Addressing The Simpsons “Apu Controversy”: Cultural Insanity

Recent backlash over Simpson’s creator Matt Groening‘s comically stereotypical Indian character and Kwik-E-mart owner, Apu, is the latest episode in the rampant Cultural Marxism that, as it is superimposed, sweeps across and infects Western culture.

Many mainstream media outlets chimed in, parroting such tripe as “The Simpsons Creators Just Don’t Care Anymore”.

Mashable said that “The Simpsons needs to die. Matt Groening, the show’s creator, made that abundantly clear this week.”

The Washington Post said “What can ‘The Simpsons’ do about Apu? A lot, actually.”

CBC said that “The real problem with Apu? There’s not enough diversity in the writers’ room.”

Apu’s voice actor, Hank Azaria, said he would be willing to stop performing the character altogether, obviously to save his skin from being deemed a “racist”.

Groening responded to the criticism, saying that “It’s hard to say. Something that started decades ago and was applauded and inoffensive is now politically incorrect. What can you do?”

Proving that he has an ounce of backbone, he was asked if he had any thoughts on the fresh criticism of Apu. “Not really. I’m proud of what we do on the show. And I think it’s a time in our culture where people love to pretend they’re offended,” he replied.

Apu (left) in the TV show “The Simpsons”.

Addressing the insanity: Understanding The Simpsons and the point of Comedy.

I ask why can’t a team of white guys who aren’t Asian make a funny stereotypical joke in a show that is already full of funny racial and cultural comical caricatures? — This kind of willingness to prod different groups and identities in jest was the very thing that made The Simpsons so beloved in the first place.

Also, why can’t an animation team be predominantly white without there being “lack of diversity” or an ulterior “evil white racist conspiracy” motive the mainstream press so obsessively highlights and insists upon?

Things fell into place and the team of animators happen to be mostly white which may have influenced the vision of the show somewhat, so what?

To the unthinking people that seriously believe this uproar is coming from actual real people (and not a carefully concerted multi-outlet corporate sponsored social engineering campaign) it all may just about seem legitimate, after all — all the mainstream media outlets are multiple heads attached to one ugly corporate body, unbeknownst to many.

The mainstream (Jew-owned and run) media constantly highlighting its warped idea of “race relations” and “white guilt” is inflammatory to racial dissension in and of itself (and is intended to be so) to keep framing the capable white man as the enemy in every circumstance.

To repeat the narrative often enough, people have eventually come to believe it and give up the “outdated ways” (organic culture before it was ruined) — especially when, over the long course of the internationally popular show since the late eighties there has been no uproar from anyone, let alone Asians in demanding that Apu be removed or rethought as a character.

Only now in the height of political correctness this “uproar” coincidentally happens.

The Washington Post claims that “engaging with the issue of representation will make for a more satirical and topical show”. Yes, really, they spouted that double negative; that self-censorship and outright avoidance of satire is the new satire, an interesting take.

I guarantee if The Simpsons’ creators cave to this censorship call from a small group with a loud voice (the corporate media) its ratings and viewership will plummet — and then The Simpsons really will die, deservedly so if it crumbles under the pressure.


The Simpsons became popular precisely because it (and its viewers) were comfortable enough to take a joke.

The Simpsons is all about ridiculing and making fun of everyday things, people, places, just about anything and everything — that’s the basis of good comedy, the poking of fun at all concerned parties in a mutually enjoyable way without it being partial or discriminatory. That’s the foundation of pretty much any decent joke, to show weakness or quirks in yourself and others and be reciprocal to the same treatment – and be comfortable with it.

That’s how people bond, build trust, and become closer together, it’s a basic social dynamic.

Some people won’t like the humor displayed in The Simpsons, to those people I suggest they turn off the show, do something else, and don’t tune in again, especially that they then don’t grovel about their elitist sense of acceptable humor (but have the right to do so nonetheless). It’s quite simple really. Look up freedom of association and freedom of speech, central pillars of liberty.

Other comical stereotypes are everywhere on the show, but ignored by the mainstream press. Only Apu gets coverage, funny that:

We see Fat Tony as the stereotypical Italian gangster; no uproar there. We see Cletus Spuckler as the stereotypical example of white trash, no uproar there. Rabbi Hyman Krustofsky as the stereotypical Jew, again, no uproar there. Ned Flanders, the stereotypical evangelical Christian, yep, no mass media campaign slating Matt Groening. Homer Simpson, a stereotypical middle class happy-go-lucky guy. Groundskeeper Willie as the stereotypical Scotsman. The list goes on and on.

You get the picture.

 

Peace for Korea: U.S. Influence In Far East Diminished?

The recent peace talks between Korean leaders Kim Jong-Un and Moon Jae-in came together in a historic moment with the declared joint aim to end the multi-decade hostilities, to denuclearize, deescalate, and to draw a close to the Korean “war” that never technically ended following the armistice agreement in 1953.

A hopeful Kim Jong-Un stated that he wanted to pursue “permanent peace”, adding “we will adopt the Panmunjom declarations while the whole world is watching us. I believe the declaration will never let us repeat our past mistakes.”

South Korean President Moon praised the “precious agreement” and declared a “new era of peace”, pledging “there will be no more war on the Korean peninsula.”

Scenes of the two leaders strolling together have, for the past sixty years or so, been an unthinkable sight through the Western rose-tinted glasses, in reality Korea has wanted to join forces and boot the Western imperialists, but the U.S. has had clout in South Korea long enough to obstruct this.

That changed today as the two leaders embraced a watershed moment.

Kim’s political pivot to warmer relations with a longtime rival and U.S. proxy/ally (South Korea) is evident that Kim wants to preserve North Korea and boot the imperialists out, but the DPRK, up until recently, has been wary of dealing with a South Korea directed by U.S. foreign policy-making.

Recent developments suggest the U.S.’s grip on the South has slipped — and so Kim, likely with careful advice and guidance from close allies such as China, has made his move to cool the climate.

How long this will last is not apparent, when Moon is replaced once more by a U.S. favoring puppet, the status quo may return, for now, a period of respite — or perhaps a sign of a permanent decline of U.S. influence in the region? Time will tell.

Smart PR move: Kim insists that he and Moon Jae-in hold hands in a symbol of solidarity that will be broadcast across the world’s media. This will no doubt destroy the public appetite for further U.S. involvement in the region.

The demonization of North Korea: a brief history.

The demonization of North Korea by the United States government continued unrelentingly, only now in 2018 have the Koreans been able to take control of their own destiny.

George W. Bush used his first State of the Union address on January 29, 2002 to brand North Korea, along with former allies Iran and Iraq, as “the world’s most dangerous regimes” who now now form a threatening “axis of evil.”

Unbeknownst to the public, because it was intended to have remained a secret, was the fact that this claimed president presented a “Nuclear Posture Review” report to Congress only three weeks earlier, on January 8, which ordered the Pentagon to prepare contingency plans for use of nuclear weapons.

The first designated targets for nuclear attack were his newly identified members of the “axis of evil,” (including the DPRK) along with four other lucky nations as well – Syria, Libya, Russia, and China.

That this is nothing short of a policy of ultimate terror remains unaddressed in the U.S. media.


2018: One step closer to a Korean peninsula free from U.S. dominion? 

As one of the few countries without a Rothschild central bank, North Korea is a total unabashed nonconformist, and, as a result, targeting the DPRK is naturally an objective in U.S. foreign policy — in fact, North Korea being a bit of a rogue state (although still partially under China’s wing) has also been a blessing for the U.S. warmongers.

In keeping North Korea as the bogeyman of the Far East, the U.S. can continue to build-up its military presence at the behest of “peacekeeping” which, while claimed to be provisional against Jong-Un’s regime, has a troubling permanence — and is actually intended to corner and target more relevant powers such as China and Russia.

The North Korea “problem” disinformation campaign (and resultant U.S. aggressive rhetoric) has been escalated ever since the South Korean peacemaker Jae-in came into office in early 2017.

For example, within the last year, U.S. Defense Secretary Mattis engaged with hysterical rhetoric, stating that:

“North Korea has accelerated the threat that it poses to its neighbors and the world through its illegal and unnecessary missile and nuclear weapons programs …” The situation had developed a “new urgency.”

This is why with the surmounting pressure from the U.S. and an ever-strengthening case for an invasion of North Korea, U.S. military escalation, and with building pressure on the Chinese — Kim was wise to amend relations and keep the U.S. interventionists out of the equation, to keep his only strong ally, China, happy — and to preserve his dynasty, which, if cut-off from its dependencies and protectorates would quickly wither from the inside out; more isolated than ever without recourse.


South Korean President Moon Jae-in less compliant with U.S. interests.

The US has been continually blocking efforts for North-South peace talks, and has expressed its contempt for South Korea’s elected President Moon Jae-in, with Trump opposing Moon’s pro-dialogue policy, calling it “talk of appeasement” with North Korea.

Jae-in was elected on a peace platform by the South Korean people. Moon’s predecessor Park Geun-hye, a puppet, did the U.S.’s bidding — until she was impeached and then sentenced to 24 years earlier this month for abuse of power, bribery, coercion, and leaking government secrets, with some claims that she took $3.5 million in bribes from a spy agency.

As a non-puppet, or at least a leader less pliable and less receptive to U.S. interests, Moon Jae-in’s peacemaker policy stands in stark contrast with that of Western-controlled Japan, which continues to involve itself with U.S. foreign policy, framing North Korea as the reckless, uncooperative state it patently isn’t.


North Korea was never the “threat” the West portrayed it to be.

North Korea both wanted unification ever since they were freed of vassalization under the Japanese Empire after WW2, the U.S. imperialists moved in to seize Korea and a war ensued, the result was a divided peninsula, one side controlled by U.S. interests, the other by North Korean, supported as a sovereign state by China and Russia.

In the fallout of the post Korean war, North Korea armed itself to the teeth, and like any sovereign nation would be — was hostile to those who sought to subvert it. Kim going the nuclear route is an act of self-defense if anything. While by no means is the Kim dynasty perfect, no side of the political equation is.

Flag of North Korean leaders.

To look at things objectively, Korea is better off multi-polar with cooperation between the sides, an amicably decentralized group of cooperative states — as opposed to the U.S. seeking to control all states for sake of “World Order” and “Peace”. At least the Kims rule honestly, they don’t hide their totalitarianism (an inevitability of political power) like all the so-called “democracies” do.

Kanye West sums it up, “decentralize”, the two Korean nations making their own decisions suggests it:

The Korean tensions were and continue to be desirable for the elites, it keeps the peninsula divided and brings South Korea closer to the U.S. sphere of influence, enabling the South to be a front-line launchpad and encirclement base for Western imperialism around China and Russia — and as a general power play in the Far East.

Conclusively, to Washington, South Korea going it alone and talking peace is undesirable, it breaks the strawman narrative that the U.S. needs to be militarily involved in the Far East and pursue full spectrum dominance.

Retaliatory moves such as when the US sent more nukes to Guam, and put the state of Hawaii on a full alert that a “ballistic missile was inbound” were part of an effort to reignite tensions, perhaps even to convince Moon Jae-in that Kim was a “madman” with his “finger on the button” — therefore obstructing peace-talks and retaining South Korea as a fearfully compliant proxy.


The U.S. is a two-sided coin of good cop, bad cop imperialism.

The U.S. intervening in Korea is nothing new, the U.S., over its history, has militarily intervened over 400 times, covertly thousands of times, in over one hundred nations. The U.S. is a globalist apparatus.

Virtually all these interventions have been lawless. It has bombed at least eighteen nations since it dropped Atomic bombs on Japan in 1945. It has used chemical warfare against Southeast Asia, and has provided chemical warfare agents for use by other nations such as Iraq. It has used biological warfare against China, North Korea, and Cuba. The Koreans are quite aware of most of this history. Most U.S. Americans are not. But now the U.S. has declared a unilateral “terrorist” war on the whole world.

Now that the two nations of Korea are at the negotiating table, the U.S.’s policing role in the region seems more redundant than ever. Let’s hope this is a win for self-governing nationalism and a defeat for monolithic globalism.


Understanding Korea: A case of perspective.

S. Brian Wilson from Global Research is a Vietnam veteran, long-time peace activist, and writer. In an article for the website he discusses the misunderstanding of the Korean situation that clouds the true motives of U.S. foreign policy in the region.

I believe it important for U.S. Americans to place themselves in the position of people living in targeted countries. That North Korea, a nation of 24 million people, i.e., one-twentieth the population of the U.S., many of them poor, a land slightly larger in area than the U.S. state of Pennsylvania, continues to be one of the most demonized nations and least understood, totally perplexes the Korean people. It is worthwhile to seek an understanding of their perspective.

I recently visited that nation and talked with a number of her citizens. I traveled 900 ground miles through six of North Korea’s nine provinces, as well as spending time in Pyongyang, the capital, and several other cities. I talked with dozens of people from all walks of life. Though times have been hard for North Koreans, especially in the 1990s, they long ago proudly rebuilt all of their dozens of cities, thousands of villages, and hundreds of dykes and dams destroyed during the war.

U.S. interference into the sovereign life of Korea immediately upon the 1945 surrender of the hated Japanese, who had occupied the Korean Peninsula for forty years, is one of the major crimes of the Twentieth Century, from which the Korean people have never recovered. (SEE “United States Government War Crimes,” Spring 2002 – issue # 1 of Global Outlook). From a North Korean’s perspective they

(1) have vigorously opposed the unlawful and egregious division of their country from day one to the present,

(2) were blamed for starting the “Korean War” which in fact had been a struggle between a minority of wealthy Koreans supporting continued colonization in collaboration with the U.S. and those majority Koreans who opposed it,

(3) proudly and courageously held the U.S. and its “crony U.N. allies” to a stalemate during the “War,” and

(4) have been tragically and unfairly considered a hostile nation ever since. They have not forgotten the forty years of Japanese occupation that preceded the U.S. imposed division and subsequent occupation that continues in the South. They deeply yearn for reunification of their historically unified culture.

Everyone I talked with, dozens and dozens of folks, lost one if not many more family members during the war, especially from the continuous bombing, much of it incendiary and napalm, deliberately dropped on virtually every space in the country. “Every means of communication, every installation, factory, city, and village” was ordered bombed by General MacArthur in the fall of 1950. It never stopped until the day of the armistice on July 27, 1953. The pained memories of people are still obvious, and their anger at “America” is often expressed, though they were very welcoming and gracious to me. Ten million Korean families remain permanently separated from each other due to the military patrolled and fenced dividing line spanning 150 miles across the entire Peninsula.

Let us make it very clear here for western readers. North Korea was virtually totally destroyed during the “Korean War.” U.S. General Douglas MacArthur’s architect for the criminal air campaign was Strategic Air Command head General Curtis LeMay who had proudly conducted the earlier March 10 – August 15, 1945 continuous incendiary bombings of Japan that had destroyed 63 major cities and murdered a million citizens. (The deadly Atomic bombings actually killed far fewer people.)

Eight years later, after destroying North Korea’s 78 cities and thousands of her villages, and killing countless numbers of her civilians, LeMay remarked, “Over a period of three years or so we killed off – what – twenty percent of the population.”6 It is now believed that the population north of the imposed 38th Parallel lost nearly a third its population of 8 – 9 million people during the 37-month long “hot” war, 1950 – 1953, perhaps an unprecedented percentage of mortality suffered by one nation due to the belligerance of another.

Virtually every person wanted to know what I thought of Bush’s recent accusation of North Korea as part of an “axis of evil.” Each of the three governments comprising Bush’s “axis of evil” of course immediately condemned the remarks, North Korea being no exception. I shared with them my own outrage and fears, and they seemed relieved to know that not all “Americans” are so cruel and bellicose. As with people in so many other nations with whom the U.S. has treated with hostility, they simply cannot understand why the U.S. is so obsessed with them.

Koreans were relieved to learn that a recent poll had indicated eighty percent of South Koreans were against the U.S. belligerent stance against their northern neighbors. The North Korean government described Bush as a “typical rogue and a kingpin of terrorism” as he was visiting the South in February, only three weeks after presenting his threatening State of the Union address.7 It was also encouraging that the two Koreas resumed quiet diplomatic talks in March just as the U.S. and South Korea were once again conducting their regular, large-scale, joint military exercises so enraging to the North, and to an increasing number of people in the South among the growing reunification movement there.

In the English-language newspaper, The Pyongyang Times, (February 23, 2002) there were articles entitled “US Is Empire of the Devil,” Korea Will Never Be a Threat to the US,” and “Bush’s Remarks Stand Condemned.” Quite frankly, all three of these articles relate a truth about the U.S. that would draw a consensus from many quarters around the world.

While in country, together we listened to Bush’s March 14 Voice of America (VOA) radio chastizement of North Korea. First, he stated that the North’s 200,000 prisoner population was proof of terrible repression. Though I had no way of knowing the number of prisoners in the North, any more than Bush did, I do know that the United States has 2 million prisoners which is similar in per-capita detention rate to that of North Korea if the 200,000 figure is accurate. Furthermore, the U.S. has a minimum of 3 million persons, mostly minority and poor, under state supervision of parole and probation. The U.S. sweeps its class and race problems into prison.

Second, Bush declared that half the population was considered unreliable and, as a result, received less monthly food rations. The Koreans are a proud people living in a Confucian tradition, having rebuilt their nation from virtual total destruction during the Korean war. I did not notice any obvious display of dissent. That some Koreans are desperate due to lack of food, water, and heat, especially in some rural areas, does not necessarily translate into dissent, though some are seeking relief by travel to neighboring countries.

Third, Bush claimed that Koreans who listen to foreign radio are targeted for execution. Together we regularly listened to U.S.VOA radio broadcasts and they freely discussed the content of the broadcasts without fear of reprisals.

Fourth, Bush condemned the DPRK for spending too much on its military, causing food shortages for the people. Note: Again it must be remembered that it was the U.S. that unilaterally divided Korea following the Japanese surrender in August 1945, and subsequently ruled with a military occupation government in the south, overseeing the elimination of virtually the entire popular movement of (majority) opposition to U.S. occupation, murdering hundreds of thousands of people. The consequent Korean civil war that openly raged in 1948-1950 was completely ignored when the U.S. defined the beginning of the Korean War in 1950. The U.S. remains at war with the DPRK, never having signed a peace treaty with her. The war has left a deep scar in the Korean character with a memory that is regularly provoked by continued belligerance directed at the DPRK. The U.S. regularly holds joint military exercises with South Korean military forces aimed at the DPRK. The U.S. retains 37,000 military troops at 100 installations south of the 38th parallel. The U.S. has its largest Asian bombing range where it practices bombs five days a week, fifty-two weeks a year, despite opposition from many South Koreans. And now Bush has identified North Korea as part of an “axis of evil” targeted for nuclear attack. This is no remote idea to North Koreans. The U.S. possesses nuclear weapons on ships and planes in the Pacific region surrounding North Korea. Virtually every nation in this perilous position would be concerned about their defense.

It is worth noting that the United States is the leading military spender in the world resulting in substantial underfunding of its own indispensable social programs.

Fifth, Bush accused the DPRK of selling weapons to other nations. That is like the pot calling the kettle black. The U.S. is by far the largest manufacturer of conventional, nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons in the world. It is also the largest seller of these weapons, and has used conventional (against dozens of nations), biological (Cuba, China, Korea, perhaps others), chemical (Southeast Asia), and nuclear (Japan, and threatened to use them on at least 20 other occasions) weapons. In addition it has armed other nations with these weapons of mass destruction, including Iraq, one of those countries now identified as part of the “axis of evil.” In the year 2000, international arms sales were nearly $37 billion, with the U.S. being directly responsible for just over half of those sales. South Korea was the third largest buyer of weapons from the United States with $3.2 worth of military hardware. And in January 2002, South Korea was seriously contemplating purchasing an additional $3.2 billion worth of 40 F-X fighter jets from U.S. arms giant Boeing.

At the conclusion of this VOA radio broadcast, Koreans and I looked at each other in disbelief. But we also knew that we were in solidarity with each other as part of the human family. When I said goodbye to my new friends we embraced knowing that we live in a single world made up of a rich diversity of ideas and species. We know that we are going to live or die together, and hope that the arrogant and dangerous rhetoric and militarism of the United States will soon end so we can all live in peace. However, for that to happen, there will need to be a dramatic awakening among the people and a corresponding expression of massive nonviolent opposition that will make such threatening behavior impossible to carry out.

False Flag: Trump Warns ‘Animal Assad’ Over Chemical Weapons Attack That Killed 70

Caving to neocon interests, US President Donald Trump has said Syrian President Bashar al-Assad will have a “big price to pay” for allegedly launching a deadly chemical weapons attack on civilians — and blamed Iran and Russian President Vladimir Putin for backing “animal Assad”.

This follows Trump’s earlier decision to strike a Syrian airbase in April 2017 in retaliation for Assad’s alleged use of chemical weapons against his own people.

Recent tweets from Trump appear to advocate a direct overthrow of Assad.

In one of the tweets, Trump slammed Obama, who vowed in 2012 that such actions (a chemical weapons attack) would cross a “red line,” but later failed to enforce the promise a year later when hundreds of Syrians were killed by sarin gas.

Instead, Obama brokered a multi-nation deal in which Syrian President Bashar Assad pledged to remove his chemical-weapons stockpile.


The continuation of war.

This latest, likely false flag chemical weapons attack in Syria follows the defeat of ISIS, and provides the much-needed justification for the Zionist-neocon lobby to keep the US forces in Syria indefinitely — and judging by the heated rhetoric, maybe even move to overthrow Assad.

Despite all this, at a rally in Cleveland last week, Trump said that the US will get out of Syria “very soon.” It is now clear that the 4,000 US troops currently occupying Syria will in fact stay in Syria.

But just as Trump again comes out urging for military withdrawal, a false flag crops up and the US is thrown back into contention. The strings are being pulled.

Trump buying into this latest publicity stunt is a worrying sign of escalation and further interventionism — it was only a matter of time before something came up and the banker’s war was given a new lease of life.

30443265_481782188890667_6331916112679982069_n


There’s no motive for Syria to use chemical weapons and draw more attention to itself.

There is no reason for Assad to attack his own people with chemical weapons, the motive is not there, he wants deescalation and for NATO to leave Syria, why would he create reasons for further occupation? — also, the means of carrying out the attack aren’t there if we take Assad’s word for the dismantlement of Syria’s chemical weapons. If there are no means, there is no opportunity to carry out the attack to begin with.

Last year, a Syrian military statement published by state media on 4 April denied the use of “any chemical or toxic substance”, saying that the military “has never used them, anytime, anywhere, and will not do so in the future”.

President Bashar al-Assad subsequently said the 2017 chemical weapons incident was a “fabrication” used to justify a US cruise missile strike on Syria’s Shayrat airbase on 7 April.

Now, in 2018, history is repeating itself.

This shock-factor child poster image from the Zionist-owned Associated Press is up across all the mainstream media outlets.

US intelligence has links to training ‘moderate’ rebels in using chemical weapons.

Globalresearch reports:

CNN accuses Bashar Al Assad of killing his own people while also acknowledging that the “rebels” are not only in possession of chemical weapons, but that these “moderate terrorists” affiliated with Al Nusra are trained in the use of chemical weapons by specialists on contract to the Pentagon.

Moscow has provided evidence that the U.S is training Al Qaeda affiliated “militants groups” in the use of chemical. A March 17, Russia’s Ministry of Defense  states the following:

“We have reliable information at our disposal that US instructors have trained a number of militant groups in the vicinity of the town of At-Tanf, to stage provocations involving chemical warfare agents in southern Syria. The provocations will be used as a pretext by the United States and its allies to launch strikes on military and government infrastructure in Syria.”

The CNN report by Barbara Starr below dated September 2013 ultimately confirms Russia’s allegations.

Moreover, in an earlier report dated December 9 2012, CNN confirms that:

“The training [in chemical weapons], which is taking place in Jordan and Turkey, involves how to monitor and secure stockpiles and handle weapons sites and materials, according to the sources. Some of the contractors are on the ground in Syria working with the rebels to monitor some of the sites, according to one of the officials.

The nationality of the trainers was not disclosed, though the officials cautioned against assuming all are American. (CNN, December 09, 2012, emphasis added)

The above report by CNN’s award winning journalist Elise Labott (relegated to the status a CNN blog), refutes CNN’s numerous accusations directed against Bashar Al Assad.

Who is doing the training of terrorists in the use of chemical weapons? From the horse’s mouth: CNN

And these are the same terrorists (trained by the Pentagon) who are the alleged target of Washington’s counter-terrorism bombing campaign initiated by Obama in August 2014:

“The Pentagon scheme established in 2012 consisted in equipping and training Al Qaeda rebels in the use of chemical weapons, with the support of military contractors hired by the Pentagon, and then holding the Syrian government responsible  for using the WMD against the Syrian people.

What is unfolding is a diabolical scenario –which is an integral part of military planning– namely a situation where opposition terrorists advised by Western defense contractors are actually in possession of chemical weapons.

This is not a rebel training exercise in non-proliferation. While president Obama states that “you will be held accountable” if “you” (meaning the Syrian government) use chemical weapons, what is contemplated as part of this covert operation is the possession of chemical weapons by the US-NATO sponsored terrorists, namely “by our” Al Qaeda affiliated operatives, including the Al Nusra Front which constitutes the most effective Western financed and trained fighting group, largely integrated by foreign mercenaries. In a bitter twist, Jabhat al-Nusra, a US sponsored “intelligence asset”, was recently put on the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations.

The West claims that it is coming to the rescue of the Syrian people, whose lives are allegedly threatened by Bashar Al Assad. The truth of the matter is that the Western military alliance is not only supporting the terrorists, including the Al Nusra Front, it is also making chemical weapons available to its proxy “opposition” rebel forces.

The next phase of this diabolical scenario is that the chemical weapons in the hands of Al Qaeda operatives will be used against civilians, which could potentially lead an entire nation into a humanitarian disaster.

The broader issue is: who is a threat to the Syrian people? The Syrian government of Bashar al Assad or the US-NATO-Israel military alliance which is recruiting “opposition” terrorist forces, which are now being trained in the use of chemical weapons.” (Michel Chossudovsky, May 8, 2013, minor edit)