Prime Minister, wanted support for a future vote; after UN report, which would have allowed the UK to act in Syria militarily.

He was defeated just on voting in principle for another vote.

So basically the UK is not going to war.

For those who believe it is centrally orchestrated how do you explain this.  Everyone is surprised by the result.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2405633/Syria-conflict-David-Cameron-humiliated-losing-Commons-vote-possible-military-action.html#addComment

David Cameron tonight ruled out UK involvement in military action against Syria after his authority and international standing were dealt a severe blow by defeat on the issue in the Commons.

In what is thought to be an unprecedented parliamentary reverse over British military action, Tory rebels joined with Labour to inflict a humiliating defeat on the Prime Minister.

A motion backing the use of force ‘if necessary’ in response to last week's deadly chemical weapons attack was rejected by 272 votes to 285, majority 13.

Defence Secretary Philip Hammond confirmed Britain would now not be involved in any military action in Syria.

He told BBC's Newsnight: 'Correct. The House of Commons has made its view clear, although technically of course neither the motion nor the amendment was carried.
 
'But it’s clear, as the Prime Minister said, that the mood of the House was against British participation in any military action and, as he said, he gets that and that will now inform the Government’s actions.'

Mr Cameron had already been forced to water down his stance - accepting Labour demands that direct British involvement would require a second vote following an investigation by United Nations weapons inspectors.

But the concession was not enough to win over enough coalition MPs, conscious that public opinion is heavily against any intervention and wary of the decade-long controversy over the Iraq war.

Thank God that common sense (and self-preservation) prevailed in Parliament tonight.

There is definitely a hidden hand in our political affairs, directing and controlling.  Whether it controls everything perfectly and this parliamentary defeat is part of that control in a way we can't yet see, or whether the hidden hand controls only imperfectly, I do not know.

One thing's for sure, I'd be careful to avoid Central London, Heathrow Airport and British Airways for a while.  

If Jєωs controlled everything they wouldn't need philosemitic "trad" fruitcakes to spend hours reading the old (or more recent) threads of "antisemites."

(as ggreg and judasmachabeus were doing early this morning)

So when a socialist British parliament is lied to in order to get them into a war coalition with a right wing US president it is evidence of a Zionist star council controlling political puppets.  But when a right wing Hawkish UK government fails to get even agreement in principle to consider air strikes proposed by a socialist US President it is not.

Seems selective to me.  Like you are ignoring facts that don't support your conspiratorial world view.

I'm glad the British voted no, but really, it's just because they'd be such an easy target for Russia and China, who refuse to chuck Assad to the Sodomite Propaganda Machine (NATO). The U.S. acting unilaterally has always worked best for its allies; it's practically expected now.

Plus, Britain has that higher Muslim population now; they risk civil unrest (if not cινιℓ ωαr) were they to openly join Obama's stupid immoral vendetta against Syria.

Really, it's just called "plausible deniability".

This entire thread is a head-scratcher.

While one may grant that there is a slightly less than definitive case to be made for Tribal ownership of Cameron personally and for a decisive degree of Jєωιѕн input into Tory policymaking, the same can hardly be said for the opposition. Can anyone claim in good faith that Ed Miliband has loyalty to anything but his evil Tribe? He is on record as being proud of his party's record of transforming England, Scotland, and Wales from true blood-and-soil Christian nations to balkanized Third World garbage tips, places where conflicting minority interests place supreme power in the hands of the Jєωs, whose hatred for all who follow the Cross of Christ surely needs no further demonstration at this late date.

How long, pray, will it be, ggreg, till by act of Parliament the words of the royal hymn are officially revised to "Goys, save our gracious Tribe," etc.? Indeed, given that the queen and the rest of the Windsor clan have demonstrated their utter loss of Christian belief by endorsing the concept of a formal, pseudo-sacramental bond between ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs, a bond usually designated by the pungently Orwellian term "gαy marriage," can one speak in earnest any longer of the UK as even a nominal kingdom?

When pre-Periclean Athenians devised a system of governance that they called "rule by the demos" (i.e., ordinary Joes), they knew even then that they were having a bit of wordsmithly fun, since ownership of money and land mattered quite as much in that day as it does in this. Still, the kindred ties going back centuries between rulers and ruled in Athens mitigated the harshest defects of "democracy."

Today, however, it is hardly a coincidence that throughout the West, the worship of "democracy"—a form of governance regarded as a joke at best by every serious political theorist, Christian or pagan, from the time of Socrates to that of Russell Kirk and Willmoore Kendall—is at its zenith. Far from democracy any longer being a private gag amongst Athenians in the know, the idiot populations of the West now evidently believe that they, rather than their Jєωιѕн overseers, decide all the ultimate questions of secular rule.

Talk about having the last laugh …

I can assure you that even amongst the anti-multicultural middle englanders and UKIP supporters there is not much hatred or fear or nervousness of the Jєωs.  The BNP and EDL are tiny political parties who cannot get their deposit back at election time.  They are a joke.

Truth is much simpler.  America keeps screwing up these wars, and the UK has nothing to gain by fighting to displace one middle eastern tyrant and replace them with another.  They also cost a lot of money to fight.  Money the average English person would prefer to spend on hospitals, roads and schools or get back in lower taxes.

That's the reason parliament voted against it.  Nothing to do with Isreal, Zionist or other crazy cօռspιʀαcιҽs.  We are simply looking after number 1 for a change.  What business is it of ours?

Whatever they do they are no threat to us.