Is Cameron Funding Al-Qaeda?

Cameron: Screw the elderly, poor, vulnerable and  the British people. I want my war in Libya for that Oil and Gold.

Does this front page story on the Daily Mirror ring any bells or sound remotely familiar? If not, that's because the mainstream corporate media has distracted you from it, over years of carefully constructed soundbites.

What you also may forget is David Cameron's almost obsessive lust for war ever since his imposition a year ago. Let me just present a summary of Mr Cameron's criminal record from his early years as a Bullingdon Club member at Oxford University, kicking and abusing street beggars, telling them to get a job, to his expressed contempt for Asda workers during another of his carefully staged and choreographed visits to gloat in telling people how he intended screwing up their futures and blaming the "global" recession on the last Labour Government. To demonstrate his contempt, Cameron even commissioned a voyeuristic study to gauge the happiness factor of the British people, as a result of him robbing them to to feed his wealthy buddies. He wanted to see how miserable he could make us, so that he could watch us suffer.

As Cameron received his instructions from the Bilderberg Group meeting and under the guidance of veteran Bilderberg member, Ken Clarke, he began by his timely visit to India to blast Pakistan as a "Terrorist State". This was while the people of Pakistan were suffering cataclysmic floods, killing and displacing thousands. Of course, this is to be expected from a renowned cruel, heartless, sadistic bully. The anticipated result of the generated apathy was a media blackout of Pakistans suffering, severely restricting and almost eliminating charitable aid, while we were distracted to the high spirited story of a bunch of trapped cheerful Chilean miners, only to be followed up by another cruel blow to Pakistan by the coverage a dumb Pakistan cricketing scandal, while thousands were dieing. All this while David Cameron was telling the British people that they "shouldn't rely on the state" (aka, diplomatic for "Screw you"). Amazingly, nobody picked up on this and reminded him that, "Err. Prime Minister. That is the role, function and entire purpose of Government, to Serve The People".

Mission accomplished, the transparent Cameron's rhetoric begins to turn to war, as he can barely contain his excitement, as he itches for another Iraq. High on his priority is Libya. Having his desires abundantly made obvious by his almost immediate visit to Egypt following the alleged uprising, he seized the opportunity to secure arms sales to Egypt (again, not picked up by the mainstream media).

Then came the Libya/Gadaffi rhetoric, spin and soundbites. Count the many references to Gadaffi slaughtering civilians. Is any of this starting to sound familiar yet?

Cameron is caught out on a major cock up, when his inpatients for war gets the better of him and he sends a bumbling team of special forces into the region. He then tells us that there will be no feet on the ground in Libya, while we already knew that the SAS were already there working with CIA/Al-Qaeda (aka, database) operatives. 

Top Ranking CIA Operatives Admit Al-qaeda Is a Complete Fabrication

It is sometimes difficult to know who to be more frustrated with, them or the viewing public who buy the the obvious bullshit being spoon fed to them everyday and they foolishly believe it. So, the question is, "How would you feel if you knew that David Cameron was using your money to fund Al-Qaeda to overthrow Gadaffi?" Which is more outrageous, this suggestion or the fact that it is true? Would you be surprised to know that it has happened more often than you'd care to think and that there is documented and declassified evidence to support this claim, going as far back as 1953 Iran. It is the exact same template that has been used ever since then being applied today. In 2006, Tony Gosling posted an article on Bilderberg.org, entitled Robin Cook: A motive for murder by MI6. The article revealed that the then foreign secretary Robin Cook was investigating claims by an Ex MI5 whistleblower that British Intelligence had paid Islamic fanatics £100,000 in 1996 to assassinate Colonel Gaddafi. Initially, Robin Cook was skeptical, and almost immediately, the corporate media sought to discredit the source of the information, but in subsequent investigations, more hard evidence began to emerge, which eventually led him to resign from the Government over the Iraq War. However, since it has now been revealed through a bumbling operation by British Intelligence that they were indeed in Libya at the start of the current instability, then we can hardly dismiss such allegations, especially since we now see a familiar pattern repeat itself. After his resignation, Robin Cook began working for The Guardian, where he wrote an article on what he'd uncovered:

Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians.

As I have covered in my other posts, it can hardly be coincidence that each region in North Africa began to topple almost simultaneously, since the timing exposes order, indicating that it is clearly by design, with the end goal being Global Government, as nations throughout the world fall over like dominoes, losing their national sovereignty to eternal debt. The wealthy North African nations had their own independent central banks, with their own sovereign national currency. Of course, the likes of Gadaffi and Mubarak are tyrants, placed in their luxurious positions by the West. However, they'd forgotten that they were only contract caretakers to be terminated at a certain time. What the corporate media won't tell you is that despite Gadaffis links to terrorism, he was good to his people. History shows that when this happens, the CIA get very irritable, as told in John Perkins, "Confession Of An Economic Hit man", a copy of which can be viewed in my related posts.