Can David Cameron explain why he has put us on al-Qaeda’s side?

The Telegraph ^ | June 5, 2013 | Peter Oborne

[Prospero]

The longer a prime minister remains in 10 Downing Street, the more likely he or she is to go mad.

Sir Peter Tapsell, father of the Commons, said that Syria was now enduring what is “fundamentally a religious war between the Shia and the Sunni, which has raged within Islam for 1,300 years”.

Mr Cameron would not accept this point. “When I see the official Syrian opposition,” he replied, “I do not see purely a religious grouping; I see a group of people who have declared that they are in favour of democracy, human rights and a future for minorities, including Christians, in Syria. That is the fact of the matter.”

Then Jack Straw, a former foreign secretary, asked whether the Prime Minister agreed that Iran would have to be part of any peace deal. Mr Cameron failed to deal with this essential question.

[Prospero]

It's become clear the Obama administration is working 24/7 to make the world safe for Saudi wahhabism and al-Qaida. Is Cameron Obama's whipped dog, or are both governments mercenaries for the Kingdom? Is aiding our "allies" in the Syrian conflict really a part of a larger effort to contain Iran, and do the Israelis really look at the present state of the conflict this way?

Are the Christians in Syria essentially hostages to Assad?

If our employees in government have such a difficult time explaining where our mutual national interests are served by arming al-Qaida, why do they have such a difficult time explaining this to their constituents?

[celmak]

"Because if we are nice to them, they'll be nice to us; the only enemy are Conservatives!"

[Pollster1]

Mr Cameron would not accept this point. “When I see the official Syrian opposition,” he replied, “I do not see purely a religious grouping; I see a group of people who have declared that they are in favour of democracy, human rights and a future for minorities, including Christians, in Syria. That is the fact of the matter.”

Politicians are supposed to lie, but this is a stupid lie. I despise Assad. I despise his terrorist opposition. Still, there is absolutely no doubt that the terrorists would be worse for Syria's remaining Christians than Assad. The terrorists would be worse for minorities than Assad. Both sides would be terrible for human rights and terrible for democracy. We don't have a dog in this fight, and we need to stay out - same for the UK.

[WayneS]

I see a group of people who have declared that they are in favour of democracy, human rights and a future for minorities, including Christians, in Syria..

His glasses are obviously a different color the ones I wear.

Also, I sure wish he'd share whatever drugs he is on, 'cause they must be AWESOME!

[Dubya-M-Dees]

Simple answer, he’s a coward and he’s scared. He’s not afraid of the ordinary citizen who is little to no threat, he’s afraid of those who threaten to cut off his head, and he’s bowed down to them. Perhaps it’s time for the same sort of pressure from a different direction.

[shalom aleichem]

Yes, he is a coward plus he is acting at behest of Obama who is probably putting somw big money on it.

[BlackVeil]

Politicians are supposed to lie, but this is a stupid lie. I despise Assad. I despise his terrorist opposition. Still, there is absolutely no doubt that the terrorists would be worse for Syria's remaining Christians than Assad.

Well said. 100% correct.