That’s right it’s not, I’m not going to post theory’s, I am going to post facts, historical news and contemporary news along with statements, documents and where possible the well researched sources.

So to be clear I will only post the material, what you make of it, whatever theories, comments or conjectures that may arise are down to the reader.

If there is any subject of a similar geopolitical nature you would like to see please get in touch, there will be links posted in due course.

1st Coastal Division that shot at parachuting Russian pilots have been working with Al Qaeda – Jabhat al Nusrah in Latakia,Syria this week

The WIDER View

Interestingly the 1st coastal division (Western deemed moderate group supplied with US TOW missiles) is currently featuring in the media after shooting Russian pilots parachuting to the ground from their downed SU24 by the Turkish military, while releasing videos and images of captured areas from the Syrian Arab Army (and associated militias) in the mountainous region of Latakia known as Jabal/Jebel Turkman. But so has Jabhat al Nusrah (al Qaeda in Syria).

Are they working in direct cooperation or just mutual tolerance of each others presence?

Jabhat al Nusrah:

Images below are taken from a Jabhat al Nusrah twitter page showing alleged gains made in Jabal/Jebel Turkman, a mountainous region in Latakia, Syria, populated predominantly by Turkmens.

The same region that the Russian SU24 jet was downed and the pilots killed allegedly by machine gun fire while parachuting to the ground.

Notice the tower on stilts standing over a building…

View original post 497 more words

Russian jet shotdown as Uk awaits decision as to join Air Strikes

Here’s a couple of thoughts about the Russian jet shot down today, based around the FACTS we know.

1) Everyone agrees when the Sukhoi jet crashed it was 4km inside Syrian territory. so here’s the problem,
it was 6000m up or 6km, to crash 4km away from Turkish border then even if shot exactly on border,
it had to travel 2/3rd of the distance it fell going forward i.e 2km forward for every 3km it fell, pretty good glide ratio.
but look at the footage, all footage shows it fall almost straight down at no more than 300 degrees,
and often far less esp as it closed with the ground.

2) Even NATO admits the Sukhoi was in Turkish airspace for a maximum of 17 secs.
Therefore we have to assume the Turkish F-16 was on patrol on or near the exact spot where the Russian jet crossed.
Here’s the problem. How could the pilot of the Turkish F-16 close in on the Russian Sukhoi, Assess it as a threat,
Issue 10 yes 10 warnings, decide to shoot, target, fire and hit. all before the 17secs were up,
and the Russian jet left it’s airspace?
Clearly then there was no time for consulting with NATO. This was an action taken by Turkey and Turkey alone. (Otherwise we’re into the realms of conspiracies involving pre-planned murder and acts of war)
The question is, would Turkey dared to have done this without knowing it was covered by NATO’S mutual defence pact?
And I think we all know the answer to that.

3) We are still hearing the regurgitated fairytales about “moderate rebels” here’s the facts,

Rebels have been trained in gulf states, with funding from the U.S
Russia is invited to Syria by a Sovereign State = legal. Any other country that is not there at the invitation of the government
(whether we like them or not), or as the result of a UN security council mandate or has not declared war = Illegal,
but here’s the kicker, You know how we’re always hearing about the rule of law? You know those cases I mean, when something is clearly wrong, and there’s a never ending carousel of “leaders”lining up to tell us so.Well I have not heard one MSM news organisation condemn the shooting of the parachuting pilots,escaping from the downed jet.
A clear war crime. (as referenced below) We do however hear how, Russia was not attacking “radical insurgents”
only attacking the type of “moderates” who shoot vulnerable parachutists then beat and parade their bodies on YouTube etc.

**In 1977, this practice (Attacks on parachutists) was finally codified in Protocol I in addition to the 1949 Geneva Conventions:

Article 42 – Occupants of aircraft

1. No person parachuting from an aircraft in distress shall be made the object of attack during his descent.

2. Upon reaching the ground in territory controlled by an adverse Party, a person who has parachuted
from an aircraft in distress shall be given an opportunity to surrender before being made the object of attack,
unless it is apparent that he is engaging in a hostile act.

3. Airborne troops are not protected by this Article.**

So are these some of the “Magical” 70,00 moderate free army David Cameron speaks of and plans to support with our airforce? We know our NATO ally Turkey supports them (The rebel shown on YouTube claiming to have killed the pilots as they escaped from the downed jet, turned out to be not only Turkish, but the son of a prominent former Mayor, and member of an organisation that has participated in attacks on politician’s in Turkey since the 70’s )

Let’s for our pilot’s sake hope they are never in the same position as those Russian’s, it’s clear these guys will shoot and ask for I.D later. kind of like some U.S police officer’s if MSM is to be believed, but that’s for another article.


The Russian Defense Ministry confirmed that one of its jets, a Sukhoi SU-24, had crashed in Syria but said it had been downed “presumably as a result of shelling from the ground.”

The Russian Defense Ministry also asserted that, “The plane stayed exclusively above the territory of Syria throughout the entire flight,” and said that the two pilots had ejected.

The Turkish military states on its website that its pilots fired only after repeated warnings to the other warplane.

“The aircraft entered Turkish airspace over the town of Yaylidag, in the southeastern Hatay province,” the statement read. “The plane was warned 10 times in the space of 5 minutes before it was taken down”

Obama destined to fail in ousting Assad

While the US and its allies have insisted that any Syrian peace deal must include the ousting of President Bashar al-Assad, that outcome is looking less and less likely. With a US election fast approaching, Assad’s presidency will more than likely outlast President Barack Obama’s.

Throughout the ongoing civil war in Syria, Western leaders have been adamant about one prerequisite for peace: Syrian President Bashar al-Assad must step down.

Syrian army readies for large-scale operation in Hama Governorate
But with the increasingly dire threat of the self-proclaimed Islamic State terrorist group – highlighted by downing of the Russian A321 jet on Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula and the Paris terror attacks – the West is beginning to show more flexibility on the fate of the Syrian leader.

During the 17-nation gathering in Vienna last weekend, a peace plan was drafted which states that “free and fair elections would be held pursuant to the new constitution within 18 months.” Speaking on this plan, the US State Department said that new Syrian elections could establish a new parliament, but that the vote would in no way guarantee Assad’s ousting, according to the Associated Press.

Even if peace negotiations did lead to a change in Syrian leadership, it’s likely that Assad would remain through a transitionary period which would last until at least 2017.

Some Western politicians are even considering the option of keeping Assad as a permanent ceremonial president to ensure stability.

US President Barack Obama holds a press conference in Kuala Lumpur on November 22, 2015, following his participation in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Summit

This is largely in line with what Russian officials have said from the beginning. The destabilization of Assad’s legitimate government would only lead to more violence and unrest, and it is up to the Syrian people — not Western diplomats — to decide their nation’s future.

“Nothing can start before defeating the terrorists who occupy parts of Syria,” Assad recently told Italian state television.

The United States and its allies are, at last, coming to this realization.

But just because a tentative peace deal is in place doesn’t mean that the Obama administration is pleased with the idea of Assad potentially holding onto power.

“I do not foresee a situation in which we can end the civil war in Syria while Assad remains in power,” President Obama told reporters in Manila last week. “Even if I said it was okay, I still don’t think it would actually work. You could not get the Syrian people, the majority of them, to agree to that kind of outcome.

SU-25 aircraft
“And you couldn’t get a number of their neighbors to agree to that outcome, as well.”

These comments may, in fact, have more to do with Washington’s waning influence over the Syrian conflict. The Obama administration has faced heavy criticism for its inability to develop a coherent strategy in the region. The Pentagon’s initial plan to train-and-equip so-called “moderate” Syrian rebels was halted after failing to get off the ground in any meaningful way. The Obama administration’s latest plan to deploy up to 50 Special Forces advisers is already facing skepticism.

Russian airstrikes, on the other hand, have devastated IS targets, destroying 472 targets in the last 48 hours alone.

With new presidential elections approaching in the United States, it’s looking more and more likely that President Obama will leave office long before President Obama


Russian T90A’s have allegedly turned up in Aleppo, Syria

If this turns out to be true then Cameron better be careful where his bombs land, when his rigged vote is won next week.

The WIDER View

According to the twitter account SAA Reporter, a Syrian journalist working with the Syrian Arab Army has posted images on the 23 November 2015 of alleged Russian T90A tanks being deployed for imminent ground operations.

The tweet also claims that this is the first Russian ground operation though it is unclear at this time if Russian troops or tank operatives will be involved in any imminent operation.

Russian T90A 1Russian T90A 2Russian T90A 3Russian T90A 4

View original post

What is the cost of a human life?

been having the exact same kinda thoughts..sure the Paris attacks were horrific. The Russian jet bombing a tragedy..But it’s so hypocritical. It’s like when refugees were dying in their hundreds no one cared until 1 poor child was photographed dead on the beach. then the attitudes changed. there’s wars in Africa that have been going on literally decades.

I am not a whinger, BUT...

What is the cost of a human life?

On a surface, it’s a simple enough question. After all, a human life is all we have, is the only thing we care about. I mean really care about. Human life is priceless, right?

Well, it depends. Depends on whose life it is. Over the past 5 years the world has seen lots and lots of people die. In Syria alone, 250,000 people died. What did the world do about it? Nothing.

Syrian  conflict - 250,000 people dead Syrian conflict – 250,000 people dead

Sure, we sent some troops in, we dropped few bombs, we ran few news reports, but largely, this remained something that was happening to some random people in a part of the world where someone is always fighting someone else. So we really didn’t give a shit.

Not until terrorists killed 224 people on board of a Russian plane and 130 people in Paris…

View original post 183 more words


It seems like once again we all have to get used to another name change. The Wahhabi sect of Salafist militants previously known as “the moderate rebels”,became “ISAQ” and “ISIS” (Islamic states of Iraq and Syria), graduated as their conquest grew to “ISIL” (Islamic State in Levant),then the particularly cringy “so-called IS” (Islamic State) a name that no news reader can’t say without the prerequisite “so called”.

So be glad that we now seem to be moving towards the universal name of “Daesh”, a name that they’ve been known by since their appearance by their Arab and Kurdish enemies, and a name they apparently hate, threatening to cut the tongue out of anyone caught using it.

Meanwhile mine is firmly in my cheek as I say “ISIS EXECUTIVE IN CHARGE OF CORPORATE BRANDING BELIEVED DEAD”

Confused? Don’t worry, we all are! Even now I just listened to a news segment, where 3 of the above names were used in one clip.

All will become clearer as this subject and more is dealt with when “THE TRUTH ABOUT SYRIA” continues Part 2 is coming soon.


This blog as a whole won’t be in chronological order, if only for the fact that I am itching to get to present day events, but first lets have a little historical context on Syria.

Above is a picture of Syrian President Bashar Al Assad and his British born wife meeting Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth ll at Buckingham Palace in 2002. Google it, you may be surprised to see him being welcomed with full red carpet treatment, also meeting with then Prime minister Tony Blair, as well as other trips, where he meets and greets such notables as the President of France, the Chancellor of Germany, and the now very anti-Assad: John Kerry.

Below is a link to a formerly secret state dept document, which dates from 2006, tell me did this State seem like a threat to the West?

please take the time to read it, quite an eye opener.

So what went wrong? why was a man who trained as a Doctor, who married a British citizen and brought in reforms and held elections after the death of his father (who was a dictatorial leader, but never the less an ally) suddenly demonised and undermined, whilst at the very same time being given handshakes and smiles? remember this was almost 10 years ago, the current crisis hasn’t just materialised from nowhere.

for a more in depth analysis of Assads assessed character please refer to this article below from the New York Times no less. it shines a very different light than the rhetoric we hear nowadays, and the international attendees at his fathers funeral are also very illuminating.

Next time we’re going to look for answers as to how this happened. Explore the famous and now discredited BBC article which was later shockingly altered and cast him as “The Butcher” after he was accused of using chemical weapons on his own people, a claim which although widely believed and often still touted, has now been shown to have been carried out by western backed “moderate rebels”

Part 2 coming soon…



Picture courtesy of the Daily Mirror UK (may be subject to copyright) Fair use for educational analysis.



The JFK assassination appears to have been part a campaign of assassinations against a generation of leaders who posed challenges to the entrenched power structure. The death toll included John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King and Malcolm X. Viewed as a whole, one is driven to the conclusion that anyone advocating or supporting serious social reforms will not be tolerated in a leadership position.

Here is a case in point, America and the worlds sad loss may have been this man’s blessing in disguise.

Please  take the time to watch this and share. Perhaps you too will look at him as the President you wish you had?  Republican or Democrat? Discuss.



By that I mean unusually honest.

This transcript contains one of the most awesome, inspiring and truthful speeches ever given by a president. This very speech must have caused a lot of panic among the higher echelons of the elite. Kennedy had been in office for only 3 months and he was already taking unprecedented steps to empower ordinary people. Kennedy did more for civil rights than any other president since Abraham Lincoln.

Kennedy was a big supporter of the constitution, he was against the tyranny of big government. He wanted to withdraw US troops from Vietnam. He wanted to abolish the CIA and Federal Reserve, and he warned us of criminal elements within the establishment who wanted to cease an opportunity to restrict peoples freedoms.

He urged the press to be more open and to fulfill its obligation to inform the American people about pertinent facts. And on top of that he spoke openly and candidly about the dangers of secret societies and their influence over the way government works.

So is it any wonder that he was dramatically silenced only two years after making this epic speech?

Here is a full transcript of the “President And The Press” speech:

The file I have is only about 5 min long. Below is copied from the transcript:

“The very word secrecy is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.”

In my efforts to provide you a transcript of the attached file, I have discovered that the above paragraph is word for word the first 1:26.

The next 3 paragraphs and the first sentence of the next paragraph were omitted. I do not know why since I do not know what the editor of the original speech had in his or her mind. The file continues …..

“For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.

Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.”

End at 2:28 – This is a solid piece in the transcript but ends mid paragraph.

Several more paragraphs of the transcript are skipped and the file continues…….

“No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed….

I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers, I welcome it. This administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: “An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it.” We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them…

Without debate, without criticism, no administration and no country can succeed  and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First (emphasized) Amendment, the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution, not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and sentimental, not to simply give the public what it wants, but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold educate and sometimes even anger public opinion…

This means greater coverage and analysis of international news for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security…”

This part ends at 4:52. mid sentence.

And I’m sure we’re all familiar with what happened next or are we?

It has taken 50 + years for the evidence to settle, I will present what facts, not theories, that have became available in that time, in a later dedicated file.