There was a time when the science, math and technologies of
the Orient from China, India and then the Arab world were added to the art,
philosophy, humanism, spiritualism as well as the architecture of the ancient Middle
Eastern civilizations, and handed to a European Continent that took in all
that, and fashioned it into a magnificent Renaissance which then turned
horrible … unfortunately.
With the gun powder that was invented in China and used to
do fireworks, with the artillery that the Arab inventors refused to use in
battle because they would not kill someone at a distance, there came the
Europeans with the idea of raising armies equipped with guns of every
description, and used them in military campaigns that conquered and subjugated
the very people who gave them the knowledge to become powerful but also
destructive. The world had become Europe's oyster, and was to remain so for
several centuries.
The colonial powers, as they came to be called, did not
simply occupy those lands and were happy to exploit their resources, they went
further and put together all sorts of ploys to keep the locals from rising
against them and resisting the occupation. Having discovered that immense
energies existed in the ethnic and sectarian differences among the local
groups, the occupiers began to think up ways to turn those energies into
weapons they can use to divide and conquer the groups that might oppose them.
They implemented their plans by taking a piece of land from
one and giving it to another, by bringing into proximity groups that had
developed bad blood between them for centuries, by framing individuals to
inflame the multitudes … and so on. The result has been that the explosive
power which the occupiers were able to unleash turned out to be greater than
the gun powder they employed to conquer the land in the first place. More than
that, the negative effect of what they had created refused to die even after
the liberation of the people and the departure of the occupiers from their
lands.
That negative effect continues to linger today, and it
happens to frighten people like David Cameron, Prime Minister of Britain, as
well as Anders Fogh Rasmussen and Philip M. Breedlove who are big honchos in
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Expressing his fear and what he
plans to do about it, Cameron wrote an article that was published in the
Telegraph UK on August 16, 2014 under the title: “Isil poses a direct and
deadly threat to Britain” and the subtitle: “The poisonous extremism on the
march in Iraq and Syria affects us all – and we have no choice but to rise to
the challenge.” As to Rasmussen and Breedlove, they wrote: “A NATO for a
dangerous world,” an article that was published in the Wall Street Journal on
August 18, 2014.
What David Cameron calls poisonous extremism in Iraq and
Syria is nothing other than the child of the Sykes-Picot agreement engendered
by Britain and France when they resolved their own centuries-old murderous
ethnic and sectarian disputes. They did it by agreeing to share the spoils they
grabbed, having conquered the Levant and taken possession of its riches.
Cameron says that people – who may be aware of that history – tell him not to
get involved in that region again, and he says he agrees not to send British
troops. However, he goes on to say that his county can do other things which
are necessary “to help bring about a more stable world.”
And there lies the bitter irony because instability had been
the goal of the dirty games that the occupiers were fostering in the colonies;
and instability is the dirty game that the world Jews are fostering today in
that same region. It is a game the Jews are able to play because of the support
they receive from Britain and from its allies, most notably the United States
of America.
Both America and Britain being members of NATO, the
organization was used in a multitude of subtle ways to foster instability in
the Levant. It happened because unconditional support was given to Israel as it
played its dirty games. And when such support was given and put to use
repeatedly, it became obvious to many around the world that America is a
pushover that cannot be trusted or respected.
For this reason Rasmussen and Breedlove of NATO found it
necessary to report that “the dangers of 2014 differ from the threats of the
Cold War.” They explain: “Instability rages … from North Africa to the Middle
East. And Russia is resorting to a hybrid war.” And so they tell what needs to
be done: “In this changed world, NATO's fundamental mission remains the same:
to defend all its members.”