Widening gulf between official statements & public awareness. How do I engage my MP?

Ned Pamphilon Productions 15.07.2013
In response to my question regarding possible UK taxpayer funding of Al Qaeda alongside ‘Syrian rebels’ http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/dear-ned-you-are-bonkers.html, my Conservative MP Matthew Hancock replied 24.06.2013:

            “Regarding Syria, I can assure you that no decision has been taken on whether to arm the National Coalition… Assad must understand that all options remain on the table if he refuses to negotiate.
            Thank you for taking the time to contact me. Please do not hesitate to do so again should you have any further concerns.”

Ah yes, that democratically elected representative body for Syria: the ‘National Coalition’! UK policy is regime change and my MP can assure me till the cows come home; I suspect the UK taxpayer already contributes toward Syrian regime change whether covertly or overtly.
General Wesley Clark, about 10 days after 9/11, was told by a colleague general at the Pentagon,
            “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.”
A few weeks later, by which time the US were bombing Afghanistan, the same contact informed him,
            “Oh, it’s worse than that… I just got this down from upstairs (the Secretary of Defence’s office) … This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.”

Clark asked,
            “Is it classified?”
The General said,
            “Yes, sir.”
Clark ordered him,
            “Well, don’t show it to me.”
John Perkins, the Economic Hit Man www.johnperkins.org, has laid out in detail how Western interests have undermined foreign sovereign governments and now, millions in the public domain are accessing such information whether local MPs deem it correct, accurate, conspiratorial or otherwise.
Press TV point to similarities between Britain’s Iraq invasion and planning to invade Syria: approx. 5.30mins:
Roland Dumas, former French Minister for Foreign Affairs, says Britain had been planning a war against Syria some two years before to the unrest broke out in the Arab country:
            “I’m going to tell you something. I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business. I met with top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria.

            This was in Britain not in America. Britain was organising an invasion of rebels into Syria. They even asked me, although I was no longer minister for foreign affairs, if I would like to participate.

            This operation goes way back. It was prepared, preconceived and planned… in the region it is important to know that this Syrian regime has a very anti-Israeli stance.
Consequently, everything that moves in the region, and I have this from the former Israeli prime minister who told me, ‘… we’ll try to get on with our neighbours, but those who don’t agree with us will be destroyed.”

Below I have transcribed points made during a conversation between James Corbett and Prof. Michel Chossudovsky on Syria. It presents information that implies my MP must be out of touch or stone walling his constituent or in denial; exactly what assurance can he give that no decision has been taken on arming Syrian rebels?
The Keiser Report on Russia Today TV recently covered a Daily Telegraph article quoting HSBC’s global economist Stephen King on the potential for civil unrest:
            “Europe’s rich Baby Boomers are behaving like the nobility in the Peasants’ Revolt, and could face an uprising by the younger generation if the situation doesn’t change.
            I am intrigued at the moment that the youth are quite peaceful, and I wonder whether that might change. It is very difficult to predict but youth movements might become more focused on their own rights rather than the economy [at large]…”
Is the commentary of Press TV, ex French minister Roland Dumas, The Corbett Report, Professor Chossudovsky, John Perkins, General Wesley Clark and Russia Today simply slanted, bias and an unreliable; unlike good old Auntie BBC? Perhaps geopolitical truth will always be elusive, but perception has always been important. If perception leads to civil unrest, it can affect us all; in the safe haven of UK backyards just as it affects the homes of Egyptians and Syrians. If the UK government becomes perceived as so untrustworthy, will the established status quo resort to authoritarian tactics to maintain its power base? The truth is one thing, perceived truth can be quite another. There is a widening gulf between official government statements and public awareness of what is actually happening. It may be a sign of increasing consciousness awareness among the public. As journalist Sonia Poulton says about new soon to be TV and radio station The People’s Voice:
            “Hi Ned,
            I welcome any channel that not only does what you want but starts to allow us to feel as if we are living in a real world. I am sick of a media narrative that doesn’t match the reality.
            Time is long over-due for a change.
            Exciting times.”
I propose we engage in improved communication within our local communities and with our political representatives. Of course I have further concerns, but what do I say to my MP to constructively engage him? I suspect he will respond again with establishment government party line answers which take us no further than this point now. Gerald Celente’s Spring 2013 Trends Journal call it the “I don’t want to hear it” trend.
I am yet to reply to my MP. I want to avoid alienation and invite constructive, open dialogue; not confrontation nor blame. Apparently, he is clever, charming, a pleasant chap and Suffolk is a Conservative heartland safe seat; my MP is unlikely to be replaced in the near future. Any suggestions Tapsters? How do we engage our political representatives? How do I engage my MP?
Ned Pamphilon, 
Global Research TV interview:
The Imperial Agenda in Syria – Michel Chossudovsky on GRTV
Published on 22 Jun 2013
Syrian ‘rebels’ are essentially foot soldiers of the Western military alliance namely the US, NATO, Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and been decimated by the Syrian armed forces. The ground war is over. The international community is calling for an end to the conflict while continuing to create conditions for the continuation of conflict.
Israel was involved in supporting Al Qaeda rebels in areas adjacent to occupied Golan Heights on Syria-Israeli border, including a hospital for Al Qaeda rebels before sending them back to the war theatre. Ironically, Israel has been supporting at least the military wing of Islamic Jihadists with a view to destabilising a neighbouring sovereign state.
It is the international community creating chaos and the ‘need’ for human rights; foreign funded, foreign trained, foreign armed…
Jan/Feb 2011 Robert Stephen Ford appointed US Ambassador to Damascus. He was previously the No.02 at the US Embassy in Iraq under John Negroponte, who has a history of creating and supporting death squads in Honduras and Nicaragua. Robert Stephen Ford who speaks Arabic and Turkish, played a key role in organising death squads on the model of the ‘Salvador Option’ and that applied in Iraq. The death squads in Syria follow a pattern executing Shiite, Alawites and Sunni ‘traitors’ plus ethnic cleansing among Christian communities; essentially a structured insurrection directed at the civilian population. The foreign media then casually accuses the Syrian government of killing its own people: atrocities then blamed on Syrian government; out of chaos comes order.
Then comes chemical weapons accusations. In reality, Al Nusra ‘Syrian rebels’ are being trained by Western special forces; not to use them, but to familiarise them with chemical weaponry. Turkish police have apprehended ‘rebels’ with chemical weapons.
This proxy war has so far been a failure, apart from creating chaos and mayhem. We are in an era of unconventional, covert warfare: destabilise the economy, impose sanctions block supplies of food and fuel create havoc, send in killers, create a refugee crisis, the international community pick up the pieces leading to some kind of transition. The ground war is over, but for sporadic attacks, rebels entering in from Turkey or Israel.
Regarding a no fly zone, Syria had an air defence system from the outset and has added to it in the last two years. In 2006 the Russians stated an initiative to base S300’s to protect their naval base at Tartus. This air defence system is likely already installed prior to the lifting of the arms embargo by the EU Putin has recently stated was already defacto: we’re going to deliver the S300 to Syria.
The context is a broader military roadmap war through Damascus to Tehran. Sectarian fighting to be triggered in Lebanon, part of covert operations. Thus far the Syrian government has won this battle against the most powerful military alliance on planet earth which funds Al Qaeda foot soldiers.
John Kerry negotiates directly with commanders of Al Qaeda and Al Nusra, violating international law and committing war crime; in violation of US anti-terror legislation. Senator John McCain the same. Double standards.
Al Qaeda is a creation of the CIA, the excuse is it s just ‘blowback’ from the heyday of the Soviet Afghan war and the mujahedin have turned against us. ın reality, Al Qaeda has been a US intelligence asset all along, recruited and trained in Saudi Arabia and Qatar and funded by the US, Israel, NATO, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and so forth. In effect, the global structure of the war on terror means the terrorists are doing the fighting for ‘us’ in the war the war on terror. The US and allies are terror states financing Al Qaeda, training Al Qaeda and interfacing on a regular basis with Al Qaeda. This new normal is a criminal project: a war on terror while at the same time a working relationship with the same terrorists in wars of conquest. It’s mad!
Interview Ends


The Tap Blog is a collective of like-minded researchers and writers who’ve joined forces to distribute information and voice opinions avoided by the world’s media.

3 Responses to “Widening gulf between official statements & public awareness. How do I engage my MP?”

  1. Nixon Scraypes says:

    Ned,just be as nice as pie,try the asking technique-“why are we arming Al Quaida” etc Let him feel clever but make him think.

  2. NPP says:

    Thanks Nixon. At the moment he probably still denies we are arming AQ. May be we are not technically, but of course, I, you, we smell a rat.
    Maintaining a courteous disposition and persistance in asking questions seems to be an option. I do sometimes just want to yeelllllllllll… a little bit. I will probably send him something along the lines of this Tap post, and so it goes, and so it goes…

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.