US manufacturers of ‘English Muffins’, and ‘English Breakfast Tea’, will be rushing to rename their brands. No doubt, ‘Freedom Muffins’, and, ‘Freedom Breakfast Tea’, will be appearing on the shelves of Walmart in the very near future.

^{[1] “UK-US special relationship in danger, warns Philip Hammond” Guardian, August 30th 2013}

John Kerry, the US Secretary of State, says there is no doubt the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons against their own people. President Obama has made similar comments through his press secretary. David Cameron, British Prime Minister, has echoed the words of both men, as has President Francois Hollande of France. Vice President Joe Biden today condemned ‘Syria’s heinous act’. US Defense Secretary Hagel has told the world the US is ready to go to war again, as soon as the President gives the order.

There is still no direct evidence to link the recent chemical attacks with Assad’s regime. The US government says it has sufficient evidence of Assad’s involvement, even though the UN weapons inspector’s have produced no report, as yet.

There’s no evidence of CIA involvement, either, but neither was there over the unseating of Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohammad Mossadeq, in 1953; a coup that allowed the US-friendly Shah to return to power. It was carried out “as an act of US foreign policy” according to recently released CIA documents that provide a plethora of evidence – sixty years later.^[1]

No-one’s suggesting the CIA was responsible for the horrific use of chemical weapons in Syria, but given their record, it’s highly likely they’re covertly assisting the rebels against Assad’s regime.

US officials have stated that only the regime had the weapons and the rockets to deliver them to their targets, but isn’t it possible a rebel faction (of which there are many) has acquired some? A number of Assad’s high-up military personnel have defected to the other side. Some may have the knowledge and the ability to get their hands on these weapons.

Given US President Obama’s somewhat loud-mouthed boast at the beginning of the conflict, declaring US military involvement if Assad crossed the ‘red line’ and utilized chemical weapons, and knowing how desperate the rebel side is to drag the West into the war on their side, what better way than to gain control of some of these weapons and use them against opposing rebel factions?

It’s possible the regime was responsible for this dreadful act, but it must be considered unlikely, given that Assad presently has the upper hand in the conflict. Why would they risk the military wrath of the West by such senseless action?

There can be no doubt that America and the West desire the toppling of Bashar al-Assad’s regime. Equally, though, the last thing they want is an outright victory by the rebel factions, with the resultant nosedive into tribal and religious strife that, as in Iraq, could continue for decades and further inflame the Middle East.

Talking on the BBC’s ‘HardTalk’ program today, Lakhdar Brahimi, the UN-Arab League Envoy to Syria, appears to be the only one exhibiting a modicum of common sense.

Lakhdar Brahimi, the UN-Arab League Envoy to Syria, has called for continued political efforts, both inside the country and internationally, to end the conflict.

Speaking to the BBC’s Sarah Montague for the Hard Talk programme, he said there was no military solution, urging all parties to “work harder together” to find a political answer to the crisis.^[2]

The American media, and its politicians, are presently awash with virtuous and righteous indignation over the appalling images emanating from Syria. Cries of, “We must do something!” echo from every Washington office.

Sententious umbrage is all very well, but before one can stare back at the world from the high ground of moral righteousness it’s as well to remember how such lofty heights were achieved:

Remember Agent Orange, My Lai, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, No Gun Ri, the massacres at Canicatti and Dachau, Fallujah, Guantanamo Bay, the 140 (approx) innocent children slaughtered by US drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen^[3]…to name just a few of the many US war crimes gone unpunished?

It is a fact that the United States, with or without its Western allies, has failed to produce any satisfactory military solution anywhere in the world since World War II.

Syria is unlikely to be the first.

^{[1] “CIA documents acknowledge its role in Iran’s 1953 coup” BBC, August 20th 2013}

^{[2] “Syria conflict: ‘There is no military solution'” BBC, August 27th 2013}

^{[3] “names of kids killed by drones in Pakistan and Yemen” Smirking Chimp, January 21st 2013}

It happened back in April…in the courtyard of this apartment complex. Quanell X, who has been working with the family, says [nine year old] Ashley was among a group of children playing. That’s when a neighbor saw something and called the mother of a 4 year old boy who was also playing in the group. Ashley was accused of touching the child in his private area…

…Ashley, who was then 9 years old, was playing doctor with the other kids in that courtyard. She was accused of inappropriately touching the 4 year old boy. It was a game that landed the 10 year old at the Harris County Juvenile Detention Center in June…

That’s because the charges and arrest came two months after the initial complaint in April…

…Ashley’s Mother…says the Houston Police sex crimes investigator didn’t allow her to sit in on the questioning of her daughter. She says a 45 minute long interrogation that left her 10 year old in tears…

…Ashley and her mother could not talk about the facts of the case – it’s clear their claiming the young girl did nothing wrong. A girl who has to be consoled by her mother when she talks about being held in juvenile custody those four days.

Ashley says, “when my Mom came to see me I said I wanted to go home and then she said I couldn’t go home and she was like I know you want to go home.”

Ashley is expected to be in court in October on the sexual assault charge.^[1]

This girl was held in a detention center for FOUR days by Houston police.

This could be almost any kid in America…or, anywhere else where young kids are curious about other kid’s bits they’re normally not allowed to see.

I’ve never had much respect for Texas, or its populace. Their politics stink. Educationally, it must be one of the most backward states in America. If you doubt it, read the full version of this story by someone who dares to call themselves a reporter. Even the link address is misspelled.

What the hell are we becoming?

^{[1] “10 year old charged with sexual assault” Fox Houston, August 21st 2013.}