On Saturday 2 December, Vanessa Beeley published an exposé, based on research in Syria, of how the UK government appears to have been financing terrorists. On Sunday 3rd December, The Guardian ran a story saying that reports of UK money reaching terrorists in Syria are exaggerated. The Guardian tells us that allegations of funds going via the Foreign Office to Al Nusra 'have been described as "entirely inaccurate and misleading" by Adam Smith International (ASI)'. That company is a key source cited in this regard by the Guardian, and the company is certainly in a position to know, given its role in disbursing such funds.
Comment: Vanessa Beeley cites in her exposé that;
Over the period of three years the UK government has poured almost £200 million of tax payer funds into a failed proxy military intervention in Syria. However, the British government will not release the names of the recipients of this funding and make the claim that they are not providing lethal aid:"This support to the moderate opposition has included political support and non-lethal equipment. In terms of equipment, we have provided communications, medical and logistics equipment. We have also provided equipment to protect against chemical weapons attack. For security reasons we do not disclose the names of groups supported." - Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon, FCOJournalist, Peter Oborne, explained what this really means:"We've spent £200m in Syria - for nothing. It is now clear that British backing for the 'rebels' in the Syrian civil war was not just a mistake, it was a disaster. The policy made a horrific war much worse, and facilitated the growth of ISIS. Though the Government said we were helping 'moderates', the main beneficiaries were Al-Qaeda and other jihadists..."
Comment: