‘UK bombed Syria to protect Iraq’: Cameron changes his story in UN letter

get-attachment (3)


Britain’s ambassador to the United Nations has claimed that Britain’s killing of Islamic State militants in Syria was legal because the drone strikes that caused the fatalities were launched to defend Iraq.

The government’s justification for the killings contrasts sharply with Prime Minister David Cameron’s earlier rhetoric, which claimed the strikes against Islamic State (formerly ISIS/ISIL) were a justified means of defending Britain’s national security.

Embedded image permalink
On Monday, Cameron told MPs the drone strikes were legal because they were intended to prevent attacks on Britain.

However, a letter sent to the UN Security Council (UNSC) by the British government laid out a different legal justification for bombing Syria.

The letter claimed drone strikes in Syria are “a necessary and proportionate exercise of the individual right of self-defense of the United Kingdom,” but added that “action against ISIL in Syria is lawful in the collective self-defense of Iraq.”

The Islamic State militants killed in the drone strike are believed to be Ruhul Amin, 26, from Aberdeen, and Reyaad Khan, 21, from Cardiff. They were killed in Raqqa, Syria, on August 21. No civilians were reported to have been killed by the airstrike.

The government’s latest justification for the strikes has proved controversial. As a result, Cameron has been accused of duplicity.

Outrage as Cameron admits approving drone strike that killed Brit citizens in Syria CAGE’s Ibrahim Mohamoud quoted:


Labour Party leadership frontrunner Jeremy Corbyn said Cameron’s failure to mention the additional justification of defending Iraq raised the question of whether parliament had been duly consulted.

“The government appears to have used an additional and entirely separate justification for this covert strike in their letter to the UN, which was not mentioned in the prime minister’s statement to parliament,” he said.

“Why did the government cite the [defense] of Iraq when justifying this strike to the UN, but not when doing so to parliament?”

“Is it because parliament previously voted against action in Syria, making this justification at odds with the will of the Commons? The prime minister cannot face two ways on this issue – he needs to urgently explain this discrepancy.”


Reprieve’s Comment by Latest RAF drone strike on IS British militants by UK govt:


Legal charity Reprieve has also condemned the government’s justification for conducting the strikes, saying such military action flouts a 2013 parliamentary vote that blocked airstrikes in Syria.

“The prime minister’s supposed reasons for carrying out this unprecedented drone attack seem to be changing by the day,” said Kat Craig, Reprieve’s Legal Director of Abuses in Counter-Terrorism.

“Parliament voted strikes in Syria down, the government promised to return to parliament if it were going to strike again, and yet the PM has just told the United Nations he struck Syria in order to defend Iraq.”

Craig called upon the government to immediately offer a full explanation of the factual and legal logic for the strikes.


Source: http://www.rt.com/uk/315075-drone-strike-cameron-syria/?utm_source=browser&utm_medium=aplication_chrome&utm_campaign=chrome


7 Responses to “‘UK bombed Syria to protect Iraq’: Cameron changes his story in UN letter”

  1. Lynn says:

    This man is paid handsomely to lie to us, that’s his sole purpose. PR man of the criminals in hiding. Well Cameron we know what you are now. The word is out old boy!! You can’t get away with this for much longer, its becoming very clear that you are a lousy front man for the tribe of Zion,

  2. ian says:

    I believe that the men killed in the drone strikes had high up British connections and it was feared that it would be leaked. I could be wrong but Camoron surely aint telling the truth.

  3. Lynn says:

    He doesnt’t kill terrorists!! He is one. We know drones are over us too Cameron. Watching and listening. How long before they are weaponised.

  4. bangonit says:

    This excuse for a man is no ambassador of Great Britain and has absolutely no allegiance to its people whatsoever and for the safety of its people he should be removed from office posthaste and tried for all of his criminal activities.
    He and the cabal he bows down to are preventing the true king of England from taking his rightful place on the throne of this once mighty nation and ending the corrupt scumbags control.
    This link has some very interesting evidence as to the claims i make here
    http://www.greghallett.com/ Love peace harmonies.

  5. Lynn says:

    Putin is cornering them now. Let’s see how many terrorists they can round up. how will they hide their true intentions then. Lol.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.