Britain Sold Chemicals to Syria to Produce Sarin G
Post# of 512
Posted On: 09/02/2013 8:46:46 PM
Britain Sold Chemicals to Syria to Produce Sarin Gas
Here's a question that deserves an answer. Is it OK to aid the enemy when your ally is the Al Qaeda linked Syrian Rebels? I think so. As if this story did not have enough twists already, it seems as though the British sold chemicals to Assad that could have been used in the production of sarin gas.
British politicians are very angry and demanding answers of Prime Minister David Cameron. It's no wonder Cameron wanted to bomb Assad. He has to get rid of the evidence. Actually it's a lot more than that, as I will explain later.
The Daily Record broke the news on Sunday: BRITAIN allowed firms to sell chemicals to Syria capable of being used to make nerve gas, the Sunday Mail can reveal today. Export licences for potassium fluoride and sodium fluoride were granted months after the bloody civil war in the Middle East began.
The chemical is capable of being used to make weapons such as sarin, thought to be the nerve gas used in the attack on a rebel-held Damascus suburb which killed nearly 1500 people, including 426 children, 10 days ago. President Bashar Assad's forces have been blamed for the attack, leading to calls for an armed response from the West. Does this mean that Britain aided and abetted their enemy? Sure it does.
Honestly it's a relief to know that Barack Obama is not the only one who does that. He and Cameron certainly have a lot to talk about. They should sit and have a spot of tea.
The Daily Record goes on to state: The chemical export licences were granted by Business Secretary Vince Cable's Department for Business, Innovation and Skills last January – 10 months after the Syrian uprising began. They were only revoked six months later, when the European Union imposed tough sanctions on Assad's regime. We know how badly Obama and Cameron want to get into the action in Syria.
This is not necessarily proof, but it does make one wonder. Was this part of a set up? Did they want Assad to use chemical weapons so badly that they were willing to sell them to him? I don't think it would surprise many people on this side of the pond if there was a set up. The only surprise would be if Barack Obama didn't have his hands in it too. I want you to think very hard about something. It was revealed some time ago that Obama has been secretly aiding the Syrian Rebels since 2012. Now we see that the British sent the goods to Assad. Between us and our trusted allies, we are arming both sides. Does it look to you as if Obama and Cameron wanted this conflict to escalate? Of course, they did. That way they could rush in to save the day.
This is not about humanitarianism. It is not about punishing Assad. It is not about choosing to side with good versus evil. This is what the British and Americans do, no matter who is in power. They find a situation that can benefit them in some way, and they exploit it. This is exactly why many of these countries hate "The West." If we wanted to fight evil forces and support good, we would go wipe out Boko Haram in Nigeria.
So why don't we? Because there's nothing in it for us. Syria is a different story. The Saudis are behind this, and the Saudis have lots of money and oil. The U.K. and U.S. both like money and oil. If you want to learn about the Saudi connection, you can click here.
Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/09/bombshell-b...CmhyFkG.99
Here's a question that deserves an answer. Is it OK to aid the enemy when your ally is the Al Qaeda linked Syrian Rebels? I think so. As if this story did not have enough twists already, it seems as though the British sold chemicals to Assad that could have been used in the production of sarin gas.
British politicians are very angry and demanding answers of Prime Minister David Cameron. It's no wonder Cameron wanted to bomb Assad. He has to get rid of the evidence. Actually it's a lot more than that, as I will explain later.
The Daily Record broke the news on Sunday: BRITAIN allowed firms to sell chemicals to Syria capable of being used to make nerve gas, the Sunday Mail can reveal today. Export licences for potassium fluoride and sodium fluoride were granted months after the bloody civil war in the Middle East began.
The chemical is capable of being used to make weapons such as sarin, thought to be the nerve gas used in the attack on a rebel-held Damascus suburb which killed nearly 1500 people, including 426 children, 10 days ago. President Bashar Assad's forces have been blamed for the attack, leading to calls for an armed response from the West. Does this mean that Britain aided and abetted their enemy? Sure it does.
Honestly it's a relief to know that Barack Obama is not the only one who does that. He and Cameron certainly have a lot to talk about. They should sit and have a spot of tea.
The Daily Record goes on to state: The chemical export licences were granted by Business Secretary Vince Cable's Department for Business, Innovation and Skills last January – 10 months after the Syrian uprising began. They were only revoked six months later, when the European Union imposed tough sanctions on Assad's regime. We know how badly Obama and Cameron want to get into the action in Syria.
This is not necessarily proof, but it does make one wonder. Was this part of a set up? Did they want Assad to use chemical weapons so badly that they were willing to sell them to him? I don't think it would surprise many people on this side of the pond if there was a set up. The only surprise would be if Barack Obama didn't have his hands in it too. I want you to think very hard about something. It was revealed some time ago that Obama has been secretly aiding the Syrian Rebels since 2012. Now we see that the British sent the goods to Assad. Between us and our trusted allies, we are arming both sides. Does it look to you as if Obama and Cameron wanted this conflict to escalate? Of course, they did. That way they could rush in to save the day.
This is not about humanitarianism. It is not about punishing Assad. It is not about choosing to side with good versus evil. This is what the British and Americans do, no matter who is in power. They find a situation that can benefit them in some way, and they exploit it. This is exactly why many of these countries hate "The West." If we wanted to fight evil forces and support good, we would go wipe out Boko Haram in Nigeria.
So why don't we? Because there's nothing in it for us. Syria is a different story. The Saudis are behind this, and the Saudis have lots of money and oil. The U.K. and U.S. both like money and oil. If you want to learn about the Saudi connection, you can click here.
Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/09/bombshell-b...CmhyFkG.99
(0)
(0)