Very interesting Jullian Assange interview with RT

[Aractus]

He says e-mails are to come which show the United States gave weapons to DEASH (al-Saud's Henchmen in Iraq and Syria), at 19:10 in the video. Julian implies there is link with Hilary Clinton because she was secretary of state at the time. Apparently she used the invasion of Libya to give weapons to terrorists, he says.

He also said "Hilary has a brag sheet in which she documents all of the ways she led in the invasion of Libya". WTF? And apparently, even Israel is angry at how close Hilary is to Saudi.

Why is the mainstream media in the United States not really reporting on this? This is huge news. Cooperate media in the United States is not doing its job (which is to report the news).

Firstly he doesn't say that the US armed DAESH. What he says is that they armed Jihadists. We don't know yet which Jihadists the US armed. Well that's not true, we do know that this has been going on for decades, and we know about many specific groups that the US has armed, as yet we don't know for certain that they armed DAESH, but it seems to be a strong possibility, especially if intelligence believed DAESH would not construct a Caliphate. However, prior to the war hawk bombing Libya we do know that the Pentagon advised her against it because of the possibility of it leaving a vacuum for a Caliphate to be established.

The problem is that Americans refuse to accept responsibility for their actions, and the public bury their heads in the sand and pretend that the US does "good things". So this is why it's falling on deaf ears, it will take decades for Americans to accept responsibility for this, just as it took decades for them to realise their catastrophic misjudgement in the illegal Vietnam war. They haven't even accepted yet that the Iraq war was illegal.

Her connections to Saudi Arabia are atrocious. Yes, in many ways Saudi is no more extreme than many of its close neighbours, such as UAE, Egypt, and Israel. However, and I think this is important, Saudi started out much like DAESH, and overtime they have "mellowed" somewhat. Now if you wipe them out like Syria and Iraq then what happens is that you send them back two centuries to a more ruthless, more violent, more militarised paradigm. DAESH believes in establishing an ever-expanding Caliphate, whereas Saudi is happy to live within their borders, and doesn't want to set up a Caliphate (yes there is a big difference between their form of government, and a government that claims all authority over every Muslim in the world). Their interpretation of Sharia law is also stricter and more brutal than Saudi's, which again is testament to the fact that Saudi is modernising - slowly. They will eventually become a more moderate country like many European countries, it may take another century - it may take two. But if they're overturned by the US, like Syria and Iraq you can kiss that progress goodbye because a brand new Jihadist movement will arise setting progress back to the 15th century.

And we need to put this in context as well: many UAE citizens are absolutely outraged at their government's relaxed approach to dress codes and the like in the city of Dubai. And I think this just goes to show that governments can't progress beyond the malleability of the people's ideologies, and those take a long time to change. What's interesting is people go to Dubai and talk about how wonderful it is, and I always wonder - why don't you visit the rest of UAE and then tell us about how wonderful it is? It's a cleverly designed tourist attraction, but it's not reflective of the strict even 'Jihadist' type culture of the country.

If Wikileaks does have documents to prove that weapons were supplied to DAESH under Clinton's watch, then it'll be the nail in the bitch's coffin because that's the one thing that American people won't turn a blind eye to.