Wednesday, 12 October 2016

Hillary Clinton's Plan For Syrian "regime change"

Dear Members of Parliament:

While most of you have taken the bait on the issue of Donald Trump's locker-room "bro talk", I ask for your attention on leaks concerning Hillary Clinton's plan for Syria, as seen in two attached image files. In these two small image files you will see that Hillary Clinton's plan in Syria is to overthrow the government and install a CIA "puppet regime".

In summary, these leaks show:

1. Hillary Clinton supports arming militants who're against ISIS, but Hillary Clinton also plans to use the same militants against the Syrian Army. We are told by the 'objective' Western media that Russia is prolonging the war; but we are not told that Hillary Clinton wants to prolong the war in Syria by arming terrorists and overthrowing Assad. This is not about democracy and human rights, it's about the CIA's plan to kill Assad by proxy and install an even worse dictatorship (with an added risk of ISIS controlling Damascus).

2. Hillary Clinton admits that the US has only taken "limited action" against ISIS in Syria. Protecting ISIS is part of her plan, you see, Hillary Clinton uses ISIS in the way that a person uses a spade or a screw driver. ISIS is a tool. They are allowed to fight the Syrian Army up to a point, then the Americans will come in, bomb everyone they don't like, and install their puppet regime. Until that happens, ISIS is essentially an American ally in Syria and all US air strikes against ISIS are pure theatre - as Hillary Clinton says in the leaked email, U.S. actions against ISIS in Syria are "limited" (read: have no effect). The U.S. did nothing when ISIS captured Palmyra in 2015, and it was Russia that liberated Palmyra from ISIS earlier this year.

3. Saudi Arabia and Qatar are funding ISIS atrocities and Hillary Clinton has put no sanctions on either nation.

4. Although not mentioned in the attachments, Hillary Clinton said in the 2nd debate, that she wants a no-fly zone over Syria. This would mean going to war against Russia. Question: should a person with Hillary Clinton's brainless-ness be allowed access to the red button? There is a 0% chance of the U.S. establishing a "no-fly zone" over Syria. If U.S. planes attack Russia's Hmeymim air base, the Russians will retaliate with S-400 and S-300VM missile launchers. Many U.S. planes will be shot down and the only player with a no-fly zone will be Russia. You cannot enforce a no-fly zone from the air, when all your planes are being blown out of the sky by advanced missile systems equipped with long-range radar.

If MPs are not aware of it, I will make this very clear: Russian officials have openly stated that they will shoot down U.S. planes over Syria, should the U.S. have the nerve to bomb the Syrian Army again. You might think that the U.S. Navy can defeat Russia, but at what cost? The S-400 and S-300VM can shoot down cruise missiles, air craft and drones. Their range is hundreds of kilometres. Also, the S-300VM is not the S-300 that Russia recently sold to Iran. The S-300VM is an upgraded version, these launchers don't come at Warehouse prices. One of the S-300VM launchers is deployed at Russia's Tartus naval base, right in the Mediterranean. It's there to shoot down cruise missiles, should Hillary Clinton become President and suddenly have an itch to start a nuclear war.

In conclusion, I ask John Key and Andrew Little to comment on Hillary Clinton's plan for Syria, specifically her suggestion of a no-fly zone, which top U.S. generals have said will lead to a war against Russia. If those of you reading this were disgusted by Trump's locker-room "bro talk" then I hate to ruin the fun for you, but we could see a war against Russia as early as February or March next year, should Hillary Clinton become President of The World.

If Aleppo is discussed in our Parliament then I hope that members will not forget about the advanced missile launchers at the Hmeymim and Tartus bases. There is no room for discussion about Trump's antics in our media or our Parliament. I'm not concerned about sexism from 10 years ago, I'm concerned about global instability and nuclear weapons. Imagine a man shoving his hand up a woman's vagina. Now imagine a nuclear bomb going off and vaporising tens-of-thousands of people. Can members see that one issue here is infinitely more concerning than the other? Drop the emotion and the sentiment and think about how dire this situation could get, if we ignore Hillary Clinton's leaked emails regarding Syria. I'm tired of "women this, women that" and "sexism this, sexism that". Let's discuss the leaked emails and Hillary Clinton's obsession with wanting to become the President of The World.

Jeff Mitchell