Why Theresa May Must Be 'Impeached'

Authored by Rob Slane via TheBlogMire.com,

So the moment we’ve been holding our breaths for a week finally came. In the end, I am mighty glad that this particular strike seems more like the impotent thrashing of the neocon snake that didn’t dare to attack places where Russian servicemen were likely to be killed, than it does the start of World War III. For the moment, at least, thank God.

But the fact that it was a fairly limited strike — compared to what it might have been — in which the majority of missiles failed to hit their targets, having been eliminated by Soviet-era air defenses, does not in anyway absolve those who ordered the strike from the grave and reckless action they have taken and for which they are responsible. Not only did they authorise this action before an investigation had been carried out in Douma, and in fact hours before the OPCW inspectors were due there, they did so without consulting their respective legislative bodies, without knowing how many of their missiles would or would not hit their targets, or — and this is crucial — knowing for sure whether their actions would elicit a response from Russia.

In other words, if you live in Britain, France or America, you now know just how cheaply the leaders of your country hold your life, and the lives of your fellow countrymen. They have taken action which could have resulted — and might still result — in a direct clash with the Russian military, and while you have breath left in you, you must never forget this, and do all you can to hold these people to account for their lawless, reckless and enormously dangerous actions.

You must also remember that they did so not because they cared about ordinary Syrians, but because their diabolical attempts to topple the Syrian Government, by backing Islamic terrorist groups such as Jaysh al-Islam, has been thwarted.

But there is one more thing.

Amongst the myriad of mind-boggling and often deceptive remarks made by Theresa May during her statement after the attacks, I was particularly struck by this:

“Together we have hit a specific and limited set of targets. They were a chemical weapons storage and production facility, a key chemical weapons research centre and a military bunker involved in chemical weapons attacks. Hitting these targets with the force that we have deployed will significantly degrade the Syrian Regime’s ability to research, develop and deploy chemical weapons.”

So the response to an alleged and unproven chemical weapons incident was to attempt to blow up alleged stockpiles of chemical weapons. I confess that I am not an expert in blowing up chemical weapons stockpiles, but it does seem to me to be a reckless and insane thing to do. If there really were stockpiles of chemical weapons in those places, exactly what guarantee could Donald and Theresa give that such chemicals would not then be released into the atmosphere? As I say, I’m not an expert in blowing up chemical weapons stockpiles — I doubt that there are many in the world who are — but it does seem to me at least possible that an action such as this is potentially catastrophic.

Of course, in all probability there were no chemical weapons there at all. But if we take her at her word, it seems that Theresa May has this to answer for: Not only did she authorised an attack on a sovereign state based on unproven allegations; not only did she fail to consult Parliament; not only did she risk a confrontation with Russia; she also risked the possibly disastrous release of chemical weapons into the atmosphere.

These are just some of the many reasons why this woman needs to be impeached by Parliament. It has never happened before, but it is possible. In fact, it is absolutely needful, not just in her case, but also to ensure that no Prime Minister ever acts so lawlessly and recklessly with so many lives again.


fx Occident Mortal Mon, 04/16/2018 - 05:09 Permalink

Syrian opposition confirms: at least 65 missiles intercepted by Assad's forces.



They went for lots of targets, but Syrian air defense prevailed - for now.

Prepare for more false flags and pretexts for additonal missile and bombing attacks once the US aircraft carrier strike group  has reached the combat zone.

Seems the anglozionist scum drank too much of their own cool-aid. Isra-hell claimed back in february that they "had taken out half of syrian air defense". Well, they were lying or clueless. Or the remaining half is remarkably powerful.


The syrian opposition, which certainly doesn't make pro-assad propaganda basically confirms that this was not a show by Trump! Trump wanted to inflict real military damage on Syria. So much for all the idiots who believe the q-anon hoax and "trust the plan". And who seriously argued that the actual target were assets of the deep shit in Syria. LOL!!

Speaking of the latter, they yesterday emphasized that iran was the ultimate goal. Sure, it is. And it is a retarded, stupid, most dangerous idea to bomb and invade Iran. If that is "the plan that should be trusted", then I really don't know why anyone would still support Trump. Folks, destroying iran was ALWAYS the necon's plan. If Trump is carrying that one out now - then we could as well have Killary in power.

I hope that I am wrong, but I fear Mattis will be the next one fired by Trump. Mattis talked Trump out of bombing Russioan and Iranian targets. I am sure Trump is infuriated about the utter failure of the attack.

When he fires Mattis, the warriors will have taken full control. Let's prey he stays as the only remaining adult in the war room.

In reply to by Occident Mortal

Karl Marxist CuttingEdge Mon, 04/16/2018 - 10:45 Permalink

She is also a woman and a lesbian, instilled by the Crown (Serco) and Israel. She serves Israel because of the Rothschilds. Women do not good leaders make. Lesbians are stooges, slaves. Being slaves they do what they're told as they have no honor, no integrity. Doing Master's bidding, including being allowed to lick Master's cunt as recompense, is what May, Hillary, Kristine Marcie are all about. The pretense of leadership ability when they're there only to destroy what honorable men built toward one world homosexuality and communism.

In reply to by CuttingEdge

Lynn Trainor squid Mon, 04/16/2018 - 09:16 Permalink

Exactly how I feel about Trump standing up there and saying to the nation in front of God and everybody that Assad used poison gas on his people, a bald-faced lie.  Even his US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said the day before the bombing that we weren't absolutely sure who did the gassing, just as Mattis also admitted in early February that the US had yet to find evidence to justify the 2017 cruise missile strikes!


In reply to by squid

rrrr Lynn Trainor Mon, 04/16/2018 - 14:04 Permalink

I sent the following to the Prime Minister of Uk. Her email webpage is 


I am not a citizen of Uk. But I am writing to you because you are jeopardizing my life and well being. If it isn't against the law for someone in your position to attack a foreign nation without the specific approval of someone else, such as a legislative body for example, it should be. Therefore what concerns me is that, in effect, you appear not to be acting within the law, or within what should reasonably be within the law. This has to mean that you are acting outside the law. If the English language is to be used correctly, this can only mean that, in effect, and therefore in actual fact, you're an outlaw. Please stop.

Second point. If you have attacked in order to determine the effectiveness of the enemy's defense capability, there is no excellent reason to employ deceit in concealing such fact. It is because of this that persons such as myself do not know what to think of persons such as yourself, and because we do not know, we can only conclude that what is happening is wrong.

In reply to by Lynn Trainor

fx squid Mon, 04/16/2018 - 12:08 Permalink

Equally mind-boggling is that the presstitutes in the US, UK, germany didn't ask the most obvious question of them all: How on earth (and why) did they fire 76 highly destructive missiles at one single building complex (non-fortified, about 150x200 metres)?

And if so - as claimed by the DoD - every missile hit the target, how so? after three hits, theres is just a stack of rubble left. Then another 73 were hitting said stack of rubble? Seriously?

In reply to by squid

commoncourtesy schatzi Mon, 04/16/2018 - 09:25 Permalink

Are all people equal before the law?


All people are not equal before the law in any country. Some people are more privileged than others through executive immunity, which is granted to officers in the executive branch of government to free them from personal liability for omissions committed while carrying out their duties.

The British prime minister and other Queen’s men enjoy absolute immunity or  ‘Crown immunity’. In 1610, UK Chief Justice Edward Coke tried to undermine parliament by declaring in the Bonham case that an Act of parliament could be set aside by the Court if it was against the ‘common right or reason’. The doctrine did not work and Coke was transferred and later dismissed as chief justice. After Coke’s fate, it was established in the UK that parliament was above the law.



In reply to by schatzi

philipat Déjà view Mon, 04/16/2018 - 04:31 Permalink

Yes, of course the Tomahawks would have released chemical weapons into the atmosphere. That assumes that "Chemical Weapons Facilities" do indeed have stockpiles of CW's. So wreckless in the extreme (unless, of course they knew very well that are ARE no CW's in Syria.

But, putting that aside for a moment, now that the OPCW team is on the ground in Syria, why not also take a look at the target sites? If indeed there were CW's in the buildings it is for sure that high concentrations would be present in the rubble, even if, for some strange reason, they were not released into the atmosphere.

In that way, "The US and its Allies" will be able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that these facilities were indeed manufacturing CW's. Or perhaps not.....

In reply to by Déjà view

SoDamnMad philipat Mon, 04/16/2018 - 04:44 Permalink

I saw a video the day after the attack of men in jeans and tee shirts filming around the "chemical research laboratory".

Now if in fact, "horrible shit was inside" don't you think the street in front of the place would not have men in jeans and tees but rather dead bodies?  Of course the White Helmets of Jabhat al-Nusra (al Queda) aren't allowed in that area. 

In reply to by philipat

HowdyDoody SoDamnMad Mon, 04/16/2018 - 05:16 Permalink

The OPCW inspected it (Barzah) and another site at Jamrayah on 22 November 2017 and the results were officially published at the end of February 2018. They declared both sites were in compliance. There were no stores or production facilities for CW at either site.

The Barzah site was used to produce snake anti-venom and to test products for chemical purity.


All three aggressor countries are members of OPCW and would know the clean status of the sites in Syria. It is blatant 'in your face' lawlessness.



In reply to by SoDamnMad

ImGumbydmmt philipat Tue, 04/17/2018 - 08:04 Permalink

2003 WMD in Iraq = 2016 17 18 Chemical Weapons Attacks" in Syria,

.....and We are dumb enough to take it again?


Colin Powell to the UN Feb 3, 2003


example key excerpt

"What you will see is an accumulation of facts and disturbing patterns of behavior. The facts on Iraqis' behavior - Iraq's behavior demonstrate that Saddam Hussein and his regime have made no effort - no effort - to disarm as required by the international community. Indeed, the facts and Iraq's behavior show that Saddam Hussein and his regime are concealing their efforts to produce more weapons of mass destruction."

and from Colin Powell in 2016


"Colin Powell has called his 2003 speech to the United Nations, laying out the Bush administration’s rationale for war in Iraq, a “blot” on his record. The speech set out to detail Iraq’s weapons program, but as the intelligence would later confirm, that program was nonexistent.

More than 13 years later, the speech continues to haunt the administration — not just for what it got wrong, but for the unintended consequences it may have set in motion."


Somebody please tell Trump.

USSA Jumped the shark... again.


In reply to by philipat

wonderfulme batalyst Mon, 04/16/2018 - 03:49 Permalink

The author states obvious and objective truths.

Anyone but a complete imbecile belives that was a false flag, much like the Skripals case that has so many holes in it that it clearly indicates the incident has been staged by the British professionals. Bombing supposed Chemical Arms Factories hardly seems like a good idea to me either.

And what do we do about those OPCW experts now? Suppose, they go to Gouta, find nothing of substance and report back.

Wouldn't that be embarassing, if you call a premediated attack on a sovereign state based on false claims "an embarassment".

It's a war crime if anything.

Not only the witch should be impeached, she should be tried in a court of law. Preferably not the on in Hague where they let the Muslim Kosovars walk free and outright kill Serbs due to not providing adecvate medical care.

In reply to by batalyst

keep the basta… wonderfulme Mon, 04/16/2018 - 04:35 Permalink

thats what happened the research building which was blown up, had no residue of any chemical weapons when checked afterwards,. It was last visited in March 2018 by the OPCW who used a lab to test their samples... the building housed research into medicines, children's toys safety, household materials and antidotes to scorpions and snakes.

just appalling.

In reply to by wonderfulme

RationalLuddite batalyst Mon, 04/16/2018 - 03:53 Permalink

Then go my disingenuous, attention seeking, easy virtue, slacktavist. Why bother? I would personally prefer you keep posting your utterly unoriginal simian turd flinging,  as it demonstrates nicely what intellectual and emotional half wits look like and where they fall on any particular issue is a useful compass bearing. You are like missionary really, converting those who can be saved to anything but whatever your malware cerebral matter farts out of its preprogramned script algorithm. 

Again - i would prefer you don't go. Please keep acting as the articulate fluid intelligence devil's advocate that we have come to appreciate.  

Yours in contempt


In reply to by batalyst

RationalLuddite SoDamnMad Mon, 04/23/2018 - 00:33 Permalink


They have Bolton in to ensure compliance i fear. "We know where your kids live" he openly threatened a pre Iraq War OPCW head. 

Well - the track record aint great. Caved in on Iraq. Just gave wilfully missleading lies of omission in their politician friyendly summary of the Skirpal poisoning. Have a demonstrable ex CIA man on the team (will look for link of team names) in Damascus now. Sending samples to Netherlands for testing as the Swiss were rather too honest for their liking and seemingly found "ahhhh Lads ..  actually it was primarily a NATO agent in the residue" ... As the Netherlands investigated the MH17 incident soooo independently too (sarc).

In reply to by SoDamnMad

Fireman batalyst Mon, 04/16/2018 - 05:53 Permalink


Vote down!




batalyst Mon, 04/16/2018 - 03:34 Permalink

This author is a complete retard. Far too many Russian stooges on ZH now. Time to unsubscribe...


Note to batshit

Don't just unsubscribe...... relieve yourself of the burden of your dung beetle "consciousness".

The sickly stench of smeared excrement is all pervasive every time this batshit turd is dropped

In reply to by batalyst

Dilluminati batalyst Mon, 04/16/2018 - 07:11 Permalink

Russian Bots. It is getting absurd but fascinating to watch all the same.  I see the same stuff again, and again from the bots and it isn't even well crafted material.  It's a poor quality product which is even more fascinating.  In a sentence if Russia starts shipping missiles and materials to Syria then that isn't free, and that will become unpopular at home quickly enough.  Even if you accept the claims or narratives of the parties involved, that was an expense and a burden.


In Distilling the truth the Russian bots guide you by their fears.  But I don't think the UK factually fired a shot.



This is your multi-multiculturalism where somebody else does the fighting.  I oppose the Russian bots, support American exceptionalism, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism) and really that explanation there is insufficient to cover what I believe, but I would have been just as OK with the US going it alone and saying: "we did so because we wanted to as we object to that dictator killing his own people."  The manner: gas, gun, or knife doesn't matter.

We live in a world of adult excuse makers, cunts and cocksuckers who their entire adult lives have done specifically that.  If this is the coalition it is the coalition of the absurd.  I'd have been just as OK going it alone and getting on with making America Great again. But one last distinction: I would have targeted Asad. 

The Bots attempt to create an impression that isn't real, most Americans would have been fine targeting Asad because he is Hitler and we don't care if Trump sticks his dick in a paid whore "Stormy" no amount of down-votes changes those facts.  And I don't think again: the UK fired a shot, and I believe Germany is incapable of doing so also.  Euro Cucked and I think the US doesn't need them also which was part of what Trump ran on.

In reply to by batalyst