Syria: is Vatican correct to claim only “dialogue” will bring peace?editor
As UK Parliament votes against military intervention, is dialogue likely to solve the Syrian conflict? Or would “the Vatican” be wiser to remember the peace plan offered by Our Lady at Fatima and consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart? Can’t be long now, surely?
Click on Syrian flag to read report on Vatican & Syria
Dialogue can only conducted between people of goodwill. The Israel Lobby in the US wants to bring down the Assad Government in order to weaken one of the remaining countries in the region that are hostile to Israeli interests. There can be no dialogue with people hell-bent on war.
For all his bluster, it is clear that Obama is not overly enamoured by the prospect of yet another Iraq, and may not be convinced by the rather convenient chemical bombardment earlier this week. Especially as it came so close after his saying that such an act would be crossing the “line”. As I write AIPAC is probably turning the screws on as many US politicians as possible in order to get them to support military intervention.
If the threatened attack of Syria goes ahead then, as former Representative Dennis Kucinich warns, we may be looking at a proxy war between the US and Russia. I doubt it though, as Russia does not seem to be willing to rattle its sabre very loudly at the moment. However, if Syria goes down and the target is turned on Iran we may see Russia draw its own line in the sand and make a stand.
Would that then be the impetus for the Roman Pontiff, in union with the Bishops, to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart? I would hope that they would do it as soon as possible. But observing Pope Francis does not fill me with any expectation of this happening except in the event of just such a cataclysm…
“The hermeneutic of continuity” Blog includes, to-day, the prayer “Litany of Syrian Saints”.
Very appropriate at this time.
I was curious when I read your comment about a litany of Syrian saints so I Googled and found this long list
It’s a good idea to pray to them at this time, very appropriate as you say.
I’d also like to draw people’s attention to a page on The Daily Mail website from January of his year which detailed leaked plans to stage a chemical attack and blame it on the Assad regime. The article mysteriously disappeared from the site this week but still can be seen in the ‘Way Back Machine’ archive:
Augustine, I cannot open that link; it says “not valid”. Can you check it out and re-post? Many thanks.
If you right click on the link and choose “open in new window” it will open but slowly. I got through and copied the link for you, but if you don’t get through with an ordinary click, try right clicking and then “open in new window”. It should work, although it will take a few minutes to download, or at least it did for me.
When I tested it with the link I just posted, the option is “go to copied address” and you will get through. If you right click on Augustine’s link it says “open in new window”.
Josephine, maybe I’m being an idiot but I just can’t get it. It appears very briefly on my screen and then disappears with the “invalid address” message! Can you take me through it step by step?
I’ve copied the article so I hope all the videos and pictures show through. Here it is:
Online Daily Mail report
U.S. ‘backed plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria and blame it on Assad’s regime’
• Leaked emails from defense contractor refers to chemical weapons saying ‘the idea is approved by Washington’
• Obama issued warning to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad last month that use of chemical warfare was ‘totally unacceptable’
By Louise Boyle
PUBLISHED: 14:16 EST, 29 January 2013 | UPDATED: 14:16 EST, 29 January 2013
Leaked emails have allegedly proved that the White House gave the green light to a chemical weapons attack in Syria that could be blamed on Assad’s regime and in turn, spur international military action in the devastated country.
A report released on Monday contains an email exchange between two senior officials at British-based contractor Britam Defence where a scheme ‘approved by Washington’ is outlined explaining that Qatar would fund rebel forces in Syria to use chemical weapons.
Barack Obama made it clear to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad last month that the U.S. would not tolerate Syria using chemical weapons against its own people.
Scroll down for video
War games: An explosion in the Syrian city of Homs last month. It has been now been suggested that the U.S. backed the use of chemical weapons to spur international military intervention
According to Infowars.com, the December 25 email was sent from Britam’s Business Development Director David Goulding to company founder Philip Doughty.
It reads: ‘Phil… We’ve got a new offer. It’s about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington.
‘We’ll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from Libya similar to those that Assad should have.
‘They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record.
‘Frankly, I don’t think it’s a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion?
‘Kind regards, David.’
Britam Defence had not yet returned a request for comment to MailOnline.
Leaked: The email was allegedly sent from a top official at a British defense contractor regarding a ‘Washington approved’ chemical attack in Syria which could be blamed on Assad’s regime
The emails were released by a Malaysian hacker who also obtained senior executives resumés and copies of passports via an unprotected company server, according to Cyber War News.
Dave Goulding’s Linkedin profile lists him as Business Development Director at Britam Defence Ltd in Security and Investigations. A business networking profile for Phil Doughty lists him as Chief Operationg Officer for Britam, United Arab Emirates, Security and Investigations.
The U.S. State Department had not returned a request for comment on the alleged emails to MailOnline today at time of publication.
However the use of chemical warfare was raised at a press briefing in D.C. on January 28.
A spokesman said that the U.S. joined the international community in ‘setting common redlines about the consequences of using chemical weapons’.
Countless losses: Families attempt to identify the bodies of Syrian fighters shot and dumped in a river in the northern Syrian city of Aleppo today
Devastation: People gather at a site hit by what activists said was missiles fired by a Syrian Air Force fighter jet from forces loyal to Assad, at the souk of Azaz, north of Aleppo on January 13
A leaked U.S. government cable revealed that the Syrian army more than likely had used chemical weapons during an attack in the city of Homs in December.
The document, revealed in The Cable, revealed the findings of an investigation by Scott Frederic Kilner, the U.S. consul general in Istanbul, into accusations that the Syrian army used chemical weapons in the December 23 attack.
• Is President Assad’s wife pregnant? British-born Asma, 37, said to be expecting her fourth child
• Revealed: The soldier whose helmet cam video of Taliban firefight has been viewed 23 million times… and he didn’t even mean for the footage to go public
An Obama administration official who had access to the document was reported as saying: ‘We can’t definitely say 100 per cent, but Syrian contacts made a compelling case that Agent 15 was used in Homs on Dec. 23.’
Mr Kilner’s investigation included interviews with civilians, doctors, and rebels present during the attack, as well as the former general and head of the Syrian WMD program, Mustafa al-Sheikh.
Dr. Nashwan Abu Abdo, a neurologist in Homs, is certain chemical weapons were used. He told The Cable: ‘It was a chemical weapon, we are sure of that, because tear gas can’t cause the death of people.’
Threats: Barack Obama said during a speech last month that if Syria used chemical weapons against its own people it would be ‘totally unacceptable’
Tyrant: Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, pictured with his wife Asma, is facing increasing international pressure over his brutal massacre of his own people
Eye witness accounts from the investigation revealed that a tank launched chemical weapons and caused people exposed to them to suffer nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, delirium, seizures, and respiratory distress.
The symptoms suggest that the weaponized compound Agent-15 was responsible. Syria denied using chemical weapons and said it would never use them against citizens.
Speaking to Pentagon reporters at the time, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said his biggest concern was how the U.S. and allies would secure the chemical and biological weapons sites scattered across Syria and ensure the components don’t end up in the wrong hands if the regime falls, particularly under violent conditions.
Government forces and rebels in Syria have both been accused by human rights groups of carrying out brutal warfare in the 22-month-old conflict, which has claimed more than 60,000 lives.
WARNING GRAPHIC CONTENT : ‘SYRIAN REBELS TESTING CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Read more: http://web.archive.org/web/20130129213824/http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2270219/U-S-planned-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-Syria-blame-Assad.html#ixzz2dYe3fLTw
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
The videos didn’t come through so you still need to get the original.
I have just this minute put my curser over the link in my own comment above, where the whole article is copied, and then pasted it into my Google search engine. The original article from the archives came up. You should try that.
Step 1 is to put your curser over the link in my previous comment
Step 2 is to right click on your mouse and select “copy” and press to copy
Step 3 is to go to your Google search engine on your computer
Step 4 is to right click on your mouse and select “paste”. Right click to paste into the search engine space.
Step 5 is to see the article in front of you, all going well.
Thanks Josephine but I still cannot get it. I think it might be the security settings on my computer. I’ve read what you posted though and thanks again.
I read that article and it is really amazing. However, my problem with the infowars.com people is that they say that the governments of the west are behind everything that happens – from the Twin Towers to 7/7 to every reported terrorist attack. I can’t help thinking that this is asking us to stretch our imaginations too far.
Don’t get me wrong. I am not above believing that governments do these things. I am not fooled by the label “conspiracy theory” – as Christopher Ferrara said in one of his articles, every murder trial involves a conspiracy theory – it’s up to the prosecution to prove their case. I heard someone say that there is plenty of “conspiracy” and not much “theory” behind these atrocities. I’d just like to be sure of the facts before a give them credibility.
How do we know the emails are for real? I have to admit that if the paper was forced to pull the article, that is proof enough in a way that there is truth in the report. Governments couldn’t possibly respond to every criticism, so if they have acted on that Daily Mail article, it would suggest there is some truth in it.
As for the Pope’s call for “dialogue” – that just shows how out of touch he really is. Our Lady never mentioned dialogue but gave a simple and very precise act to be performed to achieve peace in the world. I agree with Theresa Rose. For all the Pope talks about loving Our Lady, I find it hard to believe if he won’t do that one simple prayer and instruct his bishops to join in to consecrate Russia.
Typo in last sentence of second paragraph in my post at 7.04pm – “before a give them credibility.” should be “before I give them credibility”. Sorry.
I used to think that that and in a way I still do have reservations but the more things happen and the more I check out infowars the more believable it all is.
I don’t know if you saw Alex Jones being interviewed on TV by Andrew Neil a while back? Neil mocked Jones and really trashed him without giving him a fair hearing. That made me realise that the mainstream media are really afraid of what he knows and that he has his own TV shows to air his information. Unfortunately Jones lost his cool and snapped back at Neil, which didn’t come across well. However Andrew Neil was a total disgrace, calling Jones names and making him out to be an idiot.
There’s a lot of dark stuff going on at government level and only an imbecile would pretend otherwise.
I don’t give much credence to InfoWars. I think there is just a little too much of the PT Barnum in Alex Jones. I find it difficult to trust a ‘news source’ who is constantly trying to sell you things.
I struggled for years with conspiracy theories in that the seeming willingness of authors to believe every just-so story on the flimsiest of evidence repelled my sceptical mind.
However, I have been forced to come to the opinion that there are true and there are false conspiracy theories. Indeed, it has only been in the last 20-30 years that the very notion of conspiracy per se has been treated as the refuge of unhappy minds.
I think it probable that there does exist a more or less formulated consensus among the very wealthy and powerful that, to ensure the continued existence of what they understand as ‘civilisation’, the population of the earth needs to be drastically reduced. There is too much evidence to believe otherwise. Further, since they see the ‘survival of civilisation’ as meaning nothing other than orderly rule by these same elites, both the Catholic religion and the traditional family must be weakened in order that the opinions of the mass of individuals may be shaped more effectively, both of these institutions effectively acting as a buffer between the individual and the organs of governance. Aristotle understood two-and-a-half millennia ago the danger to tyrants by “common meals, clubs, education, and the like” (Politics XI) Such things are an obstacle to the State (or World State) forming a person fully in its own image.
Now, a consensus is one thing, a monolithic organisation is another. And I think there are at times disagreements among the members of the elite on how they should proceed. Professor Carroll Quigley, who was permitted to study the papers of the Council on Foreign Relations, suggested as much in the original version of Tragedy and Hope (1966) the plates of which were later destroyed. It is such disagreement on details that may give the impression to the ordinary observer of politics that there is no such fundamental consensus among the people who really make the far-reaching decisions. This was the experience of Hillaire Belloc who wrote about this in The Party System (1911) and noted that much of what passes as parliamentary politics is really just pantomime.
With regards to one-world government. This idea was not wholly alien to Catholic writers in the Middle Ages. Dante talks of a universal republic in which all men will be brothers. But the understanding that this world state would be confessionally Catholic and built on the basis of subsidiarity. After the Second World War Catholic moral theologians seemed to forget this condition for a successful union of men and, nevertheless, called for such a form of government. Fagothey’s Right and Reason makes this mistake. So, it should not be such a surprise to later see Paul VI and John Paul II hail the United Nations as the harbinger of a “civilisation of love”.
I agree with you that dialogue can only be conducted by people of goodwill. No amount of dialogue is possible with those hell bent on war.
For all that Pope Francis says he has a love of Our Lady, still there is no liklihood that he or the Bishops are willing to obey her requests to Consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart.
Pope Francis and all Bishops need to remember that they follow the King of France into ruin, when the King failed to Consecrate France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus as He requested. 100 years later to the date of Our Lord’s request the French Revolution began and the King went to his execution.
And is it not strange, that the French revolution unleashed a reign of terror organised by Robespiere. That reign of terror ended with the martydom of the 16 Carmelite nuns who had offered their lives to God. The only one to be executed after them was Robespierre himself.
A five minute prayer, that is all, for the Bishops in conjuction with the Holy Father to say, in their Cathedrals at the same time. But, like Augustine I don’t hold my hopes very high, if they so disregard Our Lady, who will they listen to.
I think America is determined to intervene in Syria.
Has anyone heard about the current bill to reintroduce national service aka conscription in the United Kingdom? The second reading is expected on the 6th of September 2013.
No, I thought not. There is a media blackout on the subject it appears.
I knew it! I’ve been predicting that we’ll be conscripted for battle in the Middle East, or somewhere like that. One of my friends makes fun of me for it, he probably thinks I’m a doomsday nut. But I am really frightened about World War Three. The geopolitical implications of an military intervention in Syria are alarming: Iran, Russia and China are involved.
Perhaps the government know how things are going to kick off in the near future? Can someone please reassure me?
This Bill has the additional advantage of proposing a means of dealing with all the thousands of young men who are currently claiming JSA (through no fault of their own, i.e. no jobs).
The chances of a government bill gaining royal assent is 94%.For private members bills, it was just 11%. More chance of the consecration of Russia than UK conscription. But less chance of Keith O’Brien returning to Dunbar.
Let’s hope so.
That’s astonishing – and worrying.
I’m laid up with flu these past few days so just doing a quick check on the blog in between bouts of (feel sorry for me) illness, or I’d post this on the website. I will do in due course, so thanks for the alert – which, of course, our “free press” should have done at the first whisper of such major news.
Later, that same day… Posted on our website, flu notwithstanding!
Thank you for the text of that article. The US have previous when it comes to false flag events including the Gulf of Tonkin which led to the Vietnam war. The Pope may have a point if the US wanted dialogue – which they obviously do not. When it comes to 9/11, I do not know the truth but I do know that the official version of events cannot be true. The evidence for this is never-ending, but to summarise – those towers could not have been brought down by two planes. They were built to withstand strikes from multiple and bigger planes. They came down in about 9 and 10 seconds respectively which is faster than free fall and completely turned to dust. There is footage of one very confused reporter looking unsuccessfully for débris on 9/11who said that they had “evaporated”. There was not a filing cabinet or toilet bowl left and somehow miraculously the passport of one of the hijackers survived. As the plane hits you can see a “plane-shaped” hole in the side of the building which is nonsense because the plane would have broken up as it impacted the building. made of very thick steel beams. The 9/11 Commission reported on what had happened but refused to say HOW it had happened. In addition this was a crime scene but all the steel was immediately shipped to China and India to be melte down; this amounted to tampering with a crime scene which is a criminal offence. I could go on and on but suspect I am already getting boring.
This was a lie of mammoth proportions which was perpetrated in plain sight and which has provided the very flimsy excuse to wage war all over the world. If they can get away with this they must thnk that they can get away with anything.
Here is a neoconservative talking about the need for a ‘false flag’ with Iran:
I think the attack on the USS Liberty in 1967 was a false flag operation that went wrong. The US flag was visible for all to see, yet the ship was bombed, strafed, and napalmed for hours until it became clear that the Liberty was not going to sink. At that point Israel started back-pedalling and offering help to the survivors.
The incident of the US Liberty marked the point at which the Israel Lobby became the dominating force in US foreign policy.
That is unbelievably crazy. How is it possible to trust anyone if the men governing the world are so untrustworthy?
I’ve just watched that young man and he’s obviously suggesting doing something to blame on Iran, to let the US government proclaim war – a “false flag” as you say. I just wish the politicians were as open as he has been. That would stop people speaking abut conspiracy theories when it’s no such thing. The problem is how to tell the “false flags” – the terrorist attacks can’t all be self inflicted but that clip was a real eye-opener. Thanks for posting it.
I agree with most of the comments so far.
I’m glad David Cameron consulted parliament and got a skelping. This is what Blair the Butcher should have done over Iraq.
I don’t think there’s any solid evidence to prove that this chemical attack took place. There’s even less evidence to show it was President Assad’s government was behind it.
Am I missing something, but these rebels the US and UK are so desperate to support are affiliated to Al Quaeda….I thought these were the bad guys? You couldn’t make this up. We armed Bin Laden in Afghanistan….then we declare war on him, shot him and dumped him in the sea…..but now we are wanting to arm his pals. Crazy.
Well, there’s doubt that there is such an organisation as Al Quaeda, rather a series of disparate groups that adopt the name when convenient.
The recent napalm strike against the school in northern Syria came quickly after the chemical attack and is also being slated against the Assad regime. There is outrage in Washington. But where was the outrage when Israel used flesh-burning white phosphorous in Gaza in 2008 and 2009?
In case anyone has not come across it before, I recommend http://www.antiwar.com as a good source for those news items that, for some reason, do not appear in BBC, CNN, Fox News, etc. Also, http://scotthorton.org/ has a useful archive of interviews by the eponymous broadcaster.
I’ve heard that before about Al Quaeda. A friend told me it just means something like “basic” or “base cell” (can’t remember which, but something like that) and that it isn’t actually an organisation as such.
I was listening to Obama on the news just now and seeing his “passion” about the civilians attacked by chemical weapons, he did not come across as sincere at all. Why is he so worked up about a relatively small number of people suffering (I’m not meaning to minimise it, not at all, but he seems to be so worked up about this attack and not so worked up about others with much larger numbers of casualties in various parts of the world)
I’m extremely cynical about the Syrian conflict and all the other “uprisings” in the middle east. Something is not quite right.
I do wish Pope Francis would consecrate Russia and we could see the start of the period of peace Our Lady spoke of. It beggars belief that this simple consecration is still to be done.
And why is Obama doing nothing about the hundreds of people being slaughtered in the upheaval in Egypt? It’s selective moral outrage, which precisely because it is selective is for that reason not moral but rather political.
President Obama is also happy for millions of babies to be butchered in their mothers’ wombs. No sense of outrage there.
Exactly Petrus, I couldn’t agree more.
Testing post to see if my new avatar shows up!
Success at last……. I love a red rose.
A beautiful avatar – I, too, love red roses.
Augustine & Petrus,
Spot on: Obama’s selective moral outrage is … well … very selective!
I noticed the story of the Pope’s declaring a day of fasting. Here’s the link.
Yet, Pope Francis still refrains from carrying out Our Lady’s request in Consecrating Russia to Her Immaculate Heart. He is Pope, and is capable of using Papal Authority to order the Cardinals and Bishops to carry out the Consecration with him, on the same day.
What is there to lose? Absolutely nothing. A Five minute prayer is all that it would take.
Pope declares a Universal Day of Fasting and Prayer for Syria.
Above Sixupman suggests we pray the unofficial (for private use) ‘Litany of Syrian Saints’. Whoever wrote it has done an excellent job.
Here’s the link:
Universal days of fasting and prayer for Syria or anywhere else won’t replace the act of obedience required by Our Lady, so the sooner the Pope consecrates Russia, the better and as Theresa Rose has said it is only a five minute prayer, what is there to lose?
You misunderstood me. I wasn’t saying it was an alternative solution to peace.
I will pray for Syria in addition to praying for the consecration, which I have been doing for a while.
Even if the consecration hasn’t taken place, the private prayers of the faithful for Syria are still efficacious.
If you disagree with me on that one then you’re a heretic!
If I had the ability to consecrate Russia I would. But I do have the power to offer prayers and fasting for Syria.
One could perhaps offer prayer and fasting for the consecration on Russia on Saturday instead? I would assume the regulars on this blog did that anyway.
I wasn’t meaning to criticise you, I just meant what I said that nothing can replace the act of consecrating Russia because that’s what Our Lady asked for, not fasting days.
Please don’t take my comment as a criticism of you, not for a minute.
I do agree with you that prayers are still efficacious for peace, so I’m not a heretic after all!
Miles Immaculatae and Lily,
I agree with both of you about praying for Syria and also for the consecration to be done.
With all due respect to Pope Francis, he must be nuts to think he can establish dialogue with the likes of the Syrian opposition, many of whom are in league with Al-Qaeda, the Salafists and Wahhabis. Christian Priests, such as those united with Rome (who are the Christian majority in Syria) have had their heads sawn off by the opposition. I hope Assad murders and exterminates the whole lot of them. Under him, Syria is a pluralistic society, where Islam is NOT the State Religion, Christian civil servants can take Sundays off to attend Mass, and Assad allowed 10 Synagogues to be built in Damascus. By comparison the opposition say Christians must pay a tax, and they are going to kill Jews. Yet our moronic government supports this. Go figure. It’s time the Pope and other Western leaders woke up and smelt the Arabica.
“I hope Assad murders and exterminates the whole lot of them.”
That is a most unchristian thing to say, please repent of it. We cannot wish evil on anyone, no matter who.
I do agree with you about the Pope’s ridiculous attitude and words, also western governments who have their own agenda.
I have submitted the following letter to the Daily Telegraph, albeit without acknowledgement so far.
Other bloggers might feel encouraged to send similar messages, preferably to the same newspaper (email@example.com) to convince the Editor that others are of like opinion.
A first class letter, and an excellent recommendation. I hope others will follow your example and write to the Telegraph. I’ll do my best to follow your good example asap.
Believe you me, I stand by what I said because i believe Assad to be a fair and just ruler who has given Syria and it’s people a great deal of prosperity and stability, and protected them from Hezbollah, Hamas and Al-Qaeda, not to mention the protection given to Christians, especially those united with Rome and Jews etc. The same can be said of Hosni Mubarak- how he defended the Copts.
If I have sinned through my comments above, and in my previous post, then God will judge me but sometimes you have to fight fire with fire.
Although please be a lamb, and go over to General Comments, and please try to answer my question.
I thought this woman was very good on the film