"We don't know who's guilty"


Just recent there was a news post that made me "smile", not because i was happy about the post, but because people start to open their eyes and starts to ask questions.
Here's the link:  http://www.dagbladet.no/2013/08/28/nyheter/innenriks/syria/fn/usa/28944569/

I want to tell you a story, a real story. 
It was on tuesday, I was taking the subway, I was on my way to a park, we were going to BBQ. I went with some family members, a man from Iraq walked towards us, he asked us where we came from, and we told him. (Im not going to tell you where i come from to remain anonym.) any way, he then said almost yelling ".....is a good, your country fucked america, america kill children, they've killed children in your country" he also said repedeatly "america killed children in Iraq, america killed my daughter" He was screaming, his face was red and tears were running down his face. He also screamed "fuck america, fuck america, they kill children". etc. People that were sitting in the subway just watched him, they looked down on him, after some guards (vektere) esqorted him out.

I felt so sorry for him, his daughter got killed, he couldn't do anything, he can't do anything to get justice, because americas war handlings will never see the light ever again, it's hidden...uncept someone release them like edward snowden.

Now do we really believe that it was the government in syria uses chemical weapons?! After everything? Ofcourse not!
 We have seen so many examples, videos showing what the army have done, showing how the media makes up bullshitt etc.

Come on people start using some sense and start asking some question.

This post is not done, there will be more comming after each time something new happens.


The text under is from the Norwegian newspaper called dagbladet. Here's the link: http://www.dagbladet.no/2013/08/30/nyheter/utenriks/syria/28974563/

All indications now that a U.S. attack on Syria could come as soon as the UN weapons inspectors out of the country , writes New York Times.
According to the prestigious American newspaper is President Barack Obama prepared to launch a military attack alone, and without the approval of the UN Security Council .

War Crime

Several leaders today gave support to plans for a criminal action against Syria , after gas attack that both Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron is absolutely convinced initiated by the Syrian regime.

Hundreds were killed in the brutal attack against Zamalka near the Syrian capital Damascus on 21 August .

"It 's about large-scale use of chemical weapons , and our response to a war crime - nothing else ," Cameron said in Parliament today .

He was concerned that the gas attack was a kind of trial balloon from Bashar al - Assad , but did not get parliamentary support for his desire for a military attack.

(Commentary: It's bullshitt, Obama gave the order of gas attack.)

Limited attacks

A meeting of the Security Council who only recently ended , ended by the Huffington Post without signs agreement on Syria crisis.But according to the New York Times to U.S. President believe that a consensus in the Security Council nor necessary.

This paper is based on interviews with senior officials in the Obama administration. According to these officials want U.S. intelligence material to be presented tonight to show that forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al - Assad was responsible for the gas attack on the outskirts of Damascus.

(Commentary: Obama administration... do I need to say more?)

Although not al - Assad can be linked directly to the attack , according to the administration that the evidence is sufficient for a limited attack to intimidate Syria's government from using such weapons again .

USA - operation

Obama's advisers do not believe any approval of military action will come in the Security Council , because it is blocked by Russia.

Because the use of chemical weapons is internationally banned and because Obama would protect U.S. allies Turkey, Jordan and Israel against the use of such weapons , he and his administration that this is not necessary to justify a limited military action .

Obama should have " made ​​it clear that the initiative here will come from the U.S., and while he would welcome international participation depends not he the involvement of foreign forces for what essentially will be an operation conducted by the United States ," writes the New York Times.


Meanwhile, the newspaper sources have talked to it is clear that it is not taken any decision to attack Syria.

- DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA: British protesters gathered outside Parliament today. There, Prime Minister David Cameron's proposal for military intervention in Syria rejected. Photo: AFP PHOTO / ANDREW COWIE / NTB SCANPIX


Link to the newspost: http://www.dagbladet.no/2013/08/30/nyheter/meninger/kommentar/utenriks/politikk/28967931/

Obama, Cameron and Hollande :

They stumble on a war footing

Suddenly it wasn't urgent to attack Syria to Barack Obama, David Cameron and François Holland . And late in the evening on Thursday , it went completely wrong for Cameron when the Parlament voted down his plan to attack Syria.

They had rushed out, and too much got in the way , both here and there. The heads of the three Western powers , two of them old , who have permanent seats on the Security Council of the UN, had to abruptly pull in years and think. The waters until Syria proved politically perilous .

In France, President François Hollande spoke noticeably more moderate than Tuesday, when he was " ready to punish those who have taken the shameful decision to gander innocent ." Thursday , he talked about finding other ways out than a military attack . " Everything must be done for a political solution ," said Hollande after a meeting with the head of Syria's National Coalition , the Syrian opposition, the Elysée Palace.

In Britain , Prime Minister Cameron Davis proved to be a hasty soda head and faced a revolt against war plans among their own conservative. And the Labour Party, in opposition , made ​​clear requirements to support him . Cameron would have through a resolution on Syria in Parliament yesterday, Thursday. However, to accommodate the critics he had to promise to come back again when UN weapons inspectors has submitted its report on chemical weapons in Syria. Then would be the second ballot . But Thursday night he lost anyway with 285 against and 272 votes out in the back, a stinging defeat for the United States' most ardent supporter .

In the U.S., Barack Obama said that " the decision is not yet taken ." He says to have clear evidence of the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government forces' side. But he has not yet presented any irrefutable evidence that can convince doubters and win support for a military attack .

Neither Obama or Cameron finds some support among voters to attack Syria. For Hollande is it any better , but voters are divided .

The Security Council is the no way, because of the "friends" of Syria's president, Bashar al - Assad , in Russia and China, which each have their reasons to support him . The British draft resolution , which would give the authority to use "all necessary means " to " protect civilians against chemical weapons" , was a Russian veto until it lay on the table. And now not even support the proposal in the Parliament of Great Britain.

But, as Hans Blix , former head of weapons inspectors in Iraq , said : You could probably get by Russia , China and Iran also a condemnation of the use of chemical weapons in Syria , where they waited for the report of the UN weapons inspectors in Syria and if the report provide a clear answer .

UN Secretary General Ban Ki -moon , says one has to wait for the report before the Security Council can do nothing decision . Inspectors are done in Syria Saturday. Then they write a report . First up next week to brighten the image . Does soda heads patience to wait? After the defeat in Britain they must at least think carefully .

But to bypass the UN Security Council that is , they must be able to present irrefutable evidence and compelling reasons for the sensible go to military attack . Memories of the war in Iraq , which was justified by false evidence about weapons of mass destruction, putting pressure on those who now want to attack Syria , and the story is not forgotten by opponents either.

A broad coalition has not been collected to intervene in Syria. The Arab League condemns albeit clearly the Syrian regime's use of chemical weapons. But neither country goes public with support for a military attack . And participate they will not at all.

Obama, Cameron and Hollande stumbles on a war footing .

(So let's ask this question, Obama why do you have to stick your nose into other countries all the time? And make an excuse just to "let yourself in", gas, chemical attack.. you are the one ordering the attacks so shut up, the world don't need you! What was his excuse when he declared war against libya, Iraq etc? The same bullshitt, that the government is hurting their people, oil, gas attack etc. it's plain bullshitt!)