تشييع كوكبة من الشهداء 30-6-2012

Advertisement

Geneva-Meeting on Syria,30 Jun 2012

Geneva:
Annan:” the danger of the creation of a new front for international terrorism in ME”
Lavrov”decision must belong to the Syrians-NO foreign meddling”
the sponsors of terrorist movement: the SAME BARKS as always
The international conference held in Geneva in order to resolve the crisis in Syria began with clear words of former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. The results are still to be seen.
The special envoy of the UN and the Arab League to Syria, Kofi Annan today in Geneva called on the international community to overcome their differences to find a solution to the over an year old conflict
“The way things have gone so far we are not helping anyone,” Annan said at the beginning of the meeting of foreign ministers of the countries of the Security Council of the UN, Turkey, several Arab League countries and the representative of the European Union, Catherine Ashton.
“Let us break this pattern and begin to be useful,” said Annan, who warned of the risk that the situation is extended to the entire Middle East region and to create “a new front for international terrorism.”
“Each of you has influence on the conflict in different ways,” said former UN secretary general. “States can achieve the conditions for Syria to find a peaceful solution,” Annan urged the ministers.
The special envoy to Syria also emphasized that the transitional government that promotes your plan should only include members of government and opposition “reprehensible.”
It is precisely this point that disagrees with Russia, which opposes the new plan leaves out of a possible transition government of Syrian President Bashar al Assad.
“Our partners in the West want to define the outcome of the political process in Syria themselves, even a matter of the Syrians themselves,” said Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov, after preparatory talks in Geneva.
Moscow and Washington failed to iron out these differences during their meeting in St. Petersburg on Friday its leaders Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Hillary Clinton.Moscow is an opponent of what it sees as foreign meddling in domestic affairs, objects to any solution imposed on Syria from outside .That is why Lavrov warned that we should not expect a final agreement on Saturday, but admitted that there are real opportunities to find a common point.
“We fail to execute an agreement with Russia and China. Continues to be very difficult,” said British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, on his arrival in Geneva.
At the Geneva meeting involving five countries of the Security Council of UN-France, United Kingdom, China, Russia and the United States, Turkey, Iraq, Kuwait and the European Union.
Declarations after the meeting:
Lavrov:there are decision adopted by Security Council that should be respected!
Russia’s foreign minister says the U.N.-brokered peace plan for Syria agreed on by major powers does not require the ouster of President Bashar Assad.
Sergey Lavrov says there is “no attempt in the document to impose on the Syrian people any type of transitional process.”
Moscow insists that outsiders cannot order a political solution for Syria.All parties should sit and talk : dialogue table! Each part has to comply with the Annan ‘s plan to be  applied
-there are smuggling weapons to the opposition.
– على الاطراف الخارجية ممارسة نفوذها بقوة على الاطراف في سورية لبدء الحوار بين السوريين
– اتفقنا مع جميع الاطراف على دعم خطة كوفي عنان وتنفيذها وجلوس السوريين على طاولة الحوار
– دعونا كل الافرقاء للجلوس على طاولة الحوار .
– كل جهة فاعلة عليها ان تضغط على الجانب الذي يمتثل لها لتطبيق خطة انان
– هناك تهريب اسلحة للمعارضة بشكل غير شرعي .
– قمنا بشطب كل ما يمكن ان يعتبر تدخل بالشأن السوري .
– سعت بعض الوسائل الإعلامية بالحكم على خطة أنان بالفشل
– حصلنا من القيادة السورية على ضمانات لدعم خطة عنان ونرجوا
Mr. President Assad accepted the observers of the Arab League,UN observers,international press and as he underlined in his latest statements Syria will respect Annan’s plan…I do not know if we can say the same thing about the armed opposition who receives more support from external parties and which  declared the plan will fail
الحكومة السورية وافقت على خطة عنان و التزمت بها لكن المجموعات المسلحة لم تلتزم و هي تتلقى المزيد من الدعم من الأطراف الخارجية التي أعلنت أنها ستفشل الخطة
-Armed groups foiled the attempts  of ICRC(Red Cross) to bring out the  civilians and wounded from places they control
– المجموعات المسلحة أفشلت محاولات الصليب الأحمر لإخراج المدنين و الجرحى من الأماكن التي يسيطرون عليها
Militants and  their sponsors provoke the Syrian Government and its forces and working on the escalation of violence and there are many facts that prove it
– المسلحون و الجهات الراعية لهم يستفزون الحكومة السورية و قواتها و يعملون على تصعيد العنف و هناك حقائق كثيرة على ذلك
I am surprised that no one expressed any regrets for bombing the Syrian news channel
لافروف أتعجب بأنه لم تعبر أي جهة عن أسفها بوقوع تفجير موقع قناة الإخبارية السورية
Asked about the Turkish plane,Lavrov said”A joint careful investigation must be made and this incident should not be used to ignite more problems in the area!”دعونا لتحقيق عميق بما يخص اسقاط الطائرة التركية ..لدينا معلوماتنا الخاصة يمكننا ان نقدمها للدولتين .
It is for the  Syrian people to come to a political agreement but time is running out,” Annan said in concluding remarks.
“We need rapid steps to reach agreement. The conflict must be resolved through peaceful dialogue and negotiations.”
UN Special Envoy to Syria Kofi Annan said that the international work group on Syria reached an agreement to help resolve the crisis in Syria through a political process led by Syrians themselves through comprehensive national dialogue in an atmosphere of calm, which requires disarming armed groups.
At the conclusion of the work group’s meetings on Saturday, Annan said that all sides are aware of the situation in Syria, and that they have taken cooperation to a higher level through a clearer and more specific course which they hope the Syrians can take.
“We’re determined to work together and intensively to put an end to violence in Syria and launch a process led by Syria leading to a transitional process meeting the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people and enabling this people to decide their future independently,” he said.
Annan called on all sides to commit to a permanent cessation of violence and carrying out the six-point plan without waiting others to take steps, in addition to calling on the government and the armed group to cooperate with the UN observers.
He also called on the Syrian government to release detainees, allow journalists to enter and move freely, respect the right to peaceful protests, and allow the entry of humanitarian aid.
Annan said that the workgroup agreed upon a number of directive principles regarding the transitional process in Syria, presenting a vision in which everyone participates in a pluralistic democratic country with free elections that respects human rights, the rule of law, equal access to rights, and respecting the rights of minorities, noting that this requires clear steps within a specific timeframe.
He said that the main steps in the transitional period involves establishing a “governing society” that establishes a neutral environment to affect change, with this transitional body consisting of members of the current government and opposition figures and formed through mutual agreement.
Annan stressed that the political process must be implemented in a secure and quiet environment, which requires the disarming of armed group.
He stressed that the Syrians are the ones to decide their country’s future, and that all social groups must be able to participate in comprehensive national dialogue that produces feasible results, stressing the importance of women’ being represented in all aspect, adding that the constitutional and legal systems may be reconsidered, which is up to the people’s agreement, which would be followed by free, democratic elections.
Anna said that time is running out, and that quick steps are needed to reach an agreement and resolve the conflict through peaceful dialogue and negotiations only, adding that conditions for peaceful settlement must begin immediately, and that violence must cease and all sides must be prepared to appoint negotiators to work on the transitional process.
He affirmed that the international community is ready to support any agreement reached by all sides, and that the work group members will pressure all sides to carry out the discussed points, opposing any further militarization of the conflict.
Annan said that the work group will support him completely through his direct work with the government and the opposition and in consultation with all spectrums of the Syrian people and international players to move forward, adding that he will inform the UN and the Arab League of progress.
“Today’s hopes must not turn to disappointment in the future… we must work together to carry out what we agreed upon, and we can’t do this alone,” he concluded.
من جهته قال كوفي عنان مبعوث الأمم المتحدة إلى سورية إن مجموعة العمل الدولية حول سورية توصلت إلى اتفاق للمساعدة على حل الأزمة في سورية عبر عملية سياسية يقودها السوريون بأنفسهم عبر الحوار الوطني الشامل وفي جو من الهدوء يتطلب نزع سلاح المجموعات المسلحة.20120630-220025.jpg
وأوضح عنان في ختام اجتماعات مجموعة العمل في جنيف اليوم أن جميع الأطراف يدركون تماما الوضع في سورية وهم نقلوا التعاون إلى مستوى أعلى من خلال اتخاذ موقف أوضح وأكثر تحديدا عبر مسار يأملون أن يستطيع الشعب السوري سلوكه والعمل معه.
وقال عنان “نحن مصممون على العمل بشكل مشترك ومكثف كي نضع حدا للعنف في سورية وإطلاق عملية تقودها سورية تؤدي إلى عملية انتقالية تلبي الطموحات المشروعة للشعب السوري وتمكن هذا الشعب من أن يقرر مستقبله بشكل مستقل”.
ودعا عنان جميع الأطراف إلى الالتزام بالوقف الدائم للعنف وتنفيذ خطة النقاط الست مباشرة دون انتظار إجراءات الآخرين كما دعا الحكومة والمجموعات المسلحة إلى التعاون مع مراقبي الأمم المتحدة الموجودين على الأرض.
وقال عنان “يجب على الحكومة إطلاق سراح المعتقلين والسماح بدخول الصحفيين والتنقل بحرية واحترام حق التظاهر السلمي والسماح بدخول المساعدات الإنسانية”.
وأشار عنان إلى أن مجموعة العمل اتفقت على مجموعة من المبادئ التوجيهية التي تخص العملية الانتقالية التي ستجري في سورية حيث قدمت منظورا للمستقبل يمكن أن يتشارك به الجميع في دولة تعددية ديمقراطية فيها انتخابات حرة مع احترام حقوق الإنسان وحكم القانون ونفاذ متساو للجميع إلى الحقوق مع احترام حقوق المجموعات الصغيرة وهذا الأمر يتطلب خطوات واضحة ضمن إطار زمني محدد.
وقال عنان “إن الخطوات الرئيسية في العملية الانتقالية تشمل إنشاء جمعية حاكمة يمكن أن تنشئ بيئة حيادية نستطيع من خلالها أن نحدث التغيير أي أن هذه الجهة الانتقالية يجب أن تشمل أعضاء من الحكومة الحالية ومن المعارضين وتشكل على أساس الموافقة المشتركة”.
وأكد عنان أن العملية السياسية في سورية يجب أن تطبق في بيئة من الأمان والهدوء للجميع بما في ذلك استكمال نزع سلاح المجموعات المسلحة ويجب أن تكون هناك استمرارية بالعمل الحكومي يتم التوصل إليه من كل الأطراف.
وشدد عنان على أن الشعب السوري هو من يقرر مستقبل بلده وكل فئات المجتمع يجب أن تكون قادرة على المشاركة في حوار وطني شامل للجميع تكون محصلته الأساسية قابلة للتنفيذ كما يجب أن تمثل النساء في جميع هذه الجوانب لافتا إلى أنه وبناء على هذا الأساس فإن “النظام الدستوري والنظام القانوني يمكن أن يراجع وهذا أمر خاضع لموافقة الشعب يلي ذلك انتخابات حرة وديمقراطية متعددة الأطراف”.
وأشار عنان إلى أن الوقت ينفد ولابد من خطوات سريعة للتوصل إلى اتفاق وحل النزاع من خلال الحوار السلمي والمفاوضات فقط.
وبين عنان “أن الشروط المواتية للتسوية السياسية يجب أن تبدأ مباشرة ويجب أن يتوقف العنف وعلى كل الأطراف أن يكونوا مستعدين لتعيين مفاوضين نيابة عنهم للعمل مع المبعوث الأممي على إجراء عملية سياسية انتقالية تقودها سورية”.
وقال عنان إن المجتمع الدولي جاهز لدعم أي اتفاق يتم التوصل إليه من كل الاطراف وإن أعضاء مجموعة العمل سيشاركون ويفرضون الضغوط على كل الأطراف لتنفيذ ما تمت مناقشته مع معارضة أي مزيد من العسكرة للنزاع.
وأضاف عنان “إن مجموعة العمل ستدعمني بشكل كامل من خلال عملي المباشر مع الحكومة والمعارضة وبالتشاور مع كل شرائح الشعب السوري واللاعبين الدوليين للمضي قدما وسأعمل معهم واطلع الامم المتحدة والجامعة العربية على ما يحصل”.
وأوضح عنان أنه تعهد للمجموعة بالعمل في جو من الأمل وقال “يجب ألا تتحول آمال اليوم الى خيبة امل في المستقبل ويجب البدء بالعمل سوية لتنفيذ ما اتفقنا عليه ونحن لا نستطيع فعل ذلك بمفردنا”.
من جانبه أعلن وليام هيغ وزير الخارجية البريطاني ترحيب أعضاء مجلس الامن الدولي بعمل لجنة المراقبين الدوليين في سورية وبالجهود التي بذلها عنان والتزامهم بدعمه لتطبيق خطته ذات البنود الستة بالكامل وقراري مجلس الامن الدولي ذوي الصلة.
وأشار هيغ إلى أن مجموعة العمل الدولية ستجتمع كلما اقتضت الضرورة وفي حالات الطوارئ.
وكانت مجموعة العمل الدولية حول سورية استأنفت محادثاتها في مقر الأمم المتحدة في جنيف مساء اليوم بحضور جميع الوفود بعد أن عقدت جلسة أولى القى فيها المبعوث الأممي الى سورية كوفي عنان كلمة اكد فيها ان الأزمة في سورية تفاقمت داعيا اللاعبين الدوليين إلى بذل أقصى الجهود من أجل التوصل إلى اتفاق بشأن مبادئ لتحول سياسي يقوده السوريون.
ورأى عنان أن الوضع قد يشعل المنطقة ويفجر أزمة دولية في حال عدم التوصل إلى حل مؤكدا أن مسؤولية تسوية الأزمة في سورية تقع في نهاية المطاف على عاتق السوريين أنفسهم.
وشدد في الوقت نفسه على أن المجتمع الدولي لن يستطيع المساهمة بفعالية في حل الأزمة السورية إلا في حال تمكن اللاعبين الدوليين من تقريب مواقفهم.
وأعرب المبعوث الأممي عن أمله في أن يكون الحوار في مؤتمر جنيف بناء مشددا على أن نتائج المؤتمر يجب أن تصب بالدرجة الأولى في مصالح الشعب السوري وليس في مصالح بعض اللاعبين الدوليين.
وكانت أعمال المؤتمر انطلقت بعد تأخير دام نحو ساعتين خلف أبواب مغلقة.
ونقلت وكالة (رويترز) عن مسؤول أمريكي رفيع المستوى قوله إن المحادثات صعبة بسبب الخلافات القائمة بين المشاركين مشيرا إلى أن المحادثات قد لا تسفر عن أي اتفاق.
وأوضحت مصادر دبلوماسية أن سبب تأخير بدء اجتماع جنيف يكمن في عدد كبير من اللقاءات الثنائية التي أجراها المشاركون في المؤتمر قبل انطلاق أعماله.
وشارك في الاجتماع وزراء خارجية الدول الخمس دائمة العضوية في مجلس الأمن الدولي روسيا وبريطانيا والصين والولايات المتحدة وفرنسا بالإضافة إلى وزراء خارجية تركيا والعراق والكويت وقطر.
كما تحضر الاجتماع كاثرين اشتون المفوضة العليا للسياسة الخارجية في الاتحاد الأوروبي وبان كي مون الأمين العام للأمم المتحدة.
والتقى وزير الخارجية الروسي سيرغي لافروف قبل الاجتماع مع كل من المبعوث الأممي عنان وآشتون ونظيريه الصيني يانغ جيه تشي والعراقي هوشيار زيباري.
وكان لافروف قد عقد يوم الجمعة محادثات استمرت ساعة تقريبا مع وزيرة الخارجية الأمريكية هيلاري كلينتون في بطرسبورغ في محاولة لتجاوز الخلافات القائمة بينهما.
من جانب آخر أعلنت وزارة الخارجية الروسية أن الأطراف التي تشارك في المؤتمر الدولي الخاص بسورية لم تتمكن من التوصل إلى مشروع للوثيقة النهائية للمؤتمر خلال اجتماع تحضيري جرى في جنيف يوم الجمعة على مستوى الخبراء.

Unilateral Intervention without a UN Mandate: Propagandists Sell “Vigilante” Solution for Syria

Unilateral Intervention without a UN Mandate: Propagandists Sell “Vigilante” Solution for Syria.

Bypassing the UN to “end violence” of its own creation, West plumbs new depths of own depravity

Ned Dobos of Australia’s University of New South Wales, Canberra has given a presentation, served up in the form of an op-ed in the Sydney Morning Herald titled, “Syria needs a vigilante to save its people,” that can only be described as a new benchmark in Western duplicity. Cued up by the forces of Western imperialism, Dobos plugs in every keyword and talking point flowing through the halls of the very corporate-funded think tanks that have engineered the blood-soaked destabilization in Syria in the first place.

Sidestepping entirely the history of the current conflict, both in Syria, and in a broader regional context, as well as inconvenient facts regarding the driving factors behind the violence Dobos seeks to end with his proposal, he maintains that there is a “moral imperative” for nations to act outside of the “paralyzed” United Nations.

Dobos conducts a rambling pedantic philosophical defense of what is essentially a unilateral act of war built on patently false pretenses, as NATO has already done in Libya, and as the US has done in Iraq and Afghanistan at the cost of millions of innocent lives.

Dobos concludes by stating:

“Champions of the UN often fail to see or acknowledge that the obligations of a state’s international commitments are equally prima facie, and that in some cases a perfectly good justification for their transgression will be available.

Syria is one of those cases. The global body entrusted with the task of preventing human rights abuses is, once again, paralysed by politics. For any state that is able and willing to act unilaterally, the imperative to defend people against murder, torture and rape trumps fidelity to international covenant. A vigilante that defends the innocent when the police can’t or won’t is not a villain, he is a hero.” – “Syria needs a vigilante to save its people” Ned Dobos, SMH.

The Truth Drowns Western & Dobos’ Flights of R2P Fancy  

Unfortunately for Dobos and his ivory tower academia, the truth about the violence in Syria not only mires his proposal in the unpleasantries of reality, it drowns it. The “murder, torture, and rape” Dobos claims unilateral military intervention will stop, was in fact premeditated, planned, staged, funded, and the forces carrying it out entirely armed by the West in an effort not for “preventing human rights abuses,” but to admittedly overthrow the government of Syria and install a compliant, pro-Western client regime, as the West has done in TunisiaLibyaEgypt, and is attempting to do elsewhere from Northern Africa to Southeast Asia and beyond.

Since the early 1990’s, US Army General Wesley Clark was aware of a plan drawn up by the forces of corporate-financier special interests to overthrow the “old client regimes” of the Soviet Union. General Clark would again be made aware of plans post-9/11 to invade and overthrow the governments of seven specific nations, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya Somalia, Sudan, and Iran. General Clark would later present this information at the Commonwealth Club of California, October 3, 2007.

It was also in 2007 that Seymour Hersh of the New Yorker would publish a lengthy report titled “The Redirection” regarding US, Israeli, and Saudi plans to destabilize Lebanon, Syria, and Iran using sectarian extremists with direct ties to Al Qaeda with the foreknowledge they would wreak terrible havoc, committing horrific atrocities as they carried out the West’s proxy war. Upon reading Hersh’s report and viewing the events unfolding today, the West’s plan has clearly been executed with a fair degree of exactitude and precision, obfuscated only by the West’s impressive dissembling enabled by their immense corporate media networks.

The Arab Spring was also being engineered in this period, years before it would actually unfold, with the US training “activists” in the US, providing them with equipment, funding, and directives in the lead up to one of the largest, if not the largest coordinated political destabilization in human history. Regarding Syria specifically, the US State Department would admit that it did indeed train and fund “activists” abroad with the explicit intent of sowing chaos once they returned to Syria.

In an April 2011 AFP report, Michael Posner, the assistant US Secretary of State for Human Rights and Labor, admitted that the “US government has budgeted $50 million in the last two years to develop new technologies to help activists protect themselves from arrest and prosecution by authoritarian governments.” The report went on to admit that the US (emphasis added) “organized training sessions for 5,000 activists in different parts of the world. A session held in the Middle East about six weeks ago gathered activists from Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon who returned to their countries with the aim of training their colleagues there.” Posner would add, “They went back and there’s a ripple effect.”

With the CIASaudi Arabia, Qatar, and even elements in Lebanon now openly admitting they are funding, arming, and otherwise enabling terrorists operating in and around Syrian territory – and with these terrorists accused by even the West’s own “institutions” and “international arbiters” of carrying out systematic atrocities of their own, including kidnapping, torture, and murder, Dobos’ narrative is exposed further as absolute, baseless, politically-motivated propaganda unmoored by even what is admitted in headline news.

With Libya serving as the ultimate example of just how disingenuous the West is regarding “responsibility to protect” (R2P), a political ploy contrived by modern neo-imperialists to mask naked military conquest, promoting a similar campaign in Syria is admittedly a hard, if not impossible sell. Libya’s “freedom fighters” have turned out to be sectarian terrorists now carrying out a brutal campaign of nationwide torture, harassment, illegal imprisonments, and genocide. Entire towns have been wiped out with ethnic and religious minorities fleeing the country for their survival. Even the handpicked proxies installed by NATO have been subjected to the violence, threats, and general chaos that has predictably prevailed in Libya.

In fact the only success story that can be told coming out of Libya, is its emergence as a military logistical hub serving similar NATO destabilizations across Northern Africa and across the Middle East. With an entire nation serving as a safe haven for terrorism, a nearly endless supply of weapons and fighters can be propagated to multiple theaters of conflict. Ironically enough, eastern Libya (Benghazi, the epicenter of 2011’s destabilization) had served as a terrorist recruiting center for fueling sectarian violence in Iraq that effectively neutralized a joint Sunni-Shi’ia insurrection against Western occupation.

Selling Unilateral Military Conquest – a Crime Against World Peace

Wittingly or unwittingly, Dobos has committed a crime against world peace by promoting crass, unfounded, irresponsible propaganda aimed solely at defending not only the continuation of violence in Syria, but also by attempting to prepare the ground for a larger act of overt military aggression, which he himself admits violates international law – a Nuremberg offense.

Dobos and the corporate-funded policy makers he parrots almost certainly do not believe the rhetoric they are promoting – as even the most elementary research into the topic exposes immediate and significant flaws in the premise of “unilateral intervention” based on a “moral imperative” to alleviate violence of the West’s own premeditated creation.

Dobos has also played a role in destroying the credibility of not only his own university of New South Wales, but the reputation and credibility of Western academia in general, which has now become an easily purchased stamp of approval to lend credence and employ an “academic” defense to the otherwise indefensible. Australian academia in particular has been almost entirely infiltrated and co-opted by the forces of Western special interests, in particular by the Lowy Institute.

For the very real principles and ideals the West once stood for, we must expose and denounce entirely the hackery of “academics” like “Dr.” Dobos, protest the recognition of his credentials, and give pause for thought to those employing him and allowing him to continuously abuse the good name of their educational institutions for transparently self-serving political agendas. Failing to do this will only accelerate the fall of the West’s institutions, and once credibility has been lost, it will be difficult if not impossible to ever regain it.

Suggesting that the West should unilaterally intervene in Syria, without a UN mandate has been on corporate-financier funded policy makers’ wishlist for months.Neo-Conservative led corporate funded think tank (beginning on page 18, .pdf), the Henry Jackson Society, has openly declared NATO’s plans to do just that. Of course, to do so, it must be thoroughly justified in the court of public opinion – a court Dobos just so happens to have testify before with his pedantic, fact-devoid, intelligence-insulting diatribe.

With Libya and Iraq as two very prominent examples of how the West couches military conquest within “humanitarian” pretexts still fresh in the public’s mind, it will take much more than an obscure ethics PhD from Australia parroting corporate-funded talking points to convince the world that it is necessary, let alone justified to expand upon these grievous crimes against humanity and suffer another blight upon our collective conscience.

Unilateral Intervention without a UN Mandate: Propagandists Sell "Vigilante" Solution for Syria

Unilateral Intervention without a UN Mandate: Propagandists Sell “Vigilante” Solution for Syria

Bypassing the UN to “end violence” of its own creation, West plumbs new depths of own depravityNed Dobos of Australia’s University of New South Wales, Canberra has given a presentation, served up in the form of an op-ed in the Sydney Morning Herald titled, “Syria needs a vigilante to save its people,” that can only be described as a new benchmark in Western duplicity. Cued up by the forces of Western imperialism, Dobos plugs in every keyword and talking point flowing through the halls of the very corporate-funded think tanks that have engineered the blood-soaked destabilization in Syria in the first place.

Sidestepping entirely the history of the current conflict, both in Syria, and in a broader regional context, as well as inconvenient facts regarding the driving factors behind the violence Dobos seeks to end with his proposal, he maintains that there is a “moral imperative” for nations to act outside of the “paralyzed” United Nations.

Dobos conducts a rambling pedantic philosophical defense of what is essentially a unilateral act of war built on patently false pretenses, as NATO has already done in Libya, and as the US has done in Iraq and Afghanistan at the cost of millions of innocent lives.

Dobos concludes by stating:

“Champions of the UN often fail to see or acknowledge that the obligations of a state’s international commitments are equally prima facie, and that in some cases a perfectly good justification for their transgression will be available.

Syria is one of those cases. The global body entrusted with the task of preventing human rights abuses is, once again, paralysed by politics. For any state that is able and willing to act unilaterally, the imperative to defend people against murder, torture and rape trumps fidelity to international covenant. A vigilante that defends the innocent when the police can’t or won’t is not a villain, he is a hero.” – “Syria needs a vigilante to save its people” Ned Dobos, SMH.

The Truth Drowns Western & Dobos’ Flights of R2P Fancy  

Unfortunately for Dobos and his ivory tower academia, the truth about the violence in Syria not only mires his proposal in the unpleasantries of reality, it drowns it. The “murder, torture, and rape” Dobos claims unilateral military intervention will stop, was in fact premeditated, planned, staged, funded, and the forces carrying it out entirely armed by the West in an effort not for “preventing human rights abuses,” but to admittedly overthrow the government of Syria and install a compliant, pro-Western client regime, as the West has done in TunisiaLibyaEgypt, and is attempting to do elsewhere from Northern Africa to Southeast Asia and beyond.

Since the early 1990’s, US Army General Wesley Clark was aware of a plan drawn up by the forces of corporate-financier special interests to overthrow the “old client regimes” of the Soviet Union. General Clark would again be made aware of plans post-9/11 to invade and overthrow the governments of seven specific nations, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya Somalia, Sudan, and Iran. General Clark would later present this information at the Commonwealth Club of California, October 3, 2007.

It was also in 2007 that Seymour Hersh of the New Yorker would publish a lengthy report titled “The Redirection” regarding US, Israeli, and Saudi plans to destabilize Lebanon, Syria, and Iran using sectarian extremists with direct ties to Al Qaeda with the foreknowledge they would wreak terrible havoc, committing horrific atrocities as they carried out the West’s proxy war. Upon reading Hersh’s report and viewing the events unfolding today, the West’s plan has clearly been executed with a fair degree of exactitude and precision, obfuscated only by the West’s impressive dissembling enabled by their immense corporate media networks.

The Arab Spring was also being engineered in this period, years before it would actually unfold, with the US training “activists” in the US, providing them with equipment, funding, and directives in the lead up to one of the largest, if not the largest coordinated political destabilization in human history. Regarding Syria specifically, the US State Department would admit that it did indeed train and fund “activists” abroad with the explicit intent of sowing chaos once they returned to Syria.

In an April 2011 AFP report, Michael Posner, the assistant US Secretary of State for Human Rights and Labor, admitted that the “US government has budgeted $50 million in the last two years to develop new technologies to help activists protect themselves from arrest and prosecution by authoritarian governments.” The report went on to admit that the US (emphasis added) “organized training sessions for 5,000 activists in different parts of the world. A session held in the Middle East about six weeks ago gathered activists from Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon who returned to their countries with the aim of training their colleagues there.” Posner would add, “They went back and there’s a ripple effect.”

With the CIASaudi Arabia, Qatar, and even elements in Lebanon now openly admitting they are funding, arming, and otherwise enabling terrorists operating in and around Syrian territory – and with these terrorists accused by even the West’s own “institutions” and “international arbiters” of carrying out systematic atrocities of their own, including kidnapping, torture, and murder, Dobos’ narrative is exposed further as absolute, baseless, politically-motivated propaganda unmoored by even what is admitted in headline news.

With Libya serving as the ultimate example of just how disingenuous the West is regarding “responsibility to protect” (R2P), a political ploy contrived by modern neo-imperialists to mask naked military conquest, promoting a similar campaign in Syria is admittedly a hard, if not impossible sell. Libya’s “freedom fighters” have turned out to be sectarian terrorists now carrying out a brutal campaign of nationwide torture, harassment, illegal imprisonments, and genocide. Entire towns have been wiped out with ethnic and religious minorities fleeing the country for their survival. Even the handpicked proxies installed by NATO have been subjected to the violence, threats, and general chaos that has predictably prevailed in Libya.

In fact the only success story that can be told coming out of Libya, is its emergence as a military logistical hub serving similar NATO destabilizations across Northern Africa and across the Middle East. With an entire nation serving as a safe haven for terrorism, a nearly endless supply of weapons and fighters can be propagated to multiple theaters of conflict. Ironically enough, eastern Libya (Benghazi, the epicenter of 2011’s destabilization) had served as a terrorist recruiting center for fueling sectarian violence in Iraq that effectively neutralized a joint Sunni-Shi’ia insurrection against Western occupation.

Selling Unilateral Military Conquest – a Crime Against World Peace

Wittingly or unwittingly, Dobos has committed a crime against world peace by promoting crass, unfounded, irresponsible propaganda aimed solely at defending not only the continuation of violence in Syria, but also by attempting to prepare the ground for a larger act of overt military aggression, which he himself admits violates international law – a Nuremberg offense.

Dobos and the corporate-funded policy makers he parrots almost certainly do not believe the rhetoric they are promoting – as even the most elementary research into the topic exposes immediate and significant flaws in the premise of “unilateral intervention” based on a “moral imperative” to alleviate violence of the West’s own premeditated creation.

Dobos has also played a role in destroying the credibility of not only his own university of New South Wales, but the reputation and credibility of Western academia in general, which has now become an easily purchased stamp of approval to lend credence and employ an “academic” defense to the otherwise indefensible. Australian academia in particular has been almost entirely infiltrated and co-opted by the forces of Western special interests, in particular by the Lowy Institute.

For the very real principles and ideals the West once stood for, we must expose and denounce entirely the hackery of “academics” like “Dr.” Dobos, protest the recognition of his credentials, and give pause for thought to those employing him and allowing him to continuously abuse the good name of their educational institutions for transparently self-serving political agendas. Failing to do this will only accelerate the fall of the West’s institutions, and once credibility has been lost, it will be difficult if not impossible to ever regain it.

Suggesting that the West should unilaterally intervene in Syria, without a UN mandate has been on corporate-financier funded policy makers’ wishlist for months.Neo-Conservative led corporate funded think tank (beginning on page 18, .pdf), the Henry Jackson Society, has openly declared NATO’s plans to do just that. Of course, to do so, it must be thoroughly justified in the court of public opinion – a court Dobos just so happens to have testify before with his pedantic, fact-devoid, intelligence-insulting diatribe.

With Libya and Iraq as two very prominent examples of how the West couches military conquest within “humanitarian” pretexts still fresh in the public’s mind, it will take much more than an obscure ethics PhD from Australia parroting corporate-funded talking points to convince the world that it is necessary, let alone justified to expand upon these grievous crimes against humanity and suffer another blight upon our collective conscience.

Geneva Meeting on Syria Begins

Geneva Meeting on Syria Begins.

Geneva Meeting on Syria Begins
Local Editor
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon (left), UN-AL envoy Kofi Annan (middle) and Russian foriegn minister Sergei Lavrov (right) before Geneva meeting; June 30, 2012The foreign ministers of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and four other Middle Eastern states have gathered in Geneva to hold talks on the current situation in Syria.

The representatives of Russia, China, the United States, Britain and France along with Turkey, Qatar, Kuwait and Iraq began the meeting at the United Nations office on Saturday.

The participants in the Geneva meeting were convened by the UN-Arab League envoy to Syria, Kofi Annan.

On June 27, some UN diplomats said Annan has proposed the formation of a Syrian transitional government that could include supporters of President Bashar al-Assad and opposition members.

The proposal was expected to be one of the main points of focus during the Geneva meeting.

Lavrov also stated that Russia supports the idea of a “transitional period” in Syria, which would be discussed in Geneva.

“We support changes which work towards national agreement on all questions of overdue reform.”

However, a senior US official, whose name was not mentioned in the reports, said on Saturday that the discussions of Geneva “remain challenging.”

“We need a plan that is strong and credible, so we may get there, we may not,” the US official said.

Syria has been experiencing unrest since March 2011.

On February 4, Russia and China vetoed a Western-backed draft resolution on Syria at the UN Security Council. The two countries rejected the draft as “unbalanced.”

Moscow and Beijing also vetoed a European-drafted UN Security Council resolution against Syria on October 5, 2011.

Geneva Meeting on Syria Begins

Geneva Meeting on Syria Begins

Geneva Meeting on Syria Begins
Local Editor
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon (left), UN-AL envoy Kofi Annan (middle) and Russian foriegn minister Sergei Lavrov (right) before Geneva meeting; June 30, 2012The foreign ministers of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and four other Middle Eastern states have gathered in Geneva to hold talks on the current situation in Syria.
The representatives of Russia, China, the United States, Britain and France along with Turkey, Qatar, Kuwait and Iraq began the meeting at the United Nations office on Saturday.
The participants in the Geneva meeting were convened by the UN-Arab League envoy to Syria, Kofi Annan.
On June 27, some UN diplomats said Annan has proposed the formation of a Syrian transitional government that could include supporters of President Bashar al-Assad and opposition members.
The proposal was expected to be one of the main points of focus during the Geneva meeting.
Lavrov also stated that Russia supports the idea of a “transitional period” in Syria, which would be discussed in Geneva.
“We support changes which work towards national agreement on all questions of overdue reform.”
However, a senior US official, whose name was not mentioned in the reports, said on Saturday that the discussions of Geneva “remain challenging.”
“We need a plan that is strong and credible, so we may get there, we may not,” the US official said.
Syria has been experiencing unrest since March 2011.
On February 4, Russia and China vetoed a Western-backed draft resolution on Syria at the UN Security Council. The two countries rejected the draft as “unbalanced.”
Moscow and Beijing also vetoed a European-drafted UN Security Council resolution against Syria on October 5, 2011.


http://sabinachiaburu.wordpress.com/2012/06/29/mrpresident-bashar-al-assad-on-iranian-channel-4/

President Bashar Al-Assad’s interview with Iranian Channel 4
الرئيس بشار الأسد للتلفزيون الإيراني
الدول الغربية تمارس ازدواجية المعايير تجاه قضايا المنطقة وهذا نفاق سياسي
Mr. President’s interview:

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUrig-DGrtQ
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pALxrO4zKBY
Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acUcXoVKdNI
Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_j6NGUGKTs

.
President Assad: supporting the resistance in Palestine and other areas constantly 
Syria under pressure because of its position on the Palestinian issue 
internal situation can not be separated from the outside one
but we can not determine the percentage of the role of either of them in the crisis, 
Syria agreed to the Annan plan with the conviction, related to the cessation of violence. Ethical and national cases have responded to the many tempting offers and other funds.

President Assad: Western countries ‘ claims to support the Annan plan are false and untrue 
Proved by some of the decision of the Security Council… they want a military attack, as happened in Libya, but it seems that the attempt until this moment failed
Syrian people will not accept any form of the solution which is not a Syrian national and comes from the outside.Syria is in the crisis they helped by supporting the outlaws and the presence of religious extremists .
There are priorities for reform and the first priority was the side living and focus on economic development
we are now talking about the third or fourth generation since the occupation of Palestine and attitudes will never change
a conflict between two: first draft resistance against domination and second,greater Middle East project
President Al-Assad: Syria has built its policy on national and popular compass: solid domestic situation is real barrier which prevents the success of any external interference, whether through infusion of funds or send arms.
President Assad: little mind will have the trend towards the military action of that region, the importance of geopolitical and social structure is a confluence of the earthquake. Controlling Syria means control over much of the region’s political decision ..the attack today isn’t the first in 2005 Syria suffered a similar attack but it failed so they moved to another method.
Americans were supporting Al-Qaeda since the 1980s by former President Ronald Reagan, but they call the terrorist ,now,after years, ” freedom fighters” .
on the subject of reviving the Ottoman Empire, I believe that we are in a different era with all its data and this is no longer possible to accomplish a distinction must be drawn between the position of some officials of the Turkish State and Turkish people.Their had a positive attitude towards what is happening in Syria because they know most of the facts in spite of attempts of fraud information within Turkey. Our vision for the relationship with Turkey and Turkish role is that we can build an empire of good relations and alliances and organizations that collect interests as in the case of SCO and other such new empires can be constructed through rational objective positions which reflect the interests of the region and not the dependence to Western or American positions
We did not release any person with his hands stained with the blood of Syrians but released the people who took up arms as a result of misunderstanding or ignorance or because of the need for money, but who have not committed criminal acts and on the initiative of their own progress and asked to return to the correct location in the community and natural to tolerate such to take opportunity to be national persons
Americans divide roles and change labels and terminology depending on the situation they are experiencing, if rulers of countries obey and rule as like they are good and if they strike US’interests or the interests of their allies in the region are bad.
“From the colonialist standpoint, regional countries should not move according to their national interests and if any country moves against their (Western) values and interests, they say no, like what happened in the case of Iran’s nuclear program,because Western states are opposed to Iran’s access to nuclear knowhow; they are more fearful of Iran’s expertise in the nuclear field than what they claim to be a nuclear bomb,
Some regional states have been subjected to pressures due to Syria’s stance on Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq and the resistance, and are thus attempting to undermine or eliminate the Syrian role in the region.We cannot discontinue our support for the resistance, unless nations halt such backing and consequently give up their own rights, which is a remote possibility. Our policies are based on popular support and not according to the Western approach.“for terrorists and the governments that sponsor them, reforms are not important, since the very forces that claimed a lack of reforms were the problem all they wanted was continued unrest.
He concluded by saying that the Arab League “was not permitted to play a positive role with respect to problems in Arab countries.
All of the plans pursued by the Arab League were to the detriment of Arabs,” President Assad insisted. “Most conferences of Arab leaders were scenes of quarrels.”
“There are over 5,000 incidents of ceasefire violations by terrorist groups for them to speak about; then we can say that they observers are impartial.”
In response to a question about the existence of a plan to wage a military attack on Syria, Assad said he had “no information on such a plan,” though some countries “are making efforts to guide the situation towards a military attack.”
President Assad: pressure will not affect us we live under pressure continuously.
سورية برس : الرئيس “بشار الأسد” :سورية تتعرض للضغوط بسبب مواقفها من القضية الفلسطينية.

الرئيس الأسد : الشعب السوري لن يقبل بأي نموذج للحل غير سوري و غير وطني يأتي من الخارج بغض النظر عن مضمونه.
الرئيس الأسد : لا يمكن فصل الوضع الداخلي عن الخارجي ولا يمكن تحديد نسبة مئوية لدور أي منهما في الأزمة
الوضع الداخلي المتين هو الحاجز الحقيقي الذي يمنع نجاح أي تدخل خارجي سواء عبر ضخ الأموال أو إرسال السلاح
الحالتان الوطنية و الأخلاقية تصدتا للعروض المغرية الكثيرة بالأموال و غيرها
الجانب الدولي يرفض أن يكون هناك دول لديها استقلالية وتدافع عن مصالحها
خطة أنان جيدة و مازالت صالحة الآن و للمستقبل
لتحليل الصحيح لما يجري في المنطقة هو أن هناك صراعا بين مشروعين الأول مشروع المقاومة الرافض للهيمنة والثاني مشروع الشرق الأوسط الكبير
الدول الغربية التي تدعي دعم خطة أنان هي التي تستخدم هذه العناوين بشكل زائف وغير صحيح
هناك في سورية من ساعد على الأزمة وهم الخارجين عن القانون و تواجد للمتطرفين الدينيين وهم القسم الأكبر في سوريا وهناك القاعدة
القليل من العقل لديهم سيمنعهم من الاتجاه إلى العمل العسكري لأن المنطقة بما تشكله من أهمية جيوسياسية و تركيبتها الإجتماعية هي خط إلتقاء الزلزال
هناك في سورية من ساعد على الأزمة وهم الخارجين عن القانون و تواجد للمتطرفين الدينيين وهم القسم الأكبر في سوريا وهناك القاعدة
هناك في سورية من ساعد على الأزمة وهم الخارجين عن القانون و تواجد للمتطرفين الدينيين وهم القسم الأكبر في سوريا وهناك القاعدة

التحليل الصحيح لما يجري في المنطقة هو أن هناك صراعا بين مشروعين الأول مشروع المقاومة الرافض للهيمنة والثاني مشروع الشرق الأوسط الكبير
هناك أولويات للاصلاح والأولوية الأولى كانت للجانب المعيشي والتركيز على التطوير الاقتصادي
القليل من العقل لديهم سيمنعهم من الاتجاه إلى العمل العسكري لأن المنطقة بما تشكله من أهمية جيوسياسية و تركيبتها الإجتماعية هي خط إلتقاء الزلزال
سرنا بعملية اصلاح سياسية تدريجية لأن السياسة لا تأتي بقانون بل بتراكم الخبرات ونضوج المجتمع والدولة معاً
البعض لا يكتفي بقرار مجلس الأمن بل يريد هجوما عسكريا كما حصل في ليبيا ولكن يبدو أن محاولتهم حتى هذه اللحظة بائت بالفشل
السيطرة على سورية يعني السيطرة على جزء كبير من القرار السياسي في المنطقة والهجمة التي تتعرض لها اليوم ليست الأولى ففي العام “2005” تعرضت لهجمة مماثلة ولكنها فشلت فتم الانتقال إلى أسلوب آخر

السيد الرئيس : مسؤوليتنا الطبيعية في الدستور هي حماية كل المواطنين في سورية، ومن واجبنا القضاء على كل الارهابيين في كل زوايا الوطن وهكذا نكون قد حمينا المواطنين في كل سورية

” الجانب الإقليمي مرتبط بالدول الموجودة في المنطقة ولذلك له عدة جوانب أيضا فهناك دول محرجة من الموقف السياسي السوري تجاه القضايا المختلفة سواء في فلسطين أو العراق أو لبنان وغيرها وهي رأت في هذه الظروف فرصة لكي تحجم أو تسحق الدور السوري وهناك دول ليس بالضرورة أن تكون ضد الموقف السوري ولكنها تخضع للإملاءات الخارجية وغير قادرة على اتخاذ قرار يعبر عن رؤيتها أو رؤية شعبها.
تنظيم القاعدة موجود في سورية وتم إلقاء القبض على عدد من المنتسبين إليه الذين اعترفوا بالأعمال الإجرامية التي قاموا بها 
من يمارس القتل بحق الشعب السوري مزيج من الخارجين على القانون والمتطرفين الدينيين الذين ليس عددهم كبيرا جدا ولكنهم خطرون
القاعدة هي اختراع أمريكي بأموال دول عربية وهذا الشيء معروف والأمريكيون يتبعون سياسة مؤقتة بحسب المصالح المؤقتة
الأمريكيون كانوا يدعمون القاعدة وكانوا يسمون عناصرها في الثمانينيات على لسان الرئيس السابق “رونالد ريغن” مقاتلي الحرية وبعد سنوات أصبح اسمهم الإرهابيين
الأمريكيون يقسمون الأدوار ويغيرون التسميات والمصطلحات بحسب الحالة التي يمرون بها، فإذا كانت القاعدة تضرب بلدا لا يعجبهم فهي جيدة وإذا كانت تضرب المصالح الأمريكية أو مصالح حلفائهم في منطقة معينة فهي سيئة
إننا لم نفرج عن أي شخص تلطخت يداه بدماء السوريين بل أفرجنا عن أشخاص حملوا السلاح نتيجة فهم خاطئ أو جهل أو بسبب الحاجة للمال ولكنهم لم يرتكبوا أعمالا إجرامية وقاموا بمبادرة من ذواتهم بالتقدم للدولة وطلب السماح والعودة إلى الموقع الصحيح في المجتمع ومن الطبيعي أن نتسامح مع مثل هؤلاء لكي يأخذوا الفرصة أن يكونوا أشخاصا وطنيين من جديد
يجب التمييز بين موقف بعض المسؤولين في الدولة التركية وبين الحالة الشعبية التي هي حالة إيجابية تجاه ما يحصل في سورية لأنها تعرف القسم الأكبر من الحقائق بالرغم من محاولات التزوير الإعلامي داخل تركيا
عن موضوع إحياء الإمبراطورية العثمانية فأعتقد أننا أصبحنا في عصر آخر مختلف بكل معطياته وهذا الكلام لم يعد ممكنا.
كان تصورنا بالنسبة للعلاقة مع تركيا وللدور التركي أنه يمكن بناء إمبراطورية من العلاقات الجيدة ومن التحالفات والمنظمات التي تجمع المصالح كما هو حال منظمة شنغهاي وغيرها وهذه الإمبراطوريات الجديدة يمكن بناؤها من خلال مواقف موضوعية عقلانية تعبر عن مصالح المنطقة وليس بالارتهان إلى مواقف غربية أو أمريكية تحديدا
كانت القمم العربية بالنسبة لنا هي ساحة صراع في معظمها في وجه المشاريع أو الأفكار التي كانت تطرح ضد مصالحنا فلم يكن مسموحا لهذه الجامعة أن تلعب دورا عبر بعض الدول المعروفة التي تقوم دائما بتنفيذ الخطط الخارجية على الساحة العربية.
نقدر المواقف الموضوعية لروسيا وايران والصين وغيرها والتي تدعم الاستقرار في المنطقة
زعم البعض عن تدخل ايران وحزب الله في الأوضاع في سورية و هذا الموضوع لا يستحق التعليق
الضغوطات لن تؤثر علينا نحن نعيش تحت الضغط بشكل مستمر.

مقابلة الرئيس الاسد مع التلفزيون الايراني 28-6-2012ج1


http://sabinachiaburu.wordpress.com/2012/06/29/mrpresident-bashar-al-assad-on-iranian-channel-4/

President Bashar Al-Assad’s interview with Iranian Channel 4
الرئيس بشار الأسد للتلفزيون الإيراني
الدول الغربية تمارس ازدواجية المعايير تجاه قضايا المنطقة وهذا نفاق سياسي
Mr. President’s interview:

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUrig-DGrtQ
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pALxrO4zKBY
Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acUcXoVKdNI
Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_j6NGUGKTs

.
President Assad: supporting the resistance in Palestine and other areas constantly 
Syria under pressure because of its position on the Palestinian issue 
internal situation can not be separated from the outside one
but we can not determine the percentage of the role of either of them in the crisis, 
Syria agreed to the Annan plan with the conviction, related to the cessation of violence. Ethical and national cases have responded to the many tempting offers and other funds.

President Assad: Western countries ‘ claims to support the Annan plan are false and untrue 
Proved by some of the decision of the Security Council… they want a military attack, as happened in Libya, but it seems that the attempt until this moment failed
Syrian people will not accept any form of the solution which is not a Syrian national and comes from the outside.Syria is in the crisis they helped by supporting the outlaws and the presence of religious extremists .
There are priorities for reform and the first priority was the side living and focus on economic development
we are now talking about the third or fourth generation since the occupation of Palestine and attitudes will never change
a conflict between two: first draft resistance against domination and second,greater Middle East project
President Al-Assad: Syria has built its policy on national and popular compass: solid domestic situation is real barrier which prevents the success of any external interference, whether through infusion of funds or send arms.
President Assad: little mind will have the trend towards the military action of that region, the importance of geopolitical and social structure is a confluence of the earthquake. Controlling Syria means control over much of the region’s political decision ..the attack today isn’t the first in 2005 Syria suffered a similar attack but it failed so they moved to another method.
Americans were supporting Al-Qaeda since the 1980s by former President Ronald Reagan, but they call the terrorist ,now,after years, ” freedom fighters” .
on the subject of reviving the Ottoman Empire, I believe that we are in a different era with all its data and this is no longer possible to accomplish a distinction must be drawn between the position of some officials of the Turkish State and Turkish people.Their had a positive attitude towards what is happening in Syria because they know most of the facts in spite of attempts of fraud information within Turkey. Our vision for the relationship with Turkey and Turkish role is that we can build an empire of good relations and alliances and organizations that collect interests as in the case of SCO and other such new empires can be constructed through rational objective positions which reflect the interests of the region and not the dependence to Western or American positions
We did not release any person with his hands stained with the blood of Syrians but released the people who took up arms as a result of misunderstanding or ignorance or because of the need for money, but who have not committed criminal acts and on the initiative of their own progress and asked to return to the correct location in the community and natural to tolerate such to take opportunity to be national persons
Americans divide roles and change labels and terminology depending on the situation they are experiencing, if rulers of countries obey and rule as like they are good and if they strike US’interests or the interests of their allies in the region are bad.
“From the colonialist standpoint, regional countries should not move according to their national interests and if any country moves against their (Western) values and interests, they say no, like what happened in the case of Iran’s nuclear program,because Western states are opposed to Iran’s access to nuclear knowhow; they are more fearful of Iran’s expertise in the nuclear field than what they claim to be a nuclear bomb,
Some regional states have been subjected to pressures due to Syria’s stance on Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq and the resistance, and are thus attempting to undermine or eliminate the Syrian role in the region.We cannot discontinue our support for the resistance, unless nations halt such backing and consequently give up their own rights, which is a remote possibility. Our policies are based on popular support and not according to the Western approach.“for terrorists and the governments that sponsor them, reforms are not important, since the very forces that claimed a lack of reforms were the problem all they wanted was continued unrest.
He concluded by saying that the Arab League “was not permitted to play a positive role with respect to problems in Arab countries.
All of the plans pursued by the Arab League were to the detriment of Arabs,” President Assad insisted. “Most conferences of Arab leaders were scenes of quarrels.”
“There are over 5,000 incidents of ceasefire violations by terrorist groups for them to speak about; then we can say that they observers are impartial.”
In response to a question about the existence of a plan to wage a military attack on Syria, Assad said he had “no information on such a plan,” though some countries “are making efforts to guide the situation towards a military attack.”
President Assad: pressure will not affect us we live under pressure continuously.
سورية برس : الرئيس “بشار الأسد” :سورية تتعرض للضغوط بسبب مواقفها من القضية الفلسطينية.

الرئيس الأسد : الشعب السوري لن يقبل بأي نموذج للحل غير سوري و غير وطني يأتي من الخارج بغض النظر عن مضمونه.
الرئيس الأسد : لا يمكن فصل الوضع الداخلي عن الخارجي ولا يمكن تحديد نسبة مئوية لدور أي منهما في الأزمة
الوضع الداخلي المتين هو الحاجز الحقيقي الذي يمنع نجاح أي تدخل خارجي سواء عبر ضخ الأموال أو إرسال السلاح
الحالتان الوطنية و الأخلاقية تصدتا للعروض المغرية الكثيرة بالأموال و غيرها
الجانب الدولي يرفض أن يكون هناك دول لديها استقلالية وتدافع عن مصالحها
خطة أنان جيدة و مازالت صالحة الآن و للمستقبل
لتحليل الصحيح لما يجري في المنطقة هو أن هناك صراعا بين مشروعين الأول مشروع المقاومة الرافض للهيمنة والثاني مشروع الشرق الأوسط الكبير
الدول الغربية التي تدعي دعم خطة أنان هي التي تستخدم هذه العناوين بشكل زائف وغير صحيح
هناك في سورية من ساعد على الأزمة وهم الخارجين عن القانون و تواجد للمتطرفين الدينيين وهم القسم الأكبر في سوريا وهناك القاعدة
القليل من العقل لديهم سيمنعهم من الاتجاه إلى العمل العسكري لأن المنطقة بما تشكله من أهمية جيوسياسية و تركيبتها الإجتماعية هي خط إلتقاء الزلزال
هناك في سورية من ساعد على الأزمة وهم الخارجين عن القانون و تواجد للمتطرفين الدينيين وهم القسم الأكبر في سوريا وهناك القاعدة
هناك في سورية من ساعد على الأزمة وهم الخارجين عن القانون و تواجد للمتطرفين الدينيين وهم القسم الأكبر في سوريا وهناك القاعدة

التحليل الصحيح لما يجري في المنطقة هو أن هناك صراعا بين مشروعين الأول مشروع المقاومة الرافض للهيمنة والثاني مشروع الشرق الأوسط الكبير
هناك أولويات للاصلاح والأولوية الأولى كانت للجانب المعيشي والتركيز على التطوير الاقتصادي
القليل من العقل لديهم سيمنعهم من الاتجاه إلى العمل العسكري لأن المنطقة بما تشكله من أهمية جيوسياسية و تركيبتها الإجتماعية هي خط إلتقاء الزلزال
سرنا بعملية اصلاح سياسية تدريجية لأن السياسة لا تأتي بقانون بل بتراكم الخبرات ونضوج المجتمع والدولة معاً
البعض لا يكتفي بقرار مجلس الأمن بل يريد هجوما عسكريا كما حصل في ليبيا ولكن يبدو أن محاولتهم حتى هذه اللحظة بائت بالفشل
السيطرة على سورية يعني السيطرة على جزء كبير من القرار السياسي في المنطقة والهجمة التي تتعرض لها اليوم ليست الأولى ففي العام “2005” تعرضت لهجمة مماثلة ولكنها فشلت فتم الانتقال إلى أسلوب آخر

السيد الرئيس : مسؤوليتنا الطبيعية في الدستور هي حماية كل المواطنين في سورية، ومن واجبنا القضاء على كل الارهابيين في كل زوايا الوطن وهكذا نكون قد حمينا المواطنين في كل سورية

” الجانب الإقليمي مرتبط بالدول الموجودة في المنطقة ولذلك له عدة جوانب أيضا فهناك دول محرجة من الموقف السياسي السوري تجاه القضايا المختلفة سواء في فلسطين أو العراق أو لبنان وغيرها وهي رأت في هذه الظروف فرصة لكي تحجم أو تسحق الدور السوري وهناك دول ليس بالضرورة أن تكون ضد الموقف السوري ولكنها تخضع للإملاءات الخارجية وغير قادرة على اتخاذ قرار يعبر عن رؤيتها أو رؤية شعبها.
تنظيم القاعدة موجود في سورية وتم إلقاء القبض على عدد من المنتسبين إليه الذين اعترفوا بالأعمال الإجرامية التي قاموا بها 
من يمارس القتل بحق الشعب السوري مزيج من الخارجين على القانون والمتطرفين الدينيين الذين ليس عددهم كبيرا جدا ولكنهم خطرون
القاعدة هي اختراع أمريكي بأموال دول عربية وهذا الشيء معروف والأمريكيون يتبعون سياسة مؤقتة بحسب المصالح المؤقتة
الأمريكيون كانوا يدعمون القاعدة وكانوا يسمون عناصرها في الثمانينيات على لسان الرئيس السابق “رونالد ريغن” مقاتلي الحرية وبعد سنوات أصبح اسمهم الإرهابيين
الأمريكيون يقسمون الأدوار ويغيرون التسميات والمصطلحات بحسب الحالة التي يمرون بها، فإذا كانت القاعدة تضرب بلدا لا يعجبهم فهي جيدة وإذا كانت تضرب المصالح الأمريكية أو مصالح حلفائهم في منطقة معينة فهي سيئة
إننا لم نفرج عن أي شخص تلطخت يداه بدماء السوريين بل أفرجنا عن أشخاص حملوا السلاح نتيجة فهم خاطئ أو جهل أو بسبب الحاجة للمال ولكنهم لم يرتكبوا أعمالا إجرامية وقاموا بمبادرة من ذواتهم بالتقدم للدولة وطلب السماح والعودة إلى الموقع الصحيح في المجتمع ومن الطبيعي أن نتسامح مع مثل هؤلاء لكي يأخذوا الفرصة أن يكونوا أشخاصا وطنيين من جديد
يجب التمييز بين موقف بعض المسؤولين في الدولة التركية وبين الحالة الشعبية التي هي حالة إيجابية تجاه ما يحصل في سورية لأنها تعرف القسم الأكبر من الحقائق بالرغم من محاولات التزوير الإعلامي داخل تركيا
عن موضوع إحياء الإمبراطورية العثمانية فأعتقد أننا أصبحنا في عصر آخر مختلف بكل معطياته وهذا الكلام لم يعد ممكنا.
كان تصورنا بالنسبة للعلاقة مع تركيا وللدور التركي أنه يمكن بناء إمبراطورية من العلاقات الجيدة ومن التحالفات والمنظمات التي تجمع المصالح كما هو حال منظمة شنغهاي وغيرها وهذه الإمبراطوريات الجديدة يمكن بناؤها من خلال مواقف موضوعية عقلانية تعبر عن مصالح المنطقة وليس بالارتهان إلى مواقف غربية أو أمريكية تحديدا
كانت القمم العربية بالنسبة لنا هي ساحة صراع في معظمها في وجه المشاريع أو الأفكار التي كانت تطرح ضد مصالحنا فلم يكن مسموحا لهذه الجامعة أن تلعب دورا عبر بعض الدول المعروفة التي تقوم دائما بتنفيذ الخطط الخارجية على الساحة العربية.
نقدر المواقف الموضوعية لروسيا وايران والصين وغيرها والتي تدعم الاستقرار في المنطقة
زعم البعض عن تدخل ايران وحزب الله في الأوضاع في سورية و هذا الموضوع لا يستحق التعليق
الضغوطات لن تؤثر علينا نحن نعيش تحت الضغط بشكل مستمر.

Mr,President Bashar al Assad on Iranian channel 4

Mr,President Bashar al Assad on Iranian channel 4

President Bashar Al-Assad’s interview with Iranian Channel 4
الرئيس بشار الأسد للتلفزيون الإيراني
الدول الغربية تمارس ازدواجية المعايير تجاه قضايا المنطقة وهذا نفاق سياسي
Mr. President’s interview:

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUrig-DGrtQ

Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pALxrO4zKBY

Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acUcXoVKdNI

Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_j6NGUGKTs

.
President Assad: supporting the resistance in Palestine and other areas constantly
Syria under pressure because of its position on the Palestinian issue
internal situation can not be separated from the outside one
but we can not determine the percentage of the role of either of them in the crisis,
Syria agreed to the Annan plan with the conviction, related to the cessation of violence. Ethical and national cases have responded to the many tempting offers and other funds.

President Assad: Western countries ‘ claims to support the Annan plan are false and untrue
Proved by some of the decision of the Security Council… they want a military attack, as happened in Libya, but it seems that the attempt until this moment failed
Syrian people will not accept any form of the solution which is not a Syrian national and comes from the outside.Syria is in the crisis they helped by supporting the outlaws and the presence of religious extremists .
There are priorities for reform and the first priority was the side living and focus on economic development
we are now talking about the third or fourth generation since the occupation of Palestine and attitudes will never change
a conflict between two: first draft resistance against domination and second,greater Middle East project
President Al-Assad: Syria has built its policy on national and popular compass: solid domestic situation is real barrier which prevents the success of any external interference, whether through infusion of funds or send arms.
President Assad: little mind will have the trend towards the military action of that region, the importance of geopolitical and social structure is a confluence of the earthquake. Controlling Syria means control over much of the region’s political decision ..the attack today isn’t the first in 2005 Syria suffered a similar attack but it failed so they moved to another method.
Americans were supporting Al-Qaeda since the 1980s by former President Ronald Reagan, but they call the terrorist ,now,after years, ” freedom fighters” .
on the subject of reviving the Ottoman Empire, I believe that we are in a different era with all its data and this is no longer possible to accomplish a distinction must be drawn between the position of some officials of the Turkish State and Turkish people.Their had a positive attitude towards what is happening in Syria because they know most of the facts in spite of attempts of fraud information within Turkey. Our vision for the relationship with Turkey and Turkish role is that we can build an empire of good relations and alliances and organizations that collect interests as in the case of SCO and other such new empires can be constructed through rational objective positions which reflect the interests of the region and not the dependence to Western or American positions
We did not release any person with his hands stained with the blood of Syrians but released the people who took up arms as a result of misunderstanding or ignorance or because of the need for money, but who have not committed criminal acts and on the initiative of their own progress and asked to return to the correct location in the community and natural to tolerate such to take opportunity to be national persons
Americans divide roles and change labels and terminology depending on the situation they are experiencing, if rulers of countries obey and rule as like they are good and if they strike US’interests or the interests of their allies in the region are bad.
“From the colonialist standpoint, regional countries should not move according to their national interests and if any country moves against their (Western) values and interests, they say no, like what happened in the case of Iran’s nuclear program,because Western states are opposed to Iran’s access to nuclear knowhow; they are more fearful of Iran’s expertise in the nuclear field than what they claim to be a nuclear bomb,
Some regional states have been subjected to pressures due to Syria’s stance on Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq and the resistance, and are thus attempting to undermine or eliminate the Syrian role in the region.We cannot discontinue our support for the resistance, unless nations halt such backing and consequently give up their own rights, which is a remote possibility. Our policies are based on popular support and not according to the Western approach.“for terrorists and the governments that sponsor them, reforms are not important, since the very forces that claimed a lack of reforms were the problem all they wanted was continued unrest.
He concluded by saying that the Arab League “was not permitted to play a positive role with respect to problems in Arab countries.
All of the plans pursued by the Arab League were to the detriment of Arabs,” President Assad insisted. “Most conferences of Arab leaders were scenes of quarrels.”
“There are over 5,000 incidents of ceasefire violations by terrorist groups for them to speak about; then we can say that they observers are impartial.”
In response to a question about the existence of a plan to wage a military attack on Syria, Assad said he had “no information on such a plan,” though some countries “are making efforts to guide the situation towards a military attack.”
President Assad: pressure will not affect us we live under pressure continuously.
سورية برس : الرئيس “بشار الأسد” :سورية تتعرض للضغوط بسبب مواقفها من القضية الفلسطينية.

الرئيس الأسد : الشعب السوري لن يقبل بأي نموذج للحل غير سوري و غير وطني يأتي من الخارج بغض النظر عن مضمونه.
الرئيس الأسد : لا يمكن فصل الوضع الداخلي عن الخارجي ولا يمكن تحديد نسبة مئوية لدور أي منهما في الأزمة
الوضع الداخلي المتين هو الحاجز الحقيقي الذي يمنع نجاح أي تدخل خارجي سواء عبر ضخ الأموال أو إرسال السلاح
الحالتان الوطنية و الأخلاقية تصدتا للعروض المغرية الكثيرة بالأموال و غيرها
الجانب الدولي يرفض أن يكون هناك دول لديها استقلالية وتدافع عن مصالحها
خطة أنان جيدة و مازالت صالحة الآن و للمستقبل
لتحليل الصحيح لما يجري في المنطقة هو أن هناك صراعا بين مشروعين الأول مشروع المقاومة الرافض للهيمنة والثاني مشروع الشرق الأوسط الكبير
الدول الغربية التي تدعي دعم خطة أنان هي التي تستخدم هذه العناوين بشكل زائف وغير صحيح
هناك في سورية من ساعد على الأزمة وهم الخارجين عن القانون و تواجد للمتطرفين الدينيين وهم القسم الأكبر في سوريا وهناك القاعدة
القليل من العقل لديهم سيمنعهم من الاتجاه إلى العمل العسكري لأن المنطقة بما تشكله من أهمية جيوسياسية و تركيبتها الإجتماعية هي خط إلتقاء الزلزال
هناك في سورية من ساعد على الأزمة وهم الخارجين عن القانون و تواجد للمتطرفين الدينيين وهم القسم الأكبر في سوريا وهناك القاعدة
هناك في سورية من ساعد على الأزمة وهم الخارجين عن القانون و تواجد للمتطرفين الدينيين وهم القسم الأكبر في سوريا وهناك القاعدة

التحليل الصحيح لما يجري في المنطقة هو أن هناك صراعا بين مشروعين الأول مشروع المقاومة الرافض للهيمنة والثاني مشروع الشرق الأوسط الكبير
هناك أولويات للاصلاح والأولوية الأولى كانت للجانب المعيشي والتركيز على التطوير الاقتصادي
القليل من العقل لديهم سيمنعهم من الاتجاه إلى العمل العسكري لأن المنطقة بما تشكله من أهمية جيوسياسية و تركيبتها الإجتماعية هي خط إلتقاء الزلزال
سرنا بعملية اصلاح سياسية تدريجية لأن السياسة لا تأتي بقانون بل بتراكم الخبرات ونضوج المجتمع والدولة معاً
البعض لا يكتفي بقرار مجلس الأمن بل يريد هجوما عسكريا كما حصل في ليبيا ولكن يبدو أن محاولتهم حتى هذه اللحظة بائت بالفشل
السيطرة على سورية يعني السيطرة على جزء كبير من القرار السياسي في المنطقة والهجمة التي تتعرض لها اليوم ليست الأولى ففي العام “2005” تعرضت لهجمة مماثلة ولكنها فشلت فتم الانتقال إلى أسلوب آخر

السيد الرئيس : مسؤوليتنا الطبيعية في الدستور هي حماية كل المواطنين في سورية، ومن واجبنا القضاء على كل الارهابيين في كل زوايا الوطن وهكذا نكون قد حمينا المواطنين في كل سورية

” الجانب الإقليمي مرتبط بالدول الموجودة في المنطقة ولذلك له عدة جوانب أيضا فهناك دول محرجة من الموقف السياسي السوري تجاه القضايا المختلفة سواء في فلسطين أو العراق أو لبنان وغيرها وهي رأت في هذه الظروف فرصة لكي تحجم أو تسحق الدور السوري وهناك دول ليس بالضرورة أن تكون ضد الموقف السوري ولكنها تخضع للإملاءات الخارجية وغير قادرة على اتخاذ قرار يعبر عن رؤيتها أو رؤية شعبها.
تنظيم القاعدة موجود في سورية وتم إلقاء القبض على عدد من المنتسبين إليه الذين اعترفوا بالأعمال الإجرامية التي قاموا بها
من يمارس القتل بحق الشعب السوري مزيج من الخارجين على القانون والمتطرفين الدينيين الذين ليس عددهم كبيرا جدا ولكنهم خطرون
القاعدة هي اختراع أمريكي بأموال دول عربية وهذا الشيء معروف والأمريكيون يتبعون سياسة مؤقتة بحسب المصالح المؤقتة
الأمريكيون كانوا يدعمون القاعدة وكانوا يسمون عناصرها في الثمانينيات على لسان الرئيس السابق “رونالد ريغن” مقاتلي الحرية وبعد سنوات أصبح اسمهم الإرهابيين
الأمريكيون يقسمون الأدوار ويغيرون التسميات والمصطلحات بحسب الحالة التي يمرون بها، فإذا كانت القاعدة تضرب بلدا لا يعجبهم فهي جيدة وإذا كانت تضرب المصالح الأمريكية أو مصالح حلفائهم في منطقة معينة فهي سيئة
إننا لم نفرج عن أي شخص تلطخت يداه بدماء السوريين بل أفرجنا عن أشخاص حملوا السلاح نتيجة فهم خاطئ أو جهل أو بسبب الحاجة للمال ولكنهم لم يرتكبوا أعمالا إجرامية وقاموا بمبادرة من ذواتهم بالتقدم للدولة وطلب السماح والعودة إلى الموقع الصحيح في المجتمع ومن الطبيعي أن نتسامح مع مثل هؤلاء لكي يأخذوا الفرصة أن يكونوا أشخاصا وطنيين من جديد
يجب التمييز بين موقف بعض المسؤولين في الدولة التركية وبين الحالة الشعبية التي هي حالة إيجابية تجاه ما يحصل في سورية لأنها تعرف القسم الأكبر من الحقائق بالرغم من محاولات التزوير الإعلامي داخل تركيا
عن موضوع إحياء الإمبراطورية العثمانية فأعتقد أننا أصبحنا في عصر آخر مختلف بكل معطياته وهذا الكلام لم يعد ممكنا.
كان تصورنا بالنسبة للعلاقة مع تركيا وللدور التركي أنه يمكن بناء إمبراطورية من العلاقات الجيدة ومن التحالفات والمنظمات التي تجمع المصالح كما هو حال منظمة شنغهاي وغيرها وهذه الإمبراطوريات الجديدة يمكن بناؤها من خلال مواقف موضوعية عقلانية تعبر عن مصالح المنطقة وليس بالارتهان إلى مواقف غربية أو أمريكية تحديدا
كانت القمم العربية بالنسبة لنا هي ساحة صراع في معظمها في وجه المشاريع أو الأفكار التي كانت تطرح ضد مصالحنا فلم يكن مسموحا لهذه الجامعة أن تلعب دورا عبر بعض الدول المعروفة التي تقوم دائما بتنفيذ الخطط الخارجية على الساحة العربية.
نقدر المواقف الموضوعية لروسيا وايران والصين وغيرها والتي تدعم الاستقرار في المنطقة
زعم البعض عن تدخل ايران وحزب الله في الأوضاع في سورية و هذا الموضوع لا يستحق التعليق
الضغوطات لن تؤثر علينا نحن نعيش تحت الضغط بشكل مستمر

Duplicitous Human Rights Council Report on Syria

Duplicitous Human Rights Council Report on Syria

On June 27, the UN 
Human Rights Council (HRC) discussed conflict conditions in Syria. 

Pre-scripted, its conclusions were predictable. Washington calls the shots. Most HRC members salute and obey.

Syrian HRC representative Faisal Khabbaz al-Hamwi denounced the proceedings. Calling them useless and politically biased, he said its report reflects a “disinformation war against Syria.” He walked out of the session, saying:

“We will not participate in this flagrantly political meeting.”

He had good reason to leave. Before doing so he said national reconciliation can only happen when “foreign powers stopped inciting violence. The crisis in Syria (is) genuine war and a criminal operation involving destruction of property.”

It’s not about “legitimate demands for reform.” It’s about lawlessly supporting regime change. It’s to replace Assad with a pro-Western puppet. 

Washington had that in mind for years. Independent governments aren’t tolerated. America has longstanding plans to oust them for subservient vassal ones.

Syria’s insurgency is supported and financed from abroad. It promotes anarchy and disorder. It ignores how Israel persecutes Arabs and Turkey wages war on Kurds. 

It avoids discussing Gulf states’ crimes against their own people and involvement in Washington’s war on Syria.

“A war of minds and bombs is taking place. Gunmen have been carrying out terrorist acts on Syrian cities. Such activities by gunmen and terrorists is being fed with money and weapons from abroad,” he explained.

“How could some sides pretend to be worried about the Syrian people and at the same time arming the terrorists and conspiring against the Syrians.” 

“Had these sides been honest, they would have supported Annan’s plan and urged all sides to hold a constructive national dialogue,” he added.

Vasily Nebenya, Russian Foreign Ministry Human Rights Director, said the HRC’s report on Houla killings doesn’t reflect facts on the ground.

HRC’s account “indicates to the tension of the situation where this massacre benefited powers which have interest in destabilizing the situation before debating the Syrian file at the UN Security Council.”

High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay spurned her mandate. Instead of responsibly “strengthening the promotion and protection of human rights,” she spurned them in deference to Western interests.

She said conditions in Syria continue to deteriorate. She called them “alarming.” She pointed fingers the wrong way. She ignored Western-sponsored massacres and other atrocities. She blamed Assad, not foreign mercenaries. Since March last year, they’ve been ravaging the country.

In September 2011, Paulo Pinheiro was appointed Chairman of a three-member International Commission of Inquiry for Syria. 

Its mandate is investigating human rights abuses. His reports bear testimony to his bias. Like Pillay, he represents Western interests, not truth and full disclosure. 

His earlier reports blamed Assad for insurgent crimes against humanity. He claimed soldiers were shooting unarmed protesters. Arrests were made without cause. Civilian neighborhoods were indiscriminately attacked.

His accounts came right out of the anti-Gaddafi playbook. They lack credibility. He said insurgents also committed crimes but on a much smaller scale. He lied. He’s paid to lie. His new report repeated the earlier pattern.

Again he pointed fingers the wrong way. He called conditions “on the ground dangerously and quickly deteriorating.”

“In the increasingly militarized context, human rights violations are occuring across the country on an alarming scale during military operations against locations believed to be hosting defectors and/or those perceived as affiliated with anti-government armed groups, including the Free Syrian Army.”

He ignored credible eye-witness testimonies. He fabricated accounts and conclusions. He discussed the May 25 Houla massacre. 

He said it’s “unlikely that anti-Government fighters were responsible….and considered that Syrian Government forces or those loyal to them were the most likely perpetrators.”

Russian journalist Marat Musin published firsthand observations of what happened. He exposed scoundrel media misinformation and lies.

Western-enlisted death squads bore full responsibility. Government forces and/or so-called pro-Assad shabbiha had no involvement. 

Pro-Assad loyalists were murdered. Targeting them was cold, calculated, and well-planned. In two earlier June articles, Germany’s  Frankfurther Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) published facts, not misinformation on what happened. It blamed insurgents, not government forces or pro-Assad elements.

Documentation based on credible eye witnesses reconstructed events accurately. Survivors pointed fingers the right way. Anti-Assad elements were interviewed. They claimed responsibility. FAZ kept their names confidential. At issue is potential reprisals. 

Pinheiro’s report claimed “no doubt as to what was happening on the ground and identified the Syrian authorities as carrying a clear and definite responsibility in this regard.”

It said Assad is “unwilling or unable to investigate and prosecute crimes….” It endorsed Pillay’s request for the Security Council to refer responsible government officials to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for prosecution.

At HRC’s emergency June 1 meeting, she blamed Assad for Houla killings, saying:

“These acts may amount to crimes against humanity and other international crimes and may be indicative of a pattern of widespread or systematic attacks against civilian populations that have been perpetrated with impunity.”

“I reiterate that those who order, assist or fail to stop attacks on civilians are individually criminally liable for their actions.”

Ahead of the meeting, Washington, Turkey and Qatar submitted a joint draft resolution to the HRC. It condemned “the wanton killings of civilians by shooting at close range and by severe physical abuse by pro-regime elements and a series of government artillery and tank shellings of a residential neighborhood.”

On June 1, the HRC blamed Assad for Houla killings. A final resolution was adopted. Forty-one voted yes. Russia, China and Cuba rejected one-way responsibility. Two nations abstained.

Responsible insurgents weren’t mentioned. Assad was accused of failing “to protect and promote the rights of all Syrians, including through systematic and repeated violations of human rights.”

It called for holding guilty parties accountable. It shamelessly blamed victims, not perpetrators. It ignored facts based on credible eyewitness testimonies. 

Instead it published misinformation and bald-faced lies. Doing so makes nations blaming Assad and HRC officials complicit with insurgent crimes.

On June 28, HRC members will resume discussions on Syria. Dialogue on other matters will be held. Later in the day, closed door meetings will follow. It’s unclear whether what’s considered will be revealed.

Conclusions from previous HRC emergency sessions on Syria also blamed Assad for insurgent crimes. Doing so destroys its credibility. Instead of fulfilling its mandate, it spurned it.

Duplicitous Human Rights Council Report on Syria

Duplicitous Human Rights Council Report on Syria.


On June 27, the UN 
Human Rights Council (HRC) discussed conflict conditions in Syria. 

Pre-scripted, its conclusions were predictable. Washington calls the shots. Most HRC members salute and obey.


Syrian HRC representative Faisal Khabbaz al-Hamwi denounced the proceedings. Calling them useless and politically biased, he said its report reflects a “disinformation war against Syria.” He walked out of the session, saying:


“We will not participate in this flagrantly political meeting.”


He had good reason to leave. Before doing so he said national reconciliation can only happen when “foreign powers stopped inciting violence. The crisis in Syria (is) genuine war and a criminal operation involving destruction of property.”


It’s not about “legitimate demands for reform.” It’s about lawlessly supporting regime change. It’s to replace Assad with a pro-Western puppet. 


Washington had that in mind for years. Independent governments aren’t tolerated. America has longstanding plans to oust them for subservient vassal ones.


Syria’s insurgency is supported and financed from abroad. It promotes anarchy and disorder. It ignores how Israel persecutes Arabs and Turkey wages war on Kurds. 


It avoids discussing Gulf states’ crimes against their own people and involvement in Washington’s war on Syria.


“A war of minds and bombs is taking place. Gunmen have been carrying out terrorist acts on Syrian cities. Such activities by gunmen and terrorists is being fed with money and weapons from abroad,” he explained.


“How could some sides pretend to be worried about the Syrian people and at the same time arming the terrorists and conspiring against the Syrians.” 


“Had these sides been honest, they would have supported Annan’s plan and urged all sides to hold a constructive national dialogue,” he added.


Vasily Nebenya, Russian Foreign Ministry Human Rights Director, said the HRC’s report on Houla killings doesn’t reflect facts on the ground.


HRC’s account “indicates to the tension of the situation where this massacre benefited powers which have interest in destabilizing the situation before debating the Syrian file at the UN Security Council.”


High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay spurned her mandate. Instead of responsibly “strengthening the promotion and protection of human rights,” she spurned them in deference to Western interests.


She said conditions in Syria continue to deteriorate. She called them “alarming.” She pointed fingers the wrong way. She ignored Western-sponsored massacres and other atrocities. She blamed Assad, not foreign mercenaries. Since March last year, they’ve been ravaging the country.


In September 2011, Paulo Pinheiro was appointed Chairman of a three-member International Commission of Inquiry for Syria. 


Its mandate is investigating human rights abuses. His reports bear testimony to his bias. Like Pillay, he represents Western interests, not truth and full disclosure. 


His earlier reports blamed Assad for insurgent crimes against humanity. He claimed soldiers were shooting unarmed protesters. Arrests were made without cause. Civilian neighborhoods were indiscriminately attacked.


His accounts came right out of the anti-Gaddafi playbook. They lack credibility. He said insurgents also committed crimes but on a much smaller scale. He lied. He’s paid to lie. His new report repeated the earlier pattern.


Again he pointed fingers the wrong way. He called conditions “on the ground dangerously and quickly deteriorating.”


“In the increasingly militarized context, human rights violations are occuring across the country on an alarming scale during military operations against locations believed to be hosting defectors and/or those perceived as affiliated with anti-government armed groups, including the Free Syrian Army.”


He ignored credible eye-witness testimonies. He fabricated accounts and conclusions. He discussed the May 25 Houla massacre. 


He said it’s “unlikely that anti-Government fighters were responsible….and considered that Syrian Government forces or those loyal to them were the most likely perpetrators.”


Russian journalist Marat Musin published firsthand observations of what happened. He exposed scoundrel media misinformation and lies.


Western-enlisted death squads bore full responsibility. Government forces and/or so-called pro-Assad shabbiha had no involvement. 


Pro-Assad loyalists were murdered. Targeting them was cold, calculated, and well-planned. In two earlier June articles, Germany’s  Frankfurther Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) published facts, not misinformation on what happened. It blamed insurgents, not government forces or pro-Assad elements.


Documentation based on credible eye witnesses reconstructed events accurately. Survivors pointed fingers the right way. Anti-Assad elements were interviewed. They claimed responsibility. FAZ kept their names confidential. At issue is potential reprisals. 


Pinheiro’s report claimed “no doubt as to what was happening on the ground and identified the Syrian authorities as carrying a clear and definite responsibility in this regard.”


It said Assad is “unwilling or unable to investigate and prosecute crimes….” It endorsed Pillay’s request for the Security Council to refer responsible government officials to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for prosecution.


At HRC’s emergency June 1 meeting, she blamed Assad for Houla killings, saying:


“These acts may amount to crimes against humanity and other international crimes and may be indicative of a pattern of widespread or systematic attacks against civilian populations that have been perpetrated with impunity.”


“I reiterate that those who order, assist or fail to stop attacks on civilians are individually criminally liable for their actions.”


Ahead of the meeting, Washington, Turkey and Qatar submitted a joint draft resolution to the HRC. It condemned “the wanton killings of civilians by shooting at close range and by severe physical abuse by pro-regime elements and a series of government artillery and tank shellings of a residential neighborhood.”


On June 1, the HRC blamed Assad for Houla killings. A final resolution was adopted. Forty-one voted yes. Russia, China and Cuba rejected one-way responsibility. Two nations abstained.


Responsible insurgents weren’t mentioned. Assad was accused of failing “to protect and promote the rights of all Syrians, including through systematic and repeated violations of human rights.”


It called for holding guilty parties accountable. It shamelessly blamed victims, not perpetrators. It ignored facts based on credible eyewitness testimonies. 


Instead it published misinformation and bald-faced lies. Doing so makes nations blaming Assad and HRC officials complicit with insurgent crimes.


On June 28, HRC members will resume discussions on Syria. Dialogue on other matters will be held. Later in the day, closed door meetings will follow. It’s unclear whether what’s considered will be revealed.


Conclusions from previous HRC emergency sessions on Syria also blamed Assad for insurgent crimes. Doing so destroys its credibility. Instead of fulfilling its mandate, it spurned it.

NATO Member Turkey Harboring Terrorist Army

NATO Member Turkey Harboring Terrorist Army.


Warns Syria about defending its own borders – brazen act of war, crime against world peace ignored by feckless United Nations. 

After losing a fighter jet earlier this month while conducting a high-speed, low altitude invasion of Syria’s airspace, Turkey has now pledged to treat any Syrian operation along its borders as a military threat.

“Turkey’s warning could tilt the dynamic along the border, which has become an incubator for Syrian antigovernment rebels who are seeking increased levels of international support. Turkey’s pledge to respond to aggression from Syrian forces could help the rebel Free Syrian Army by deterring Syrian forces from attacking—or else result in Turkish retaliation for cross-border attacks on rebels,” reported the Wall Street Journal in their article, “Turkey Warns of Retaliation Against Syria.” This encapsulates the brazen warping of logic applied by NATO aggressors as they seek to perpetuate the bloodbath and destabilization caused by their own proxy forces, primarily harbored, armed, and deployed from NATO member Turkey.

Syrian Rebels are Al Qaeda Terrorists 

By US officials’ own admissions, since 2007 a combined US-Israeli-Saudi effort to assemble and deploy against Syria and Iran an army of sectarian extremists drawn from the ranks of Al Qaeda and its affiliates has been underway. In Seymour Hersh’s 2007 New Yorker article, “The Redirection,” he reported, “The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.”

Within Hersh’s report, not only is this army of fanatical terrorists described as being fully backed by the West in order to create a sectarian bloodbath to be used to achieve Western foreign policy objectives, but it was fully anticipated that this army would commit abhorrent atrocities, particularly against ethnic and religious minorities throughout the region. In particular former CIA agent Robert Baer in Lebanon warned about the fate of Christians located in the region.

Today, Baer’s warning has manifested itself in a genocidal campaign against Syria’s Christians increasingly more difficult for the Western media to hide. This is confirmed by LA Times’ “Church fears ‘ethnic cleansing’ of Christians in Homs, Syria,” and more recently in USA Today’s distorted, but still telling, “Christians in Syria live in uneasy alliance with Assad, Alawites.”

Also mentioned was the Syrian chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood, who by 2007 was already receiving significant backing from the West and Israel to destabilize Syria – despite its feigned anti-Western, anti-Israeli rhetoric.  

As clandestine military operations became larger in scale and more difficult for the complicit Western media to obfuscate, it was announced that hundreds of fighters as well as torrents of weapons and cash began flowing into Syria from NATO-armed terrorists in Libya. The Al Qaeda affiliated Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) (a US State Department listed terrorist organization – #28) led by Abdul Hakim Belhaj, spearheaded efforts to bolster what is essentially a foreign terrorist operation in Syria beginning as early as November 2011, according to the London Telegraph.

After Belhaj’s visit to the Turkish-Syrian border and his pledge to send cash, weapons, and fighters, up to 600 Libyan terrorists were reported to have made the journey to Syria to join the fighting. At least one ship flush with weapons from Libya was interdicted by Lebanon on its way to rebels’ hands in Syria.

In addition to LIFG terrorists admittedly entwined with the so-called “Free Syrian Army” (FSA), more recent reports indicate that Iraqi terrorists have also joined their ranks. Reuters in their article, “Outgunned Syria rebels make shift to bombs,” admit that not only is the FSA conducting a terrorist bombing campaign against the people of Syria, but that it is facilitated by rebels who “fought with Al Qaeda elements in Iraq” and learned their bombing skills while attacking both sectarian Iraqi targets as well as Western troops.

Ironic indeed, that the US in particular is backing entirely terrorist forces that thousands of Americans have shed their blood allegedly fighting in the “War on Terror.” It appears that Al Qaeda, admittedly a creation of the CIA in the 1980’s to draw in and fight Soviets in Afghanistan, is still patronized by the West and used as both a convenient casus belli as well as a terrorist proxy force against enemies of Western foreign policy.

Turkey is Helping

According to the New York Times, “a small number of C.I.A. officers are operating secretly in southern Turkey, helping allies decide which Syrian opposition fighters across the border will receive arms to fight the Syrian government, according to American officials and Arab intelligence officers.” While the Times article attempts but fails to allay fears that the FSA is in fact a terrorist front, the real significance of the article is that it confirms Turkey is serving as a willing conduit to harbor, arm, and deploy terrorist forces against neighboring Syria – a crime against world peace.

The Gulf States, which provided the bulk of the “hijackers” allegedly behind the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, are now the primary weapons and cash suppliers for the FSA, with Saudi Arabia leading the way – as Seymour Hersh reported they would be in 2007. These weapons,according to the UK Independent, are being transferred to terrorists via Turkey. It is also reported that the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood then distributes the weapons once they make their way into Syria – belying the narrative that the unrest is anything but an foreign-facilitated extremist terror campaign.

Perhaps most disturbing is a report published by Michael Weiss of the Neo-Con corporate-financier funded (beginning on page 18, .pdf) Henry Jackson Society, titled, “Syrian rebels say Turkey is arming and training them.” In the report, Weiss claims that, “rebel sources in Hatay told me last night that not only is Turkey supplying light arms to select battalion commanders, it is also training Syrians in Istanbul. Men from the unit I was embedded with were vetted and called up by Turkish intelligence in the last few days and large consignments of AK-47s are being delivered by the Turkish military to the Syrian-Turkish border.”

Weiss can hardly be considered a reliable source, and is just as likely fabricating his entire narrative for the purpose of psychologically targeting Syria. However, Turkey has made no attempts to refute such claims, made more frequently and by an increasing number of sources. Turkey is admittedly serving as a conduit for weapons, and is most likely participating in a more direct role to train, arm, fund, and support terrorists operating along the Turkish-Syrian border.

And despite all of this, the United Nations has remained mute over these transgressions, acts of war, and crimes against world peace. While it feigns outrage over the violence in Syria, it has failed categorically to identify the driving forces behind it – namely the unending torrent of weapons, cash, and foreign fighters flowing over Syria’s borders – supplied by NATO and its Gulf State partners.

Turkey Plays Pivotal Role in Psychologically Breaking Syria 

Turkey is clearly harboring a terrorist front within its borders and facilitating their violent-subversive actives within Syrian borders. While the US and NATO hypocritically use a similar narrative to justify cross-border raids into Pakistan, it is attempting to tie Syria’s hands from even operating up to and along its own border to stem very real, admitted terrorist networks maintained by NATO and their Gulf State partners.

The goal of NATO is to create enough chaos in Syria, long enough, to shake the Syrian people’s faith in their government and their armed forces by dividing and destroying Syria’s national institutions. Just as in Libya, such divisions brought on by unwarranted panic will accelerate, not stem the violence. The stated goal by Western policy makers is to create divisions, doubt, and defections – and they are trying to achieve this through a combination of propaganda, economic sanctions, and overt Western-backed terrorism. They pursue this course of action because a full-scale military operation is untenable, as is the prospect of their terrorist proxies achieving any meaningful tactical victory. Syria, by remaining united and exhibiting perseverance will defeat NATO aggression.

Libya proves that capitulation is not an option, with sectarian genocide the result, subjecting capitulators, defectors, and even NATO’s hand-picked proxies to post-Qaddafi violence and mayhem. There is no option but to continue resisting.

NATO Member Turkey Harboring Terrorist Army

NATO Member Turkey Harboring Terrorist Army

Warns Syria about defending its own borders – brazen act of war, crime against world peace ignored by feckless United Nations. 

After losing a fighter jet earlier this month while conducting a high-speed, low altitude invasion of Syria’s airspace, Turkey has now pledged to treat any Syrian operation along its borders as a military threat.

“Turkey’s warning could tilt the dynamic along the border, which has become an incubator for Syrian antigovernment rebels who are seeking increased levels of international support. Turkey’s pledge to respond to aggression from Syrian forces could help the rebel Free Syrian Army by deterring Syrian forces from attacking—or else result in Turkish retaliation for cross-border attacks on rebels,” reported the Wall Street Journal in their article, “Turkey Warns of Retaliation Against Syria.” This encapsulates the brazen warping of logic applied by NATO aggressors as they seek to perpetuate the bloodbath and destabilization caused by their own proxy forces, primarily harbored, armed, and deployed from NATO member Turkey.

Syrian Rebels are Al Qaeda Terrorists 

By US officials’ own admissions, since 2007 a combined US-Israeli-Saudi effort to assemble and deploy against Syria and Iran an army of sectarian extremists drawn from the ranks of Al Qaeda and its affiliates has been underway. In Seymour Hersh’s 2007 New Yorker article, “The Redirection,” he reported, “The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.”

Within Hersh’s report, not only is this army of fanatical terrorists described as being fully backed by the West in order to create a sectarian bloodbath to be used to achieve Western foreign policy objectives, but it was fully anticipated that this army would commit abhorrent atrocities, particularly against ethnic and religious minorities throughout the region. In particular former CIA agent Robert Baer in Lebanon warned about the fate of Christians located in the region.

Today, Baer’s warning has manifested itself in a genocidal campaign against Syria’s Christians increasingly more difficult for the Western media to hide. This is confirmed by LA Times’ “Church fears ‘ethnic cleansing’ of Christians in Homs, Syria,” and more recently in USA Today’s distorted, but still telling, “Christians in Syria live in uneasy alliance with Assad, Alawites.”

Also mentioned was the Syrian chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood, who by 2007 was already receiving significant backing from the West and Israel to destabilize Syria – despite its feigned anti-Western, anti-Israeli rhetoric.  

As clandestine military operations became larger in scale and more difficult for the complicit Western media to obfuscate, it was announced that hundreds of fighters as well as torrents of weapons and cash began flowing into Syria from NATO-armed terrorists in Libya. The Al Qaeda affiliated Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) (a US State Department listed terrorist organization – #28) led by Abdul Hakim Belhaj, spearheaded efforts to bolster what is essentially a foreign terrorist operation in Syria beginning as early as November 2011, according to the London Telegraph.

After Belhaj’s visit to the Turkish-Syrian border and his pledge to send cash, weapons, and fighters, up to 600 Libyan terrorists were reported to have made the journey to Syria to join the fighting. At least one ship flush with weapons from Libya was interdicted by Lebanon on its way to rebels’ hands in Syria.

In addition to LIFG terrorists admittedly entwined with the so-called “Free Syrian Army” (FSA), more recent reports indicate that Iraqi terrorists have also joined their ranks. Reuters in their article, “Outgunned Syria rebels make shift to bombs,” admit that not only is the FSA conducting a terrorist bombing campaign against the people of Syria, but that it is facilitated by rebels who “fought with Al Qaeda elements in Iraq” and learned their bombing skills while attacking both sectarian Iraqi targets as well as Western troops.

Ironic indeed, that the US in particular is backing entirely terrorist forces that thousands of Americans have shed their blood allegedly fighting in the “War on Terror.” It appears that Al Qaeda, admittedly a creation of the CIA in the 1980’s to draw in and fight Soviets in Afghanistan, is still patronized by the West and used as both a convenient casus belli as well as a terrorist proxy force against enemies of Western foreign policy.

Turkey is Helping

According to the New York Times, “a small number of C.I.A. officers are operating secretly in southern Turkey, helping allies decide which Syrian opposition fighters across the border will receive arms to fight the Syrian government, according to American officials and Arab intelligence officers.” While the Times article attempts but fails to allay fears that the FSA is in fact a terrorist front, the real significance of the article is that it confirms Turkey is serving as a willing conduit to harbor, arm, and deploy terrorist forces against neighboring Syria – a crime against world peace.

The Gulf States, which provided the bulk of the “hijackers” allegedly behind the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, are now the primary weapons and cash suppliers for the FSA, with Saudi Arabia leading the way – as Seymour Hersh reported they would be in 2007. These weapons,according to the UK Independent, are being transferred to terrorists via Turkey. It is also reported that the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood then distributes the weapons once they make their way into Syria – belying the narrative that the unrest is anything but an foreign-facilitated extremist terror campaign.

Perhaps most disturbing is a report published by Michael Weiss of the Neo-Con corporate-financier funded (beginning on page 18, .pdf) Henry Jackson Society, titled, “Syrian rebels say Turkey is arming and training them.” In the report, Weiss claims that, “rebel sources in Hatay told me last night that not only is Turkey supplying light arms to select battalion commanders, it is also training Syrians in Istanbul. Men from the unit I was embedded with were vetted and called up by Turkish intelligence in the last few days and large consignments of AK-47s are being delivered by the Turkish military to the Syrian-Turkish border.”

Weiss can hardly be considered a reliable source, and is just as likely fabricating his entire narrative for the purpose of psychologically targeting Syria. However, Turkey has made no attempts to refute such claims, made more frequently and by an increasing number of sources. Turkey is admittedly serving as a conduit for weapons, and is most likely participating in a more direct role to train, arm, fund, and support terrorists operating along the Turkish-Syrian border.

And despite all of this, the United Nations has remained mute over these transgressions, acts of war, and crimes against world peace. While it feigns outrage over the violence in Syria, it has failed categorically to identify the driving forces behind it – namely the unending torrent of weapons, cash, and foreign fighters flowing over Syria’s borders – supplied by NATO and its Gulf State partners.

Turkey Plays Pivotal Role in Psychologically Breaking Syria 

Turkey is clearly harboring a terrorist front within its borders and facilitating their violent-subversive actives within Syrian borders. While the US and NATO hypocritically use a similar narrative to justify cross-border raids into Pakistan, it is attempting to tie Syria’s hands from even operating up to and along its own border to stem very real, admitted terrorist networks maintained by NATO and their Gulf State partners.

The goal of NATO is to create enough chaos in Syria, long enough, to shake the Syrian people’s faith in their government and their armed forces by dividing and destroying Syria’s national institutions. Just as in Libya, such divisions brought on by unwarranted panic will accelerate, not stem the violence. The stated goal by Western policy makers is to create divisions, doubt, and defections – and they are trying to achieve this through a combination of propaganda, economic sanctions, and overt Western-backed terrorism. They pursue this course of action because a full-scale military operation is untenable, as is the prospect of their terrorist proxies achieving any meaningful tactical victory. Syria, by remaining united and exhibiting perseverance will defeat NATO aggression.

Libya proves that capitulation is not an option, with sectarian genocide the result, subjecting capitulators, defectors, and even NATO’s hand-picked proxies to post-Qaddafi violence and mayhem. There is no option but to continue resisting.

Al-Jaafari.. Syria calls for Adopting Necessary Procedures to Prevent, Stop the Financing of Terrorist Acts in Syria

Syria’s permanent Envoy to the United Nations Bashar al-Jaafari said that the terrorist acts in Syria wouldn’t be perpetrated without the support, whether in money, weapon, persons or through providing the political and media backing to the terrorist groups who carry out such acts.

“Syria urges all countries to cooperate in order to implement the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, and calls for taking the necessary measures to prevent and stop the financing of any terror acts against Syria launched from lands of neighboring countries and not to provide a safe haven to those who plot for the terrorist acts,” al-Jaafari added in a statement at a the UN General Assembly session held to discuss the UN Global Strategy for Combating Terrorism.

“During the latest period, Syria has witnessed painful events due to the terrorist acts perpetrated by extremist groups that use unusual criminal means based on takfiri and extremist fatwas issued by instigators, residents in courtiers known to all using the suicide bombers, booby-trapped cars and others to spread death and chaos in the country,” al-Jaafari said.

He added that targeting civilians, law enforcement members, private and public properties unfortunately became a daily criminal activity by the armed groups who practiced acts of burglary, breaking off roads, burning hospitals in order to terrify the civilians and obliging them to flee their homes like the latest acts against Lebanese pilgrims who were abducted by an armed terrorist group in Syria.

“Those systemized terror acts bear the imprints of al-Qaeda and its mentality in killing, tearing off and mutilating bodies and assassinating whole families on sectarian backgrounds… I here now inform you of two explosions that took place near the Justice Palace in Damascus today,” al-Jaafari added.

Al-Jaafari added, ”These terrorist acts cannot be committed without material, financial, political and media support that some Arab and regional countries are, regrettably, providing for the terrorist groups to carry out terrorist operations in Syria, even declaring commitment to providing such support through conferences whose organizers claim to be friends of the Syrian people.”

”Stopping the Ship Lutfallah 2 proved the involvement of certain Arab and non-Arab countries in sending lethal weapons to the armed terrorist groups in Syria to practice the killing not demand reforms…Reform is all the Syrians’ demand which cannot be realized through terrorism, ”said al-Jaafari.

”The media incitement to terrorism in Syria has become a painful reality that the Syrian people suffer from which necessitates tackling it seriously…the terrorists’ usage of information and communication technology has risen recently that certain countries, who suffered from terrorism, are furnishing for them.”

”We have witnessed launching satellite channels directed to the Syrian people, which disseminate extremist religious views that instigate terrorism, killing and sectarian sedition, supported by extremist groups and countries, ”said al-Jaafari, adding ”It is a such a odd contradiction that the broadcast of the Syrian channels is blocked according to an AL decision, not to mention the unilateral sanctions that the EU imposed of the Syrian General Organization of the Radio& Television.”

Al-Jaafari added ”This fierce campaign against the Syrian state and private media has encouraged the ”peaceful” terrorist groups to carry out a terrorist attack against the headquarter and buildings of al-Ikhbariya channel and assassinating three innocent pressmen, as well as four guards and workers after tying them up…They blew the building up and abducted several other journalists.”

Al-Jaafari added ”Sadly enough, as we are discussing a revision of the world strategy to combat terrorism, neither the UN secretary general nor the president of the UN General Assembly condemned the terrorist attacks that claimed the lives of innocent people.”

Al-Jaafari pointed out that the number of victims of terrorism perpetrated by the armed terrorist groups is increasing continuously, while the Syrian Government, in cooperation with the UN organizations and NGOs, is offering humanitarian aid to the victims and to other people who were forced by the armed terrorist groups to leave their homes.

He added that hundreds of thousands of people were displaced from Homs and Hama cities as over 110 thousand Christians were forced to leave their villages and their churches were occupied in addition to hundreds of thousands of other people whose villages were destroyed.

Al-Jaafari stressed that Syria calls on all countries to work together to implement the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy and to take the necessary measures to stop funding any terrorist acts.

He added that the terrorist acts which are aimed at destabilizing the state and the people of Syria are no less dangerous than any other terrorist acts which targeted other developing countries and developed countries.

أكد الدكتور بشار الجعفري مندوب سورية الدائم في الأمم المتحدة ان العمليات الارهابية في سورية لا يمكن تنفيذها دون توافر التمويل والدعم سواء في المال أو السلاح أو الأشخاص أو من خلال تأمين التغطية السياسية والإعلامية للمجموعات الإرهابية التي تنفذ هذه العمليات وهناك بعض الدول العربية والإقليمية وغيرها تقوم بتوفير هذه التسهيلات للمجموعات الإرهابية المسلحة من أجل القيام بأعمال إرهابية في سورية.

وقال الدكتور الجعفري.. إن سورية تهيب بجميع الدول العمل معها من أجل التنفيذ الدقيق لما نصت عليه استراتيجية الأمم المتحدة العالمية لمكافحة الإرهاب وتطالب بالانتقال من الأقوال إلى الأفعال من خلال اتخاذ التدابير اللازمة لمنع ووقف تمويل أي أعمال إرهابية أو الإعداد لها ضد سورية انطلاقا من أراضي دول أخرى مجاورة وعدم توفير ملاذ آمن لمن يخططون للأعمال الإرهابية أو يدعمونها أو يرتكبونها.

فقد أكد الدكتور الجعفري في بيان أدلى به اليوم أمام الجمعية العامة للأمم المتحدة خلال الاجتماع رفيع المستوى الذي خصص لمناقشة المراجعة الثالثة لاستراتيجية الأمم المتحدة العالمية لمكافحة الإرهاب أن سورية شهدت خلال الفترة الماضية أحداثا مؤلمة نتيجة للأعمال الإرهابية التي تنفذها مجموعات إرهابية متطرفة تستخدم أساليب إجرامية غير معهودة استنادا إلى فتاوى تكفيرية ومتطرفة صادرة عن محرضين مقيمين في دول أضحت معروفة للجميع وتستخدم هذه المجموعات الانتحاريين والسيارات المفخخة والأحزمة الناسفة والعبوات الناسفة لضرب أهدافها من مرافق حيوية وبنى تحتية بهدف نشر الموت والدمار والذعر في صفوف المواطنين.

وقال الجعفري.. إن هذه العمليات الإرهابية لا يمكن تنفيذها دون توافر التمويل والدعم سواء في المال أو السلاح أو الأشخاص أو من خلال تأمين التغطية السياسية والإعلامية للمجموعات التي تنفذ هذه العمليات وإنه لمن دواعي الأسف قيام بعض الدول العربية والإقليمية وغيرها بتوفير هذه التسهيلات لمجموعات إرهابية مسلحة من أجل القيام بأعمال إرهابية في سورية بل وتعهد هذه الدول إياها علنا وعلى رؤوس الأشهاد وفي مؤتمرات يزعم منظموها صداقتهم للشعب السوري بتقديم الدعم بالسلاح والمال والتدريب وتأمين الملاذات الآمنة للإرهابيين والسماح لهم بتنفيذ عمليات إرهابية انطلاقا من أراضي هذه الدول المجاورة.

وتابع الجعفري.. لقد برهن ايقاف السفينة لطف الله 2 على انخراط دول بعينها عربية وغير عربية بإرسال أسلحة فتاكة إلى المجموعات الإرهابية في سورية لممارسة القتل والدمار وليس للمطالبة بالإصلاح فالاصلاح مطلب شرعي لكل السوريين ومكافحة الفساد مطلب معظم السوريين لكن ذلك لا يتم من خلال الإرهاب وقد نقلنا إلى الأمين العام ورئيس مجلس الامن كل الحيثيات المتعلقة بهذه الحادثة إضافة إلى المعلومات المنقولة بشأن عمليات تهريب السلاح والإرهابيين عبر الحدود.

وقال الجعفري.. إن التحريض الإعلامي على الإرهاب في سورية أصبح واقعا تدخليا مؤلما يعاني منه الشعب السوري بكامله ويستدعي التعامل معه بكل نزاهة وجدية مضيفا.. إنه ازداد مؤخرا استخدام الإرهابيين في سورية لتكنولوجيا المعلومات والاتصالات التي توفرها لهم علنا دول عانت هي نفسها من آفة الإرهاب ولكنها مع ذلك تسمي هذه التكنولوجيا /الأسحلة غير القاتلة/.

وتابع الجعفري.. شهدنا اطلاق قنوات تلفزيونية موجهة إلى الداخل السوري تبث أفكارا دينية متطرفة تحرض على الإرهاب والقتل والفتنة الطائفية والمذهبية مدعومة في ذلك من بعض الدول والمجموعات المتطرفة والمفارقة العجيبة في هذا السياق هي أنه في نفس الوقت يتم حظر بث القنوات الفضائية السورية بقرار صادر عن جامعة الدول العربية إضافة إلى العقوبات الأحادية التي فرضها الاتحاد الأوروبي على الهيئة العامة للاذاعة والتلفزيون والعقوبات التي سبقت ذلك من قبل الإدارة الأمريكية على أجهزة إعلامية سورية.

وقال الجعفري.. إن هذه الحملة الشرسة على وسائل الإعلام السوري العامة والخاصة قد شجعت المجموعات الإرهابية /السلمية/ على تنفيذ هجوم إرهابي على مقر ومباني قناة الإخبارية الفضائية السورية واغتيال ثلاثة من الصحفيين السوريين الأبرياء إضافة إلى أربعة من إداريي القناة وحراسها بعد تقييدهم وتفجير كامل المبنى علاوة على قيام هذه المجموعات الإرهابية باختطاف عدد آخر من الإعلاميين العاملين في القناة.

وأضاف الجعفري.. من المحزن أنه في الوقت الذي نناقش فيه مسألة مراجعة الاستراتيجية العالمية لمكافحة الإرهاب لم يقم لا الأمين العام ولا رئيس الجمعية العامة بإدانة هذه الهجمات الإرهابية التي أودت بحياة ضحايا أبرياء كما لم يقم أي منهما بتقديم التعازي لأهالي الضحايا.

وبين الجعفري.. أن عدد ضحايا الإرهاب الذي نفذته المجموعات الإرهابية في سورية في ازدياد مستمر حيث تقوم الحكومة السورية بالتعاون مع منظمات الأمم المتحدة المختصة والمنظمات غير الحكومية بتقديم المساعدات الإنسانية إلى هؤلاء الضحايا وكذلك إلى أولئك الذين أجبرتهم المجموعات المسلحة على ترك بيوتهم ودور عبادتهم على أسس طائفية أو مذهبية بغيضة تبتعد كل البعد عن أخلاق وقيم الشعب السوري الذي أرسى مثالا فريدا في المنطقة وعلى مر العصور في التعايش المثالي بين مختلف الطوائف والأديان والأعراق التي يتألف منها المجتمع السوري.

وقال الجعفري.. لقد تم تهجير مئات الألوف من سكان مدينتي حمص وحماة إلى خارج بيوتهم حيث تم طرد نحو 110 آلاف مواطن مسيحي من قراهم وأحيائهم وجرى احتلال كنائسهم وهددوا بالقتل في حال عودتهم إلى منازلهم هذا إضافة إلى مئات الألوف الأخرى ممن دمرت قراهم وجرى طردهم من بيوتهم.

وأكد الجعفري أن سورية تهيب بجميع الدول للعمل معها من أجل التنفيذ الدقيق لما نصت عليه استراتيجية الأمم المتحدة العالمية لمكافحة الإرهاب وتطالب بالانتقال من الأقوال إلى الأفعال من خلال اتخاذ التدابير اللازمة لمنع ووقف تمويل أي أعمال إرهابية أو الإعداد لها ضد سورية انطلاقا من أراضي دول أخرى مجاورة وعدم توفير ملاذ آمن لمن يخططون للأعمال الإرهابية أو يدعمونها أو يرتكبونها.

وقال الجعفري.. لقد كلفتنا الأعمال الإرهابية دماء غالية من شعبنا من مدنيين وعسكريين وسوف يأتي يوم نسائل فيه كل من شارك في هذه الأعمال وحرض على ارتكابها ومولها وسهل تنفيذها.

وأضاف الجعفري.. إن ما يجري في سورية من أنشطة إرهابية تستهدف استقرار الدولة والشعب والمجتمع لا يقل خطورة أبدا عن الأعمال الإرهابية التي استهدفت العديد من الدول الأعضاء النامية منها والمتقدمة ولا يوجد هناك إرهاب حلال وإرهاب حرام وفقا للفتاوى ذات الصلة .. يوجد إرهاب واحد تجب مكافحته فالإرهاب الذي يستهدف سورية هو نفسه الإرهاب الذي استهدف وما زال يستهدف دولا أعضاء أخرى في هذه المنظمة الدولية .. هناك إرهاب نووي وإعلامي وثقافي وسياسي واقتصادي كل ذلك إرهاب وتبقى المعاناة واحدة.

Russia Censures US’s Double-Standards: Excluding Iran from Geneva Talks “Mistake”

Russia Censures US’s Double-Standards: Excluding Iran from Geneva Talks “Mistake”

Russia Censures US’s Double-Standards: Excluding Iran from Geneva Talks “Mistake
Sergei LavrovRussia opposes support to any plans for outside interference in Syria which may be voiced at the upcoming international conference in Geneva, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Thursday.
Lavrov said world powers had yet to agree any final resolution based on new proposals from UN-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan for an international conference on Saturday in Geneva.
“We will not, and would not be able to support any outside interference or imposition of recipes [in Syria],” Lavrov said at a press conference in Moscow.
Only Syrians can Decide Assad’s Fate
Syria needs political transformation, but its nature should be defined by Syrian people only, he added.
UN envoy to Syria, Kofi Annan, reportedly proposed on Wednesday creation of an interim government in the country comprising both opposition members and President Bashar al-Assad loyalists, but not necessarily Assad himself.
Lavrov denied media reports that Russia has agreed to support Annan’s plan, which could be approved at the conference in Geneva on Saturday. The resolution for the conference is still being drafted, he said.
The Foreign Minister also said that he did not expect any NATO members to push for a repetition of a “Libyan scenario” in Syria.
Lavrov agreed that changes and reforms were much needed in Syria, saying: “We support changes which work towards national agreement on all questions of overdue reform”.
Not Inviting Iran to Geneva Talks a Mistake
Participants invited by Annan to the conference in Geneva include representatives of five permanent Security Council members – Russia, China, England, France and the United States – as well as Turkey, Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar and the EU, and heads of the UN and Arab League.
Lavrov also criticized the organizers for not inviting Iran, Syria’s longtime ally, to the conference in Geneva and censures the United States for its “double standards” in opposing Tehran’s attendance.
“Iran is an influential player in this situation and to leave it out of the Geneva meeting, I believe, is a mistake,” Lavrov said, noting that Washington had agreed in the past to Iran joining talks on Iraq and Afghanistan. “When the Americans needed to decide certain issues involving the security of their contingents in Iraq and Afghanistan, they initiated contact with Iran without wavering and agreed to something,” Lavrov said.
 
Lavrov, who earlier this week had said he would still go Geneva even if Iran was not invited, confirmed that Russia would still be attending the conference despite Moscow’s irritation. “In contrast to some of our partners, we are not capricious people,” Lavrov said. “We will go to the Geneva meeting, irrespective of what the final list of participants is.”

The Map of Foreign Armed Groups in Homs and Al-Qusayr

The Map of Foreign Armed Groups in Homs and Al-Qusayr.

The Map of Foreign Armed Groups in Homs and Al-Qusayr
Nidal Hamadeh

armed groupsWell-informed French sources declared that thousands of Arab and foreign fighters are in Homs and its surrounding territories, as well as in Al-Qusayr and the nearby villages, especially those to the west of Al-Assi River.

The previously mentioned sources quoted French security sources as saying that almost all of those fighters entered Syria through Lebanon, some of which came through Beirut International Airport, while others came through the Mediterranean upon ships that docked off the port of Tripoli whose passengers, the foreign fighters, came to the Lebanese land on-board small boats.
The same sources stated that the armed groups in Al-QusayrMap and its nearby villages are around twelve thousand fighters from different countries (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Tunisia, Libya, Jordan, Algeria, Palestine, and Lebanon), besides the armed Syrian fighters who are fighting against the regime. The French sources mentioned that the majority of the Lebanese fighters come from Irsal, Sidon, and Tripoli. As for the foreigners, they spread through the villages to the west of Al-Assi River taking advantage of the environment which is full of trees; those villages are Saqarja, Abou Houri, Al-Nahriya, Al-Azaniya, Al-Burhaniya, and Ain Al-Tannour. The latter is the center of gravity of those fighters because the Syrian Army exclude it from shelling for it contains the reservoir of drinking water for Homs and Hamah from the Al-Assi River. The army avoids bombing the village not to hit this reservoir and consequently cut off water from both Homs and Hamah.
Most of Al-Qusayr is under total control of the insurgents, and the majority of them are Syrians, the French sources stated. However, the Syrian Army controls the building of the directorate to the east of the city and close to the borders with Homs, in addition to the villages along the international road between Homs and the Lebanese borders in Al-Qa’a. In this wide area, armed groups are well-equipped with rocket launchers, heavy-caliber cannons, anti-aircraft weapons, ammunition, and automatic rifles. They also built fortifications, passageways, and barricades, and they immediately bury their homicidal.

Homs…
Armed militantAccording to the same sources, the Syrian army controls most of the quarters in Homs while the armed groups control a part of the overpopulated Al-Khalediya Quarter, near the Al-Qosour Quarter which is geographically outside Homs. The Syrian army intended to control the latter quarter, and is performing combing operations in the area. It is also continuing to cordon off Al-Khalediya Quarter where fighters were shifting between the two quarters either for withdrawal or storage. The army is tightening the grip over the area where armed groups are hiding by which almost all the quarters are under its control. As for the armed groups, they are fortified in a 1 squared Kilometer piece of land.

500 armed fighters are in this area while the majority of the fighters are in Bustan Al-Diwan Quarter in Al-Hamidiya neighborhood. They caused Christian populations to immigrate from their hometown, and established a field court in Beit Al-Agha, the majestic historic landmark in Homs. The situation in Jouret Al-Shayah, very close to the city’s commercial center, is more likely in favor of the regime, which is, seemingly, about to end the battles with significant military success during the last days in which hundreds of fighters were killed.
The Regime’s StrategySyrian army
French sources stated that the Syrian regime is applying the anti-insurgency war or confronting guerrillas plan which allows it to control the strategic facilities, Homs-Levant highway, Homs-Aleppo highway, military and civil airports, public facilities, electricity stations, oil refinery in Homs, military bases such as the Al-Dhab’a Airport in Al-Qusayr valley, Al-Baath University in Homs, and all the governmental institutions in the city. The army seeks decreasing its losses and not exhausting it throughout avoiding presence in the small rural villages where fighters are located. The Syrian army follows the method of bombarding on a daily basis, but seems tending to finalize its operations in the summer.
What is the military solution?
Syrian army tanksAs the source mentioned, the situation in Homs is in the regime’s favor. However, the regime must use its ground forces in Al-Qusayr to terminate the battles in this flat land where trees are spread all over the area. It also has to increase the number of its helicopters, and after the battle of Homs ends, the army can send its special forces to Al-Qusayr. The regime wishes to end the battles in the summer, before the American presidential elections in November because Obama, the busy man about being reelected, prefers not to have foreign troubles. This is what he said to the Europeans concerning the Iranian nuclear program, and was asserted on by a French diplomat in front of Arab journalists in a closed meeting in the French Foreign Ministry on the Iranian issue. “France won’t be the diplomatic spearhead against Iran, because President Hollande doesn’t want to annoy Obama in the climax of his electoral campaign,” the man said. It is self-evident that what is applied on Iran is also applied on Syria since the NATO didn’t react against shooting down the Turkish jet in the Syrian regional waters along with the Turkish borders.

Translated by Zeinab Abdallah

The Map of Foreign Armed Groups in Homs and Al-Qusayr

The Map of Foreign Armed Groups in Homs and Al-Qusayr

The Map of Foreign Armed Groups in Homs and Al-Qusayr
Nidal Hamadeh
armed groupsWell-informed French sources declared that thousands of Arab and foreign fighters are in Homs and its surrounding territories, as well as in Al-Qusayr and the nearby villages, especially those to the west of Al-Assi River.
The previously mentioned sources quoted French security sources as saying that almost all of those fighters entered Syria through Lebanon, some of which came through Beirut International Airport, while others came through the Mediterranean upon ships that docked off the port of Tripoli whose passengers, the foreign fighters, came to the Lebanese land on-board small boats.

The same sources stated that the armed groups in Al-QusayrMap and its nearby villages are around twelve thousand fighters from different countries (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Tunisia, Libya, Jordan, Algeria, Palestine, and Lebanon), besides the armed Syrian fighters who are fighting against the regime. The French sources mentioned that the majority of the Lebanese fighters come from Irsal, Sidon, and Tripoli. As for the foreigners, they spread through the villages to the west of Al-Assi River taking advantage of the environment which is full of trees; those villages are Saqarja, Abou Houri, Al-Nahriya, Al-Azaniya, Al-Burhaniya, and Ain Al-Tannour. The latter is the center of gravity of those fighters because the Syrian Army exclude it from shelling for it contains the reservoir of drinking water for Homs and Hamah from the Al-Assi River. The army avoids bombing the village not to hit this reservoir and consequently cut off water from both Homs and Hamah.

Most of Al-Qusayr is under total control of the insurgents, and the majority of them are Syrians, the French sources stated. However, the Syrian Army controls the building of the directorate to the east of the city and close to the borders with Homs, in addition to the villages along the international road between Homs and the Lebanese borders in Al-Qa’a. In this wide area, armed groups are well-equipped with rocket launchers, heavy-caliber cannons, anti-aircraft weapons, ammunition, and automatic rifles. They also built fortifications, passageways, and barricades, and they immediately bury their homicidal.
Homs…
Armed militantAccording to the same sources, the Syrian army controls most of the quarters in Homs while the armed groups control a part of the overpopulated Al-Khalediya Quarter, near the Al-Qosour Quarter which is geographically outside Homs. The Syrian army intended to control the latter quarter, and is performing combing operations in the area. It is also continuing to cordon off Al-Khalediya Quarter where fighters were shifting between the two quarters either for withdrawal or storage. The army is tightening the grip over the area where armed groups are hiding by which almost all the quarters are under its control. As for the armed groups, they are fortified in a 1 squared Kilometer piece of land.
500 armed fighters are in this area while the majority of the fighters are in Bustan Al-Diwan Quarter in Al-Hamidiya neighborhood. They caused Christian populations to immigrate from their hometown, and established a field court in Beit Al-Agha, the majestic historic landmark in Homs. The situation in Jouret Al-Shayah, very close to the city’s commercial center, is more likely in favor of the regime, which is, seemingly, about to end the battles with significant military success during the last days in which hundreds of fighters were killed.

The Regime’s StrategySyrian army
French sources stated that the Syrian regime is applying the anti-insurgency war or confronting guerrillas plan which allows it to control the strategic facilities, Homs-Levant highway, Homs-Aleppo highway, military and civil airports, public facilities, electricity stations, oil refinery in Homs, military bases such as the Al-Dhab’a Airport in Al-Qusayr valley, Al-Baath University in Homs, and all the governmental institutions in the city. The army seeks decreasing its losses and not exhausting it throughout avoiding presence in the small rural villages where fighters are located. The Syrian army follows the method of bombarding on a daily basis, but seems tending to finalize its operations in the summer.

What is the military solution?
Syrian army tanksAs the source mentioned, the situation in Homs is in the regime’s favor. However, the regime must use its ground forces in Al-Qusayr to terminate the battles in this flat land where trees are spread all over the area. It also has to increase the number of its helicopters, and after the battle of Homs ends, the army can send its special forces to Al-Qusayr. The regime wishes to end the battles in the summer, before the American presidential elections in November because Obama, the busy man about being reelected, prefers not to have foreign troubles. This is what he said to the Europeans concerning the Iranian nuclear program, and was asserted on by a French diplomat in front of Arab journalists in a closed meeting in the French Foreign Ministry on the Iranian issue. “France won’t be the diplomatic spearhead against Iran, because President Hollande doesn’t want to annoy Obama in the climax of his electoral campaign,” the man said. It is self-evident that what is applied on Iran is also applied on Syria since the NATO didn’t react against shooting down the Turkish jet in the Syrian regional waters along with the Turkish borders.
Translated by Zeinab Abdallah

La résistance à l’Empire atlanto-sioniste se joue en Syrie

La résistance à l’Empire atlanto-sioniste se joue en Syrie

After uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt, which were popular and aimed at overthrowing despots submitted to the Empire, the latter through the media wanted us to believe in the existence of an “Arab Spring” wind of democracy to the sauce that would sweep the Western “tyrants”.It must be said and repeated: there is no “Arab Spring”. Only two revolts in Egypt and Tunisia, quickly recovered by the globalists.
Libya is the ultimate proof of this scam: a relatively prosperous country, who certainly knew of red and opposition, but the standard of living was more than satisfactory. A country that financed many development projects throughout Africa and was preparing to launch a competitor of the dollar currency, the dinar gold. And then suddenly, we did it the people’s revolt against the tyrant, in this case Gaddafi! The reality is that this was a minority, armed and financed by the oil monarchies of the Gulf and Western intelligence services, who has declared war against a legitimate government in place. We know the following: NATO bombing, Gaddafi lynching, murder of much of his family, anti-black racist massacres, and the icing on the cake or rather filth on the dunghill: the monster BHL shooting a film on a heap of bodies to glorify his image … Libya is currently living the darkest hours of its history.
The Western monarchies and Wahhabi-Zionists have attempted to repeat this abomination against Syria. Same scenario: it is argued, in support servile media, an awful bloody dictator – Bashar al-Assad – killing his people that rises to demand freedom and democracy. The reality for those who pay close attention to these issues, is again quite different: mercenaries, funded and armed by foreign agents – the same as in Libya – spread terror in the country.Bombings, massacres of civilians, plunder …
In reality, Libya and Syria have a long history in the crosshairs of imperial powers and Israel. For Libya, the existence of a prosperous Arab and Muslim country, with very large reserves of oil, which has long worked to build a real independence of Africa and the Arab world against imperial domination , was an unbearable prospect for the Yankees. Adding that the Zionists have always hated Gadhafi for his anti-Israeli statements and active support, financial and military support, for Palestinians. Note that this is exactly the same configuration as the Iraq of Saddam! It is no coincidence!
Regarding Syria, things are equally clear: this is a state allied with Iran, that the Zionists want a very long time to shave his insubordination to the terrorist entity. Overthrow Assad would allow Israel to avoid having to support its gates to the Persians.
To destroy the seeds of rebellion in the Muslim world AUTHENTIC, the empire has naturally established alliance with the Wahhabi monarchy. Qatar and Saudi Arabia, we have long known, are slaves of the West, by their hatred of the Shia and Sunni non-Wahhabi, they allied themselves to the devil that made them believe they can implement the States like-minded throughout the Arab world.
What are the objectives of this global business of subversion? First, we have seen that it is preparing a future war against Iran. But more broadly, we must remember that the Jewish extremists, who hold the reins of power in the West – through AIPAC, the CRIF, the JDL, AJC, the Bnai Brith, Bilderberg etc. … -, believe that they will rule the world after it was destroyed by a huge war West-East.
Some, like Rav Ron Chaya, admit it without any ambiguity, and that’s to his credit. Then it seems that their idea is to put in all Muslim countries, authorities in Saudi or Qatari sauce, that is to say living caricatures insulting behavior by Islam and Muslims. Recall that these two states apply equally ruthless villains Islamic penal law to the most humble, the poor and children without applying any indulgence as we taught the Prophet (sas), while leaving leaders, criminals, traitors and perverts , committing the most serious violations of the sacred and that their characteristic is to be fully integrated into the global financial system, involved in the scam of this paper money that is the dollar and thereby prosper leaving the U.S. empire, leaving him ADDITION build military bases where the worst place there blameworthy and enjoy the abundant oil. It is then that in the eyes of public opinion, it becomes urgent to launch a global war against those awful “bearded” …
This interest reflects in part that of fanatical American neoconservatives. For the latter, the greatest threat is represented by Russia and China. The U.S. is on the verge of collapse, given the state of their economy plagued by speculation and finance predatory loan sharks of Wall Street, they fear above all the advent of these two powers. But this is not coincidence that China and Russia, having realized that they were also targeted, support Syria: State, and Iran are strategic allies of these two great countries.
More than ever, we must hammer home that the insurgents are Syrian fanatics, puppets of the Empire primarily Judeo-Atlanticist. People without brains, who murder their own brothers, believing work for the greatness of Islam, but in reality are his worst enemies.
Source Muslim resistance

The U.S. and Syria: Facts you should know

The U.S. and Syria: Facts you should know.


The following timeline reviews the progression of U.S.-NATO intervention in Syria and counteracts the Big Lie in the corporate media aimed at preparing open imperialist military aggression against the Syrian people.

● Washington has funneled money to a right-wing Syrian opposition group since at least 2005. (Washington Post, April 16, 2011)

● The U.S. reopened its embassy in Damascus in January 2011 after six years. This was no thaw in relations. The new ambassador, Robert S. Ford, who served until October 2011, is a protégé of John Negroponte, who organized death squads in El Salvador in the 1970s and in Iraq while ambassador there in 2004-05. There terror squads killed tens of thousands. Ford served directly under Negroponte at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.

● Ford “played a central role in laying the groundwork within Syria as well as establishing contacts with opposition groups.” Two months after he arrived in Damascus, the armed insurgency began. (Global Research, May 28)

● Armed opposition to Bashar al-Assad began in March 2011 in Daraa, a small town on the Jordanian border. Mass protest movements usually start in large population centers. Later, Saudi Arabia admitted sending weapons to the opposition via Jordan. (RT, March 13)

● The U. S. and its NATO allies used grassroots protests in Egypt, Syria and elsewhere as a cover to build support for right-wing insurgencies whose goal was not to help the Syrian people but to bring Syria into the pro-imperialist camp. Any excesses or mistakes by the Assad government were not the real issue.

● The Arab League, European Union and U.S. begin imposing economic sanctions, a form of warfare, against Syria in November 2011 on the pretext of stopping state-sanctioned violence against protesters. Stepped-up sanctions and freezing of Syrian assets caused the value of the Syrian pound to drop by 50 percent against the dollar, with the cost of necessities often tripling.

● Exiles who received U.S. funding became part of the Syrian National Council. SNC’s Burhan Ghalioun said he would open up Syria to the West, end Syria’s strategic relationship with Iran (and with the Lebanese and Palestinian resistance), and realign Syria with the reactionary Arab regimes in the Gulf. (Wall Street Journal, Dec. 2, 2011)

U.S. &NATO escalate involvement

● Ex-CIA agent Philip Giraldi admitted that the U.S. was involved in Syria and laid out the U.S. plan: “NATO is already clandestinely engaged in the Syrian conflict, with Turkey taking the lead as U.S. proxy. Ankara’s foreign minister, Ahmet Davitoglu, has openly admitted that his country is prepared to invade as soon as there is agreement among the Western allies to do so. The intervention would be based on humanitarian principles, to defend the civilian population based on the ‘responsibility to protect’ doctrine that was invoked to justify Libya.” (theamericanconservative.comDec. 19, 2011)

● Giraldi continued: “Unmarked NATO warplanes are arriving at Turkish military bases close to … the Syrian border, delivering weapons from the late Muammar Gaddafi’s arsenals as well as volunteers from the Libyan Transitional National Council who are experienced in pitting local volunteers against trained soldiers. … French and British special forces trainers are on the ground, assisting the Syrian rebels while the CIA and U.S. Spec Ops are providing communications equipment and intelligence. …

● “The frequently cited United Nations report that more than 3,500 civilians have been killed by Assad’s soldiers is based largely on rebel sources and is uncorroborated. Likewise, accounts of mass defections from the Syrian Army and pitched battles between deserters and loyal soldiers appear to be a fabrication, with few defections being confirmed independently. Syrian government claims that it is being assaulted by rebels who are armed, trained, and financed by foreign governments are more true than false.”

● The “Free Syrian Army” has rear bases in Turkey, is funded by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and is made up of defecting Syrian soldiers. Spiegel Online sites a source in Beirut who reports seeing “‘hundreds of foreign fighters’ who have attached themselves to the FSA.” (Feb. 15)

● The U.N.-mandated commission of inquiry, in its February 2012 report, documented torture, taking of hostages, and executions by armed opposition members.

● The first heavy fighting in Syria’s capital, Damascus, started in March. Pipelines were blown up, and huge explosions ripped through intelligence and security buildings in Christian areas onMarch 16, killing at least 27 people. The Syrian government charged then that terrorist attacks supported from abroad have been responsible for eight car bomb attacks since December, killing 328 and wounding 657. This got little Western media attention.

● Human Rights Watch on March 20 accused armed Syrian opposition members of “Kidnappings, the use of torture and executions … of security force members, individuals identified as members of government-supported militias, and individuals identified as government allies and supporters.”

● In the Baba Amr neighborhood of Homs, the armed opposition has formed its own laws, courts and death squads, according to Spiegel Online. Abu Rami, an opposition commander in Baba Amir, interviewed by Spiegel, said in the city of Homs his group has executed between 200 and 250 people. (March 29)

U.N. steps in

● Former U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan went to Syria in March at the behest of the U.N. and Arab League to put together a peace proposal. But Annan and the U.N. are not impartial. Annan is an architect of the “responsibility to protect” doctrine, cited by former CIA agent Giraldi as the planned pretext for intervention in Syria. The U.N. endorsed this doctrine under Annan’s tenure.

● In 2004, Annan gave U.N. approval to the U.S., French and Canadian intervention that deposed Haiti’s President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Annan’s stated reasons were the same then as now in Syria: an alleged impending “humanitarian catastrophe.” Annan provided a similar U.N. cover for France to tighten its colonial grasp on the Ivory Coast in 2006. In Syria, Annan’s calls for a Syrian government ceasefire and for outside “humanitarian” aid are really calls for foreign intervention.

● Syria agreed to an Annan-brokered ceasefire March 27. The opposition refused. While the Western heads of state and the corporate media heaped blame on Assad for “not honoring” the ceasefire, the West kept arming the opposition.

● What the U.S. government really thought of the ceasefire was revealed by Robert Grenier, former director of the CIA’s Counter-Terrorism Center, who called upon those who would “help” Syria “to climb metaphorically into the ring and dirty themselves,” adding, “what the situation needs is not high-minded sentiments, but effective, lethal aid.” (Al Jazeera, March 29)

● As the imperialists “climbed into the ring,” they continued to blame Assad. Speaking at an anti-Assad “Friends of Syria” meeting in Istanbul on April 1, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Assad had “defiled” the ceasefire. She called for Damascus to unilaterally stop fighting and withdraw from areas of heavy right-wing infiltration. She said the U.S had pledged at least $25 million in “nonlethal” aid to the Syrian opposition, which included satellite communication equipment.

● By May, the reactionaries “have begun receiving significantly more and better weapons … paid for by Persian Gulf nations and coordinated … by the U.S.” (Washington Post, May 15) “The Syrian rebels have received their first ‘third generation’ anti-tank weapons. They are supplied by Saudi and Qatari intelligence agencies following a secret message from President Barack Obama.” (debkafile.comMay 22)

The Houla massacre

● Right before a scheduled visit to Syria by Annan, news broke of a horrible massacre of 108 people in Houla on May 25, which included whole families and as many as 48 children. Headlines worldwide blamed the Syrian government, and all Western capitals called for increased sanctions and more international pressure on Assad.

● By May 27, the imperialists had coordinated their “international outrage” and expelled Syrian diplomats from the U.S., the Netherlands, Australia, Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Bulgaria and Canada.

● The U.N. Security Council reacted to the massacre — with no investigation as to who was responsible — by unanimously condemning Syria for allegedly using tanks and artillery after agreeing to a ceasefire. Ignored were statements from the Assad government that it was not responsible. A closer look showed this was the case.

● Marat Musin, reporting for Russia’s ANNA News, was in Houla and interviewed witnesses right after the massacre. Musin determined that the massacre was committed by the so-called Free Syrian Army, not the Assad forces. His report concluded: “The attack was carried out by a unit of armed fighters from Rastan, in which more than 700 gunmen were involved. They brought the city under their control and began with a cleansing action against loyalist [pro-Assad] families, including elderly people, women and also children. The dead were presented to … the U.N. and the ‘international community’ as victims of the Syrian army.” (May 31) The conservative German newspaper, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, corroborated the ANNA report on June 7.

 ● Residents knew many of the killers by name and identified them as local criminal elements now working for the FSA. (Syria News, May 31) Anti-Assad forces then posed as villagers and invited the U.N. observers in. Some put on uniforms of the Syrian soldiers they had killed and said they were defectors.

● A widely shown photo of dozens of shrouded bodies, which the BBC first presented as the aftermath of Houla, was really taken by photographer Marco di Lauro in Iraq in March 2003.

● BBC world news editor Jon Williams admitted in his blog June 7 that there was no evidence whatsoever to identify either the Syrian Army or Alawite militias as the perpetrators of the May 25massacre. United Kingdom’s Channel 4 senior reporter Alex Thomson said June 7 that the opposition led him into a line of fire and tried to get him killed by Syrian military forces so it would “look bad” for Assad.

● There has been no independent investigation of Houla to date, yet at a June 7 meeting, Annan and current U.N. General Secretary Ban Ki-moon again made statements putting the responsibility for the Houla massacre on Assad.

● Major General Robert Mood, head of the U.N. Supervision Mission in Syria, suspended patrols of the 300-member team on June 16, citing “spiraling violence in restive areas.” The suspension was right before the G-20 Summit in Mexico, providing another opportunity for imperialism to criticize Assad.

● In initial remarks, Annan called the Houla massacre the “tipping point.” The deaths at Houla have been used by the U.S. and NATO to more aggressively and openly organize for Assad’s overthrow. U.S. officials and Arab intelligence officers admit that the CIA is in southern Turkey funneling weapons to the FSA. It is also there to “make new sources and recruit people.” (New York Times, June 21)

● As a result, “The onetime ragtag militias of the Syrian opposition are developing into a more effective fighting force with the help of an increasingly sophisticated network of activists here in southern Turkey that is smuggling crucial supplies across the border including weapons, communication gear, field hospitals and even salaries for soldiers who defect. The network reflects an effort to forge an opposition movement … that together can not only defeat … Assad but also replace his government.” (New York Times, June 26)

The U.S. and Syria: Facts you should know

The U.S. and Syria: Facts you should know


The following timeline reviews the progression of U.S.-NATO intervention in Syria and counteracts the Big Lie in the corporate media aimed at preparing open imperialist military aggression against the Syrian people.
● Washington has funneled money to a right-wing Syrian opposition group since at least 2005. (Washington Post, April 16, 2011)
● The U.S. reopened its embassy in Damascus in January 2011 after six years. This was no thaw in relations. The new ambassador, Robert S. Ford, who served until October 2011, is a protégé of John Negroponte, who organized death squads in El Salvador in the 1970s and in Iraq while ambassador there in 2004-05. There terror squads killed tens of thousands. Ford served directly under Negroponte at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.
● Ford “played a central role in laying the groundwork within Syria as well as establishing contacts with opposition groups.” Two months after he arrived in Damascus, the armed insurgency began. (Global Research, May 28)
● Armed opposition to Bashar al-Assad began in March 2011 in Daraa, a small town on the Jordanian border. Mass protest movements usually start in large population centers. Later, Saudi Arabia admitted sending weapons to the opposition via Jordan. (RT, March 13)
● The U. S. and its NATO allies used grassroots protests in Egypt, Syria and elsewhere as a cover to build support for right-wing insurgencies whose goal was not to help the Syrian people but to bring Syria into the pro-imperialist camp. Any excesses or mistakes by the Assad government were not the real issue.
● The Arab League, European Union and U.S. begin imposing economic sanctions, a form of warfare, against Syria in November 2011 on the pretext of stopping state-sanctioned violence against protesters. Stepped-up sanctions and freezing of Syrian assets caused the value of the Syrian pound to drop by 50 percent against the dollar, with the cost of necessities often tripling.
● Exiles who received U.S. funding became part of the Syrian National Council. SNC’s Burhan Ghalioun said he would open up Syria to the West, end Syria’s strategic relationship with Iran (and with the Lebanese and Palestinian resistance), and realign Syria with the reactionary Arab regimes in the Gulf. (Wall Street Journal, Dec. 2, 2011)
U.S. &NATO escalate involvement
● Ex-CIA agent Philip Giraldi admitted that the U.S. was involved in Syria and laid out the U.S. plan: “NATO is already clandestinely engaged in the Syrian conflict, with Turkey taking the lead as U.S. proxy. Ankara’s foreign minister, Ahmet Davitoglu, has openly admitted that his country is prepared to invade as soon as there is agreement among the Western allies to do so. The intervention would be based on humanitarian principles, to defend the civilian population based on the ‘responsibility to protect’ doctrine that was invoked to justify Libya.” (theamericanconservative.comDec. 19, 2011)
● Giraldi continued: “Unmarked NATO warplanes are arriving at Turkish military bases close to … the Syrian border, delivering weapons from the late Muammar Gaddafi’s arsenals as well as volunteers from the Libyan Transitional National Council who are experienced in pitting local volunteers against trained soldiers. … French and British special forces trainers are on the ground, assisting the Syrian rebels while the CIA and U.S. Spec Ops are providing communications equipment and intelligence. …
● “The frequently cited United Nations report that more than 3,500 civilians have been killed by Assad’s soldiers is based largely on rebel sources and is uncorroborated. Likewise, accounts of mass defections from the Syrian Army and pitched battles between deserters and loyal soldiers appear to be a fabrication, with few defections being confirmed independently. Syrian government claims that it is being assaulted by rebels who are armed, trained, and financed by foreign governments are more true than false.”
● The “Free Syrian Army” has rear bases in Turkey, is funded by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and is made up of defecting Syrian soldiers. Spiegel Online sites a source in Beirut who reports seeing “‘hundreds of foreign fighters’ who have attached themselves to the FSA.” (Feb. 15)
● The U.N.-mandated commission of inquiry, in its February 2012 report, documented torture, taking of hostages, and executions by armed opposition members.
● The first heavy fighting in Syria’s capital, Damascus, started in March. Pipelines were blown up, and huge explosions ripped through intelligence and security buildings in Christian areas onMarch 16, killing at least 27 people. The Syrian government charged then that terrorist attacks supported from abroad have been responsible for eight car bomb attacks since December, killing 328 and wounding 657. This got little Western media attention.
● Human Rights Watch on March 20 accused armed Syrian opposition members of “Kidnappings, the use of torture and executions … of security force members, individuals identified as members of government-supported militias, and individuals identified as government allies and supporters.”
● In the Baba Amr neighborhood of Homs, the armed opposition has formed its own laws, courts and death squads, according to Spiegel Online. Abu Rami, an opposition commander in Baba Amir, interviewed by Spiegel, said in the city of Homs his group has executed between 200 and 250 people. (March 29)
U.N. steps in
● Former U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan went to Syria in March at the behest of the U.N. and Arab League to put together a peace proposal. But Annan and the U.N. are not impartial. Annan is an architect of the “responsibility to protect” doctrine, cited by former CIA agent Giraldi as the planned pretext for intervention in Syria. The U.N. endorsed this doctrine under Annan’s tenure.
● In 2004, Annan gave U.N. approval to the U.S., French and Canadian intervention that deposed Haiti’s President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Annan’s stated reasons were the same then as now in Syria: an alleged impending “humanitarian catastrophe.” Annan provided a similar U.N. cover for France to tighten its colonial grasp on the Ivory Coast in 2006. In Syria, Annan’s calls for a Syrian government ceasefire and for outside “humanitarian” aid are really calls for foreign intervention.
● Syria agreed to an Annan-brokered ceasefire March 27. The opposition refused. While the Western heads of state and the corporate media heaped blame on Assad for “not honoring” the ceasefire, the West kept arming the opposition.
● What the U.S. government really thought of the ceasefire was revealed by Robert Grenier, former director of the CIA’s Counter-Terrorism Center, who called upon those who would “help” Syria “to climb metaphorically into the ring and dirty themselves,” adding, “what the situation needs is not high-minded sentiments, but effective, lethal aid.” (Al Jazeera, March 29)
● As the imperialists “climbed into the ring,” they continued to blame Assad. Speaking at an anti-Assad “Friends of Syria” meeting in Istanbul on April 1, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Assad had “defiled” the ceasefire. She called for Damascus to unilaterally stop fighting and withdraw from areas of heavy right-wing infiltration. She said the U.S had pledged at least $25 million in “nonlethal” aid to the Syrian opposition, which included satellite communication equipment.
● By May, the reactionaries “have begun receiving significantly more and better weapons … paid for by Persian Gulf nations and coordinated … by the U.S.” (Washington Post, May 15) “The Syrian rebels have received their first ‘third generation’ anti-tank weapons. They are supplied by Saudi and Qatari intelligence agencies following a secret message from President Barack Obama.” (debkafile.comMay 22)
The Houla massacre
● Right before a scheduled visit to Syria by Annan, news broke of a horrible massacre of 108 people in Houla on May 25, which included whole families and as many as 48 children. Headlines worldwide blamed the Syrian government, and all Western capitals called for increased sanctions and more international pressure on Assad.  
● By May 27, the imperialists had coordinated their “international outrage” and expelled Syrian diplomats from the U.S., the Netherlands, Australia, Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Bulgaria and Canada.
● The U.N. Security Council reacted to the massacre — with no investigation as to who was responsible — by unanimously condemning Syria for allegedly using tanks and artillery after agreeing to a ceasefire. Ignored were statements from the Assad government that it was not responsible. A closer look showed this was the case.
● Marat Musin, reporting for Russia’s ANNA News, was in Houla and interviewed witnesses right after the massacre. Musin determined that the massacre was committed by the so-called Free Syrian Army, not the Assad forces. His report concluded: “The attack was carried out by a unit of armed fighters from Rastan, in which more than 700 gunmen were involved. They brought the city under their control and began with a cleansing action against loyalist [pro-Assad] families, including elderly people, women and also children. The dead were presented to … the U.N. and the ‘international community’ as victims of the Syrian army.” (May 31) The conservative German newspaper, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, corroborated the ANNA report on June 7.
 ● Residents knew many of the killers by name and identified them as local criminal elements now working for the FSA. (Syria News, May 31) Anti-Assad forces then posed as villagers and invited the U.N. observers in. Some put on uniforms of the Syrian soldiers they had killed and said they were defectors.
● A widely shown photo of dozens of shrouded bodies, which the BBC first presented as the aftermath of Houla, was really taken by photographer Marco di Lauro in Iraq in March 2003.
● BBC world news editor Jon Williams admitted in his blog June 7 that there was no evidence whatsoever to identify either the Syrian Army or Alawite militias as the perpetrators of the May 25massacre. United Kingdom’s Channel 4 senior reporter Alex Thomson said June 7 that the opposition led him into a line of fire and tried to get him killed by Syrian military forces so it would “look bad” for Assad.
● There has been no independent investigation of Houla to date, yet at a June 7 meeting, Annan and current U.N. General Secretary Ban Ki-moon again made statements putting the responsibility for the Houla massacre on Assad.
● Major General Robert Mood, head of the U.N. Supervision Mission in Syria, suspended patrols of the 300-member team on June 16, citing “spiraling violence in restive areas.” The suspension was right before the G-20 Summit in Mexico, providing another opportunity for imperialism to criticize Assad.
● In initial remarks, Annan called the Houla massacre the “tipping point.” The deaths at Houla have been used by the U.S. and NATO to more aggressively and openly organize for Assad’s overthrow. U.S. officials and Arab intelligence officers admit that the CIA is in southern Turkey funneling weapons to the FSA. It is also there to “make new sources and recruit people.” (New York Times, June 21)
● As a result, “The onetime ragtag militias of the Syrian opposition are developing into a more effective fighting force with the help of an increasingly sophisticated network of activists here in southern Turkey that is smuggling crucial supplies across the border including weapons, communication gear, field hospitals and even salaries for soldiers who defect. The network reflects an effort to forge an opposition movement … that together can not only defeat … Assad but also replace his government.” (New York Times, June 26)

Downed Turkish Fighter Jet is the Result of NATO Aggression, not Syrian Action

Downed Turkish Fighter Jet is the Result of NATO Aggression, not Syrian Action

The facts concerning the incident in which a Turkish fighter jet was shot down by Syrian air defences last week have yet to be proven. However, what we can say is that the warplane was brought down in Syrian territorial waters. Its two pilots are believed to have ejected and are uninjured, although they have not yet been located since Friday’s crash.

Damascus claims that the military aircraft violated its airspace, thus giving it the right to shoot it down. Istanbul has admitted that the RF-4E Phantom jet did enter Syrian airspace “for a short time” but that it exited before being hit. The fact so far that the wreckage was subsequently located in the Mediterranean Sea within Syrian territorial waters tends to support the claim of legitimate defensive action by Syria. The precedent for such Syrian action is well established.

Last year, for example, Iran shot down an American spy drone that had violated the Islamic Republic’s airspace. No one then argued against Iran’s right to take defensive measures on that occasion. Even hawkish American politicians, who regularly condone the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists, were muted on Iran’s downing of prized Pentagon technology – underscoring the legitimacy of defensive action by a nation whose territorial space is violated.

Moreover, one doesn’t have to imagine too hard how Washington, London or other NATO members would respond if an Iranian or Syrian military aircraft were to cross into their territories.
Yet the American-led NATO alliance has leapt to condemn Syria over the downed Turkish warplane. NATO this week convened an emergency meeting in Brussels to discuss the incident. The organization’s general secretary Anders Fogh Rasmussen emerged after the meeting to issue a statement condemning Syria for what he called “a completely unacceptable act”. NATO member Turkey had hastily called the Brussels gathering under the military umbrella’s Article 5 provision that an attack on one member is an attack on all.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Rayyip Erdogan had earlier denounced Syria over an alleged “hostile act”. Turkey is claiming that its warplane was shot down in international airspace – albeit having entered Syrian airspace – and that the aircraft then crashed in Syrian waters. The fact that Rasmussen pointedly avoided media questions on that specific claim suggests that there is no evidence to back it up. Flight control data would be easily available to support the Turkish claim, but the fact that NATO shied away from the crucial point over where exactly the Syrians fired on the Turkish jet implies that Syria’s case is correct.

Nevertheless, NATO persists in condemning Syria. The military alliance said the shooting down of the fighter jet was “another example of the Syrian government’s disregard for international law, human lives and peace”.

Such condemnation is cloyingly rich coming from the same alliance that made a mockery of international law last year when it distorted UN Security Council Resolution 1973 from one mandating a No Fly Zone over Libya to “protect human rights” into a green light for a seven-month aerial bombing campaign on that country. The NATO blitzkrieg on Libya involved drone strikes, cruise missile launches and over 11,000 bombing sorties. The civilian death toll is unknown but it could be as high as 50,000 because the NATO bombers struck urban centres, apartment blocks, food stores and public infrastructure and utilities such as water and electricity stations. Just one of these bombing missions at a farming community in Zlitan resulted in as many 80 civilian deaths – just one of many NATO acts in Libya that would constitute a war crime. NATO’s criminal destruction of Libya paved the way for the collapse of a popular government and the roadside lynching of its leader Muammar Gaddafi. Libya now lies in ruins under a state of lawlessness overseen by feuding armed militia whom NATO’s illegal intervention has imposed on the suffering people of the North African country.

Is that what NATO’s general secretary Rasmussen considers as regard for international law, human lives and peace?

The reaction of Turkish PM Erdogan is particularly instructive of NATO’s cynical double standards and moral bankruptcy. Two years ago, in May 2010, a civilian Turkish aid ship transporting vital humanitarian provisions to the besieged Palestinian people of Gaza was attacked by Israeli commandos. Unlike the disputed downing of the Turkish warplane, the Israeli stormtroopers hijacked a civilian aid vessel in international waters – an act of piracy – and proceeded to murder unarmed civilians onboard the Mavi Marmari. The butchery was captured in glaring detail on CCTV. If ever there were a case of “hostile action” the Israeli attack on the Turkish aid convoy is it.

Initially, the Turkish leader strongly condemned Israel’s act of lawlessness on the high seas. He could hardly do anything less, given the enormity of the crimes. But despite promising a robust response at the time, the Turkish leader and the government have since let the whole matter slip into oblivion.

The striking anomaly in the reaction to the downed warplane off the Syrian coast is telling. In the case of the Mavi Marmara aid ship, there were no Turkish calls for an emergency NATO meeting to assess what was undeniably a gratuitous attack by Israel on a NATO member – made all the more grave because that act resulted in nine civilian deaths. There was no hastily convened meeting in Brussels; there was no strongly worded condemnation from NATO against Israel’s patent act of international aggression.

By this comparison, Erdogan and his NATO allies show themselves to be self-serving hypocrites of the first order. But their moral bankruptcy is exposed even further with a few more facts concerning the downing of this Turkish attack aircraft. Bereft in the Western mainstream media is the crucial context of this incident. The buzzing – if not violation – of Syrian territory by a Turkish warplane comes after 15 months of unrelenting covert aggression by Turkey and other NATO members inside Syria. Turkey has been providing land bases for Jihadi mercenaries from Libya, Saudi Arabia and Iraq to invade Syria and wage a terrorist campaign to destabilise the government of Bashar Al Assad.

Turkey along with NATO’s leading members, the US, Britain and France, is involved in a covert war of aggression against Syria that is being funded with over $100 million from the anti-Syrian monarchies of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. This terrorist campaign has involved no-warning car bombs in Damascus, Aleppo and other cities claiming hundreds of lives. It has involved kidnappings, shootings and sabotage of oil pipelines. And there is credible evidence that the civilian massacres in Houla and Qubair were the work of NATO-backed mercenaries, not the Syrian army as Western politicians and their media mouthpieces were quick to allege.

This criminal assault on Syria and its citizens by NATO and its proxies is clearly a clandestine campaign to elicit regime change. This is part of a long-term Western plan to rewrite the political map in the Middle East for the conquest of oil and subjugation of countries that are deemed resistant to Western hegemony in the region. What is happening in Syria has to be seen in the context of US-led NATO wars of occupation in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. The overthrow of the Assad government in Damascus is part of the bigger Western war plan on Iran and geopolitical rivals of Russia and China.

The cynical concern for international law and human rights that NATO powers espouse over countries that it is targeting for regime change is in stark contrast to their lack of concern over crimes against humanity committed by Israel or by the Arab monarchs towards their own people peacefully protesting for such rights. Why are Washington, London and Brussels not calling for international sanctions on the regimes in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain?

What NATO wants is an “act of war” that it can pin on Syria, thus giving the NATO war machine the pseudo legal right to launch an overt military campaign on that country – as opposed to the 15-month covert campaign of aggression that has so far proved ineffective in dislodging the popularly supported Assad government.

The hypocritical, histrionic reaction of Turkey and its NATO allies over the latest downing of a Turkish warplane off the Syrian coast is more reflective of their criminal war agenda across the Middle East than the actual circumstances of the incident.

Downed Turkish Fighter Jet is the Result of NATO Aggression, not Syrian Action

Downed Turkish Fighter Jet is the Result of NATO Aggression, not Syrian Action.

The facts concerning the incident in which a Turkish fighter jet was shot down by Syrian air defences last week have yet to be proven. However, what we can say is that the warplane was brought down in Syrian territorial waters. Its two pilots are believed to have ejected and are uninjured, although they have not yet been located since Friday’s crash.

Damascus claims that the military aircraft violated its airspace, thus giving it the right to shoot it down. Istanbul has admitted that the RF-4E Phantom jet did enter Syrian airspace “for a short time” but that it exited before being hit. The fact so far that the wreckage was subsequently located in the Mediterranean Sea within Syrian territorial waters tends to support the claim of legitimate defensive action by Syria. The precedent for such Syrian action is well established.

Last year, for example, Iran shot down an American spy drone that had violated the Islamic Republic’s airspace. No one then argued against Iran’s right to take defensive measures on that occasion. Even hawkish American politicians, who regularly condone the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists, were muted on Iran’s downing of prized Pentagon technology – underscoring the legitimacy of defensive action by a nation whose territorial space is violated.

Moreover, one doesn’t have to imagine too hard how Washington, London or other NATO members would respond if an Iranian or Syrian military aircraft were to cross into their territories.

Yet the American-led NATO alliance has leapt to condemn Syria over the downed Turkish warplane. NATO this week convened an emergency meeting in Brussels to discuss the incident. The organization’s general secretary Anders Fogh Rasmussen emerged after the meeting to issue a statement condemning Syria for what he called “a completely unacceptable act”. NATO member Turkey had hastily called the Brussels gathering under the military umbrella’s Article 5 provision that an attack on one member is an attack on all.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Rayyip Erdogan had earlier denounced Syria over an alleged “hostile act”. Turkey is claiming that its warplane was shot down in international airspace – albeit having entered Syrian airspace – and that the aircraft then crashed in Syrian waters. The fact that Rasmussen pointedly avoided media questions on that specific claim suggests that there is no evidence to back it up. Flight control data would be easily available to support the Turkish claim, but the fact that NATO shied away from the crucial point over where exactly the Syrians fired on the Turkish jet implies that Syria’s case is correct.

Nevertheless, NATO persists in condemning Syria. The military alliance said the shooting down of the fighter jet was “another example of the Syrian government’s disregard for international law, human lives and peace”.

Such condemnation is cloyingly rich coming from the same alliance that made a mockery of international law last year when it distorted UN Security Council Resolution 1973 from one mandating a No Fly Zone over Libya to “protect human rights” into a green light for a seven-month aerial bombing campaign on that country. The NATO blitzkrieg on Libya involved drone strikes, cruise missile launches and over 11,000 bombing sorties. The civilian death toll is unknown but it could be as high as 50,000 because the NATO bombers struck urban centres, apartment blocks, food stores and public infrastructure and utilities such as water and electricity stations. Just one of these bombing missions at a farming community in Zlitan resulted in as many 80 civilian deaths – just one of many NATO acts in Libya that would constitute a war crime. NATO’s criminal destruction of Libya paved the way for the collapse of a popular government and the roadside lynching of its leader Muammar Gaddafi. Libya now lies in ruins under a state of lawlessness overseen by feuding armed militia whom NATO’s illegal intervention has imposed on the suffering people of the North African country.

Is that what NATO’s general secretary Rasmussen considers as regard for international law, human lives and peace?

The reaction of Turkish PM Erdogan is particularly instructive of NATO’s cynical double standards and moral bankruptcy. Two years ago, in May 2010, a civilian Turkish aid ship transporting vital humanitarian provisions to the besieged Palestinian people of Gaza was attacked by Israeli commandos. Unlike the disputed downing of the Turkish warplane, the Israeli stormtroopers hijacked a civilian aid vessel in international waters – an act of piracy – and proceeded to murder unarmed civilians onboard the Mavi Marmari. The butchery was captured in glaring detail on CCTV. If ever there were a case of “hostile action” the Israeli attack on the Turkish aid convoy is it.

Initially, the Turkish leader strongly condemned Israel’s act of lawlessness on the high seas. He could hardly do anything less, given the enormity of the crimes. But despite promising a robust response at the time, the Turkish leader and the government have since let the whole matter slip into oblivion.

The striking anomaly in the reaction to the downed warplane off the Syrian coast is telling. In the case of the Mavi Marmara aid ship, there were no Turkish calls for an emergency NATO meeting to assess what was undeniably a gratuitous attack by Israel on a NATO member – made all the more grave because that act resulted in nine civilian deaths. There was no hastily convened meeting in Brussels; there was no strongly worded condemnation from NATO against Israel’s patent act of international aggression.

By this comparison, Erdogan and his NATO allies show themselves to be self-serving hypocrites of the first order. But their moral bankruptcy is exposed even further with a few more facts concerning the downing of this Turkish attack aircraft. Bereft in the Western mainstream media is the crucial context of this incident. The buzzing – if not violation – of Syrian territory by a Turkish warplane comes after 15 months of unrelenting covert aggression by Turkey and other NATO members inside Syria. Turkey has been providing land bases for Jihadi mercenaries from Libya, Saudi Arabia and Iraq to invade Syria and wage a terrorist campaign to destabilise the government of Bashar Al Assad.

Turkey along with NATO’s leading members, the US, Britain and France, is involved in a covert war of aggression against Syria that is being funded with over $100 million from the anti-Syrian monarchies of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. This terrorist campaign has involved no-warning car bombs in Damascus, Aleppo and other cities claiming hundreds of lives. It has involved kidnappings, shootings and sabotage of oil pipelines. And there is credible evidence that the civilian massacres in Houla and Qubair were the work of NATO-backed mercenaries, not the Syrian army as Western politicians and their media mouthpieces were quick to allege.

This criminal assault on Syria and its citizens by NATO and its proxies is clearly a clandestine campaign to elicit regime change. This is part of a long-term Western plan to rewrite the political map in the Middle East for the conquest of oil and subjugation of countries that are deemed resistant to Western hegemony in the region. What is happening in Syria has to be seen in the context of US-led NATO wars of occupation in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. The overthrow of the Assad government in Damascus is part of the bigger Western war plan on Iran and geopolitical rivals of Russia and China.

The cynical concern for international law and human rights that NATO powers espouse over countries that it is targeting for regime change is in stark contrast to their lack of concern over crimes against humanity committed by Israel or by the Arab monarchs towards their own people peacefully protesting for such rights. Why are Washington, London and Brussels not calling for international sanctions on the regimes in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain?

What NATO wants is an “act of war” that it can pin on Syria, thus giving the NATO war machine the pseudo legal right to launch an overt military campaign on that country – as opposed to the 15-month covert campaign of aggression that has so far proved ineffective in dislodging the popularly supported Assad government.

The hypocritical, histrionic reaction of Turkey and its NATO allies over the latest downing of a Turkish warplane off the Syrian coast is more reflective of their criminal war agenda across the Middle East than the actual circumstances of the incident.

NATO Proxies Turkey and Saudi Arabia Move to War Footing on Eve of Syrian ‘Peace Summit’

NATO Proxies Turkey and Saudi Arabia Move to War Footing on Eve of Syrian ‘Peace Summit’.

The NATO-backed covert aggression against Syria could be reaching a tipping point for all-out war involving state forces. That should be no surprise. For the past 16 months, NATO and its regional proxies have been steadily increasing the violence and turmoil inside and outside Syria, while the Western corporate-controlled media maintain the ridiculous fiction that the bloody chaos is largely due to the government forces of President Bashar Al Assad cracking down on “peaceful protesters”.

Ironically, the crisis is culminating at the same time that the United Nations convenes an emergency summit on Syria in Geneva this weekend. The meeting, which is ostensibly aimed at “reviving the Kofi Annan peace plan”, will be attended by the five permanent members of the UN security council and other “invited” regional states. The irony is that leading NATO members, the US, Britain and France, as well as their Turkish and Arab allies who will also be attending the crisis conference, are the very parties that have deliberately created the precipice for all-out war in the Middle East.

As dignitaries fly into Geneva to “salvage peace in Syria”, there is a lockstep military build-up on the northern and southern flanks of Syria underway, with news that Turkey has dispatched battlefield tanks, missile batteries and heavy artillery to its Syrian border, while to the south Saudi Arabia has announced that its military forces have been put on a “state of high alert”.

Ankara’s military mobilization along its 800km land border with Syria came within hours of the declaration by Turkey’s prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan slating Syria as “a hostile state”. The immediate cause of the deterioration in relations between the neighbouring countries is the downing of a Turkish fighter jet last week in Syrian territorial waters. Syria claims it was acting in self-defence after the Phantom RF-4E warplane entered its airspace on Friday. Ankara has so far failed to give an explanation for why one of its warplanes was making such a provocative low-flying manoeuvre into Syrian airspace. But the Turkish government has announced that any move by Syrian armed forces towards its border will be viewed as another “hostile act” that it will respond to. How’s that for a provocative tether? Especially towards a country that is being attacked by armed groups crossing over its border with Turkey.

Meanwhile, on the same day that Turkey is militarizing along its border with Syria, Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah makes an unprecedented announcement putting his armed forces on high alert “due to the tense situation in the Middle East”. Using vague and contrived language, the Saudi ruler warned against “foreign or terrorist attacks” to justify the mobilization of the kingdom’s armed forces.

The military pincer movement against Syria tends to support the analysis that the downing of the Turkish fighter jet was a deliberate set-piece scenario designed to furnish a cause for war, or at least a stepping up of the international psy-ops campaign of intimidation against Syria.

It is notable that the circumstances surrounding the shooting down of the warplane have yet to be clarified. The Syrians seem to have firm grounds for acting in the way they did given the provocative conduct of the Turkish fighter jet. And there is an onus on the Ankara government to give some explanation for the unusual military manoeuvre, especially in the light of claims that the aircraft was on a reconnaissance mission on behalf of anti-Assad forces on the ground in Syria. Yet almost reflexively, before details have been established about the incident, Turkey has moved on to a war footing. Equally telling is that Saudi Arabia, a key ally of Ankara in opposition to Syria, has simultaneously moved also on to a war footing – without any substantive grounds for such a mobilization.

Some informed analysts have said that the Turkish-Saudi pincer on Syria is more aimed at intensifying the psy-ops pressure on Bashar Al Assad to cave in and relinquish power. Hisham Jaber, director of the Beirut-based Center for Middle East Studies, told Press TV that Ankara and Riyadh will balk at an all-out war with Syria because both are well aware that any such conflict will bring in Iran, Russia and China in support of their ally in Damascus.

Nonetheless, there is an ineluctable logic towards all-out war. Ever since the armed insurrection by foreign mercenaries was instigated in Syria’s southern town of Deraa in mid-March 2011, Turkey and Saudi Arabia have played key roles in fomenting the covert campaign of aggression to overthrow the Assad government – a campaign that is authored by leading NATO members, the US, Britain and France. The division of labour is such that Turkey has supplied land bases to organize the mercenaries from Libya, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Iraq; while Saudi Arabia provides the money – up to $100 million – to buy weapons and pay wages for the soldiers of fortune; and ultimately it is Washington, London and Paris that are calling the tactical shots in the NATO war plan on Syria.

As several other commentators have pointed out, this war plan is aimed at asserting Western capitalist hegemony in the oil-rich Middle East and Central Asia regions. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria are part of an overarching bid for “full-spectrum dominance” that will eventually target, overtly, Iran, Russia and China.

It is this crucial wider context of war-making by the waning capitalist powers that underscores the gravity of the military build-up inside and outside Syria. The dynamic for war has a compelling, nefarious logic – as the history of world wars testifies.

Which makes the Geneva “crisis conference” this weekend appear all the more ludicrous. In attendance are the US, Britain, France, Turkey and the Gulf Arab monarchical states of Kuwait and Qatar. All are professing to support a peaceful solution in Syria even though all the above are funnelling weapons, logistics and personnel to wage a brutal, terrorist assault on that country – an assault that has now led to the precipice of all-out regional war.

Also attending the UN conference are secretary general Ban Ki-moon and the UN/Arab League special envoy to Syria, Kofi Annan. The UN and the Arab League and these two figureheads in particular have shown themselves to be willing dupes to NATO’s war of aggression on Syria, and beyond, by indulging in the charade that the Western powers are “supporting peace” instead of denouncing them as “supporting war”. Significantly, the UN and Annan have not invited Iran to attend the conference as a result of US pressure. How provocative is that? Iran clearly has vital interests at stake given its proximity and geopolitical threats from the encroaching war on its Syrian ally.

The other ghost missing from the feast in Geneva this weekend is Saudi Arabia. The omission of Saudi Arabia should not be seen as some kind of consolation to Syrian and Iranian sensibilities, but rather as a way of shielding the House of Saud from embarrassment. Considering the incendiary role of Saudi Arabia in Syria, and possibly the region’s conflagration, the Saudi rulers should be summoned to a top seat at the “peace summit” – to face the most withering questions about their warmongering, criminal interference in a neighbouring state.

Then, using Nuremburg principles, prosecutors should proceed to arraign the rulers in Riyadh along with their accomplices in Washington, London, Paris and Ankara.

NATO Proxies Turkey and Saudi Arabia Move to War Footing on Eve of Syrian ‘Peace Summit’

NATO Proxies Turkey and Saudi Arabia Move to War Footing on Eve of Syrian ‘Peace Summit’

The NATO-backed covert aggression against Syria could be reaching a tipping point for all-out war involving state forces. That should be no surprise. For the past 16 months, NATO and its regional proxies have been steadily increasing the violence and turmoil inside and outside Syria, while the Western corporate-controlled media maintain the ridiculous fiction that the bloody chaos is largely due to the government forces of President Bashar Al Assad cracking down on “peaceful protesters”.
Ironically, the crisis is culminating at the same time that the United Nations convenes an emergency summit on Syria in Geneva this weekend. The meeting, which is ostensibly aimed at “reviving the Kofi Annan peace plan”, will be attended by the five permanent members of the UN security council and other “invited” regional states. The irony is that leading NATO members, the US, Britain and France, as well as their Turkish and Arab allies who will also be attending the crisis conference, are the very parties that have deliberately created the precipice for all-out war in the Middle East.
As dignitaries fly into Geneva to “salvage peace in Syria”, there is a lockstep military build-up on the northern and southern flanks of Syria underway, with news that Turkey has dispatched battlefield tanks, missile batteries and heavy artillery to its Syrian border, while to the south Saudi Arabia has announced that its military forces have been put on a “state of high alert”.
Ankara’s military mobilization along its 800km land border with Syria came within hours of the declaration by Turkey’s prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan slating Syria as “a hostile state”. The immediate cause of the deterioration in relations between the neighbouring countries is the downing of a Turkish fighter jet last week in Syrian territorial waters. Syria claims it was acting in self-defence after the Phantom RF-4E warplane entered its airspace on Friday. Ankara has so far failed to give an explanation for why one of its warplanes was making such a provocative low-flying manoeuvre into Syrian airspace. But the Turkish government has announced that any move by Syrian armed forces towards its border will be viewed as another “hostile act” that it will respond to. How’s that for a provocative tether? Especially towards a country that is being attacked by armed groups crossing over its border with Turkey.
Meanwhile, on the same day that Turkey is militarizing along its border with Syria, Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah makes an unprecedented announcement putting his armed forces on high alert “due to the tense situation in the Middle East”. Using vague and contrived language, the Saudi ruler warned against “foreign or terrorist attacks” to justify the mobilization of the kingdom’s armed forces.
The military pincer movement against Syria tends to support the analysis that the downing of the Turkish fighter jet was a deliberate set-piece scenario designed to furnish a cause for war, or at least a stepping up of the international psy-ops campaign of intimidation against Syria.
It is notable that the circumstances surrounding the shooting down of the warplane have yet to be clarified. The Syrians seem to have firm grounds for acting in the way they did given the provocative conduct of the Turkish fighter jet. And there is an onus on the Ankara government to give some explanation for the unusual military manoeuvre, especially in the light of claims that the aircraft was on a reconnaissance mission on behalf of anti-Assad forces on the ground in Syria. Yet almost reflexively, before details have been established about the incident, Turkey has moved on to a war footing. Equally telling is that Saudi Arabia, a key ally of Ankara in opposition to Syria, has simultaneously moved also on to a war footing – without any substantive grounds for such a mobilization.
Some informed analysts have said that the Turkish-Saudi pincer on Syria is more aimed at intensifying the psy-ops pressure on Bashar Al Assad to cave in and relinquish power. Hisham Jaber, director of the Beirut-based Center for Middle East Studies, told Press TV that Ankara and Riyadh will balk at an all-out war with Syria because both are well aware that any such conflict will bring in Iran, Russia and China in support of their ally in Damascus.
Nonetheless, there is an ineluctable logic towards all-out war. Ever since the armed insurrection by foreign mercenaries was instigated in Syria’s southern town of Deraa in mid-March 2011, Turkey and Saudi Arabia have played key roles in fomenting the covert campaign of aggression to overthrow the Assad government – a campaign that is authored by leading NATO members, the US, Britain and France. The division of labour is such that Turkey has supplied land bases to organize the mercenaries from Libya, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Iraq; while Saudi Arabia provides the money – up to $100 million – to buy weapons and pay wages for the soldiers of fortune; and ultimately it is Washington, London and Paris that are calling the tactical shots in the NATO war plan on Syria.
As several other commentators have pointed out, this war plan is aimed at asserting Western capitalist hegemony in the oil-rich Middle East and Central Asia regions. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria are part of an overarching bid for “full-spectrum dominance” that will eventually target, overtly, Iran, Russia and China.
It is this crucial wider context of war-making by the waning capitalist powers that underscores the gravity of the military build-up inside and outside Syria. The dynamic for war has a compelling, nefarious logic – as the history of world wars testifies.
Which makes the Geneva “crisis conference” this weekend appear all the more ludicrous. In attendance are the US, Britain, France, Turkey and the Gulf Arab monarchical states of Kuwait and Qatar. All are professing to support a peaceful solution in Syria even though all the above are funnelling weapons, logistics and personnel to wage a brutal, terrorist assault on that country – an assault that has now led to the precipice of all-out regional war.
Also attending the UN conference are secretary general Ban Ki-moon and the UN/Arab League special envoy to Syria, Kofi Annan. The UN and the Arab League and these two figureheads in particular have shown themselves to be willing dupes to NATO’s war of aggression on Syria, and beyond, by indulging in the charade that the Western powers are “supporting peace” instead of denouncing them as “supporting war”. Significantly, the UN and Annan have not invited Iran to attend the conference as a result of US pressure. How provocative is that? Iran clearly has vital interests at stake given its proximity and geopolitical threats from the encroaching war on its Syrian ally.
The other ghost missing from the feast in Geneva this weekend is Saudi Arabia. The omission of Saudi Arabia should not be seen as some kind of consolation to Syrian and Iranian sensibilities, but rather as a way of shielding the House of Saud from embarrassment. Considering the incendiary role of Saudi Arabia in Syria, and possibly the region’s conflagration, the Saudi rulers should be summoned to a top seat at the “peace summit” – to face the most withering questions about their warmongering, criminal interference in a neighbouring state.
Then, using Nuremburg principles, prosecutors should proceed to arraign the rulers in Riyadh along with their accomplices in Washington, London, Paris and Ankara.

State of War in Syria

State of War in Syria


On Wednesday, 
Assad said “a state of war” exists. 

“(A)LL our policies, directives and all sectors will be directed in order to gain victory in this war.”

He called on government officials to boost relations with Russia, Latin American and African states.

“Apparently, the problem was with the West only, while the majority of the world want to build relations with us and with others, but throughout decades, we were seeking to boost our economic ties with those who colonized us directly or indirectly.” 

“Syria seeks to build good relations with all world countries but we have to know where are our real interests.”

On June 27, Hurriyet daily headlined “Downed jet was flying with another plane: CHP deputy,” saying:

Main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) deputy Orhan Duzgun “demanded that the government reveal the nationality of the accompanying jet….”

Hatay area Syrians “saw (it) with their naked eyes. There were two planes flying. The fate of the second one remains unknown. The government….denies” what people on the ground saw.

Duzgun believes it belonged to another NATO member. Its country of origin isn’t known. It could be America. US military aircraft operate from Incirlik Air Base. It’s near the Aegean Sea close to Syria’s border. It’s operated jointly by Washington and Ankara. Both planes likely flew from the same location.

On Thursday, insurgents attacked the privately owned Al-Ikhbariaya TV station. It’s located 20 km south of Damascus. Despite no evidence suggesting it, The New York Times claimed “elite Syrian Republican Guard” defectors were responsible.

AP gave a different account. It said “gunmen” raided the station. Seven employees were killed. Others were kidnapped. Al-Ikhbariya’s compound sustained heavy damage. Nonetheless, broadcasts resumed shortly after the attack.

One employee said:

“I heard a small explosion then a huge explosion and gunmen ran in. They ransacked the offices and entirely destroyed the newsroom.”

Information Minister Omran al-Zoubi called it “a massacre against the freedom of the press.” Terrorists were responsible, he said.

“This massacre won’t go unpunished and the broadcast of the Syrian al-Ikhbariya Satellite Channel will not stop and we hold the EU, Arab and International organizations responsible for this massacre.”

“Those who committed this crime had carried out the decision of the Arab League Council to silence the voice of Syria.”

Three journalists and four other employees were killed. Al-Ikhbariya’s editor-in-chief, Abdo al-Assadi, called the massacre an attack on all Syrian media. Those murdered were “armed only with their words and views.”

Editor Adham al-Taweel said al-Ikhbariya was attacked for discussing anti-Assad propaganda. Correspondent Yara Saleh added that other journalists will be motivated to “unmask these terrorists and their actions.”

The Syrian Journalists Union and National Media Council also condemned the massacre. So did the Lebanese Amal Movement. Its Central Information Bureau said it constituted an attack against journalism, the media, and a free press.

On June 26, Russian State Duma’s Vice Chairman, Vladimir Zhirinovsky, condemned Turkey for violating Syrian airspace. He called doing it “a deliberate provocative act.” 

He suggested Washington and key NATO allies are escalating conflict ahead of full-scale intervention. He said Syria acted responsibly.

Vice Chairman of the Russian Federation Ilyas Umakhanov said Syrians alone must resolve issues.

Viktor Ozerov, Chairman of the Council of the Federation Committee on Defense and Security,  warned against NATO intervention. So did Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich.

Heated Turkish rhetoric continues. On June 26, Today’s Zaman headlined “Army on high alert on Syrian border as Turkey warns of retaliation,” saying:

“Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has warned Syria that the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) have been given instructions to treat any approaching Syrian military unit as a threat….”

He ordered them to intercept, confront, and attack “in case of any violation” encountered.

Turkey runs point for Washington. It’s NATO’s regional attack dog. It belligerently flew warplanes low and fast into Syrian territory. It suggests other provocations will follow. Erdogan’s spoiling for a fight. America, Israel, Britain and France urge one.

“The rules of engagement have changed,” he said. Hours after his comments, Turkish forces headed for Syria’s border areas from Diyarbakir to Mardin. They included tanks and long-range artillery.

He also accused Russia of being “Syria’s mouthpiece.” Calling what happened “extremely dangerous,” its foreign ministry warned against using this incident as a pretext for further intervention.

White House press secretary Jay Carney said Washington “will work with Turkey and other partners to hold the Assad regime accountable.”

Pentagon spokesman Navy Captain John Kirby said:

“We don’t have the tick-tock of the decision-making process that led to this aircraft being shot down. The fact is that it was shot down. We believe it was a deliberate act.”

Another Pentagon spokesman, George Little, added that “the the Syrian regime needs to answer for it.”

Washington, Turkey, key NATO partners, and regional allies keep advancing the ball closer to war. Expect a future false flag attack used to launch it. The likelihood looks more certain daily.

NATO’s Tuesday meeting gave ominous signs. Secretary-General Fogh Rasmussen made hostile comments. He condemned Syria for Turkey’s provocation.

He called it “unacceptable….in the strongest terms.” He accused Assad of violating “international norms, peace and security, and human life.”

Syria is under attack. According to international law, it’s entitled to respond defensively. Failure would be irresponsible. Rasmussen is titular head of a global killing machine.

NATO’s record shows total disregard for international law. Since the 1990s, it committed naked aggression against Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria. Member states support Washington’s proxy wars.

According to Rasmussen, “the security of the Alliance is indivisible. We stand together with Turkey in the spirit of solidarity.” Discussions in Brussels stopped short of invoking Article 5. Doing so suggests imminent war.

Given what’s ongoing, one or more false flags could launch it. They could come any time. Scoundrel media misinformation increases the possibility. 

Propaganda reports feature big lies. Repetition enlists public support. It works every time. No matter how often people are fooled, they’re easy marks for more.

Syrian expert Patrick Seale sees ominous “War Clouds over the Greater Middle East.”

“Six conflict-zones….are in danger of erupting into fresh violence.” Washington and its allies spurn peace. Instead they’re “adding fuel to the fire.”

Pressure builds intolerably. At issue is embroiling the entire region in conflict. Washington is losing multiple wars. Why itch for more? Spoiling for more fights makes winning any less likely.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov calls Washington’s war on Assad “an element of a larger regional geopolitical game.”

Obama’s policy is influenced by electoral priorities. Much depends on pleasing the Israeli Lobby. AIPAC wants war on Syria and Iran. It calls both countries state sponsors of terrorism. No evidence backs either claim.

For years, “Syria has been a force for (regional) instability,” it says. 

“Iran is the world’s leading state sponsor of terror and is racing toward a nuclear weapons capability. Through its proxy armies of Hizballah in Southern Lebanon, Hamas in the Gaza Strip and insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Iranian regime is supporting terrorists carrying out daily attacks on American troops and Israeli civilians.”

Again, rhetoric substitutes for hard facts.

Seale says Obama “lost control to Israel. (He) collapsed in front of (Netanyahu’s) Greater Israel (land grab) ambitions….”

He’s embroiled in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Palestine, Yemen, Somalia, and “increasingly across the Sahel from the Atlantic Ocean to the Red Sea. Its territory includes Mauritania, Mali, southern Algeria, Niger, Chad, South Sudan and Eritrea.

He’s fighting battles he can’t win. He’s like a punch drunk fighter refusing to go down when licked. Instead, new ways to kill, destroy, and subvert are used. Peace and stability more than ever look distant.

Immanuel Wallerstein discussed the “impossible dilemmas of declining powers.” Years ago he predicted America’s decline. It’s happening faster than he imagined. It’s policies are self-defeating. Short-term priorities assure its longer-run downfall.

“The obvious thing to do is not to go down this road any more.” America’s agenda doesn’t work. Neither does Israel’s “Don’t (Obama and Netanyahu) understand this?” 

If so, why do they keep doing what’s failing? They even boast when they should change strategies responsibly.

Political priorities take precedence. Opposition hard-liners in both countries think they’re soft. Voices for change are absent. Hawks are dominant. Public opinion remains indifferent about what matters most.

Wallerstein suggests both leaders have delusions of grandeur. Obama wants unchallenged global hegemony. Netanyahu seeks a Greater Israel. It includes all Arab land he can grab. 

These policies fuel conflicts. They endanger world peace and humanity. They also ignore both nations in decline. Imagine what they’ll risk to restore lost supremacy.

Stephen Lendman
 lives in Chicago and can be reached at 
lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net

His new book is titled “How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War”


State of War in Syria

State of War in Syria.


On Wednesday, 
Assad said “a state of war” exists. 


“(A)LL our policies, directives and all sectors will be directed in order to gain victory in this war.”

He called on government officials to boost relations with Russia, Latin American and African states.


“Apparently, the problem was with the West only, while the majority of the world want to build relations with us and with others, but throughout decades, we were seeking to boost our economic ties with those who colonized us directly or indirectly.” 

“Syria seeks to build good relations with all world countries but we have to know where are our real interests.”

On June 27, Hurriyet daily headlined “Downed jet was flying with another plane: CHP deputy,” saying:


Main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) deputy Orhan Duzgun “demanded that the government reveal the nationality of the accompanying jet….”


Hatay area Syrians “saw (it) with their naked eyes. There were two planes flying. The fate of the second one remains unknown. The government….denies” what people on the ground saw.


Duzgun believes it belonged to another NATO member. Its country of origin isn’t known. It could be America. US military aircraft operate from Incirlik Air Base. It’s near the Aegean Sea close to Syria’s border. It’s operated jointly by Washington and Ankara. Both planes likely flew from the same location.


On Thursday, insurgents attacked the privately owned Al-Ikhbariaya TV station. It’s located 20 km south of Damascus. Despite no evidence suggesting it, The New York Times claimed “elite Syrian Republican Guard” defectors were responsible.


AP gave a different account. It said “gunmen” raided the station. Seven employees were killed. Others were kidnapped. Al-Ikhbariya’s compound sustained heavy damage. Nonetheless, broadcasts resumed shortly after the attack.


One employee said:


“I heard a small explosion then a huge explosion and gunmen ran in. They ransacked the offices and entirely destroyed the newsroom.”

Information Minister Omran al-Zoubi called it “a massacre against the freedom of the press.” Terrorists were responsible, he said.


“This massacre won’t go unpunished and the broadcast of the Syrian al-Ikhbariya Satellite Channel will not stop and we hold the EU, Arab and International organizations responsible for this massacre.”


“Those who committed this crime had carried out the decision of the Arab League Council to silence the voice of Syria.”

Three journalists and four other employees were killed. Al-Ikhbariya’s editor-in-chief, Abdo al-Assadi, called the massacre an attack on all Syrian media. Those murdered were “armed only with their words and views.”


Editor Adham al-Taweel said al-Ikhbariya was attacked for discussing anti-Assad propaganda. Correspondent Yara Saleh added that other journalists will be motivated to “unmask these terrorists and their actions.”


The Syrian Journalists Union and National Media Council also condemned the massacre. So did the Lebanese Amal Movement. Its Central Information Bureau said it constituted an attack against journalism, the media, and a free press.


On June 26, Russian State Duma’s Vice Chairman, Vladimir Zhirinovsky, condemned Turkey for violating Syrian airspace. He called doing it “a deliberate provocative act.” 


He suggested Washington and key NATO allies are escalating conflict ahead of full-scale intervention. He said Syria acted responsibly.


Vice Chairman of the Russian Federation Ilyas Umakhanov said Syrians alone must resolve issues.


Viktor Ozerov, Chairman of the Council of the Federation Committee on Defense and Security,  warned against NATO intervention. So did Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich.


Heated Turkish rhetoric continues. On June 26, Today’s Zaman headlined “Army on high alert on Syrian border as Turkey warns of retaliation,” saying:


“Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has warned Syria that the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) have been given instructions to treat any approaching Syrian military unit as a threat….”


He ordered them to intercept, confront, and attack “in case of any violation” encountered.


Turkey runs point for Washington. It’s NATO’s regional attack dog. It belligerently flew warplanes low and fast into Syrian territory. It suggests other provocations will follow. Erdogan’s spoiling for a fight. America, Israel, Britain and France urge one.


“The rules of engagement have changed,” he said. Hours after his comments, Turkish forces headed for Syria’s border areas from Diyarbakir to Mardin. They included tanks and long-range artillery.


He also accused Russia of being “Syria’s mouthpiece.” Calling what happened “extremely dangerous,” its foreign ministry warned against using this incident as a pretext for further intervention.


White House press secretary Jay Carney said Washington “will work with Turkey and other partners to hold the Assad regime accountable.”


Pentagon spokesman Navy Captain John Kirby said:


“We don’t have the tick-tock of the decision-making process that led to this aircraft being shot down. The fact is that it was shot down. We believe it was a deliberate act.”


Another Pentagon spokesman, George Little, added that “the the Syrian regime needs to answer for it.”


Washington, Turkey, key NATO partners, and regional allies keep advancing the ball closer to war. Expect a future false flag attack used to launch it. The likelihood looks more certain daily.


NATO’s Tuesday meeting gave ominous signs. Secretary-General Fogh Rasmussen made hostile comments. He condemned Syria for Turkey’s provocation.


He called it “unacceptable….in the strongest terms.” He accused Assad of violating “international norms, peace and security, and human life.”


Syria is under attack. According to international law, it’s entitled to respond defensively. Failure would be irresponsible. Rasmussen is titular head of a global killing machine.


NATO’s record shows total disregard for international law. Since the 1990s, it committed naked aggression against Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria. Member states support Washington’s proxy wars.


According to Rasmussen, “the security of the Alliance is indivisible. We stand together with Turkey in the spirit of solidarity.” Discussions in Brussels stopped short of invoking Article 5. Doing so suggests imminent war.


Given what’s ongoing, one or more false flags could launch it. They could come any time. Scoundrel media misinformation increases the possibility. 


Propaganda reports feature big lies. Repetition enlists public support. It works every time. No matter how often people are fooled, they’re easy marks for more.


Syrian expert Patrick Seale sees ominous “War Clouds over the Greater Middle East.”


“Six conflict-zones….are in danger of erupting into fresh violence.” Washington and its allies spurn peace. Instead they’re “adding fuel to the fire.”


Pressure builds intolerably. At issue is embroiling the entire region in conflict. Washington is losing multiple wars. Why itch for more? Spoiling for more fights makes winning any less likely.


Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov calls Washington’s war on Assad “an element of a larger regional geopolitical game.”


Obama’s policy is influenced by electoral priorities. Much depends on pleasing the Israeli Lobby. AIPAC wants war on Syria and Iran. It calls both countries state sponsors of terrorism. No evidence backs either claim.


For years, “Syria has been a force for (regional) instability,” it says. 


“Iran is the world’s leading state sponsor of terror and is racing toward a nuclear weapons capability. Through its proxy armies of Hizballah in Southern Lebanon, Hamas in the Gaza Strip and insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Iranian regime is supporting terrorists carrying out daily attacks on American troops and Israeli civilians.”


Again, rhetoric substitutes for hard facts.


Seale says Obama “lost control to Israel. (He) collapsed in front of (Netanyahu’s) Greater Israel (land grab) ambitions….”


He’s embroiled in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Palestine, Yemen, Somalia, and “increasingly across the Sahel from the Atlantic Ocean to the Red Sea. Its territory includes Mauritania, Mali, southern Algeria, Niger, Chad, South Sudan and Eritrea.


He’s fighting battles he can’t win. He’s like a punch drunk fighter refusing to go down when licked. Instead, new ways to kill, destroy, and subvert are used. Peace and stability more than ever look distant.


Immanuel Wallerstein discussed the “impossible dilemmas of declining powers.” Years ago he predicted America’s decline. It’s happening faster than he imagined. It’s policies are self-defeating. Short-term priorities assure its longer-run downfall.


“The obvious thing to do is not to go down this road any more.” America’s agenda doesn’t work. Neither does Israel’s “Don’t (Obama and Netanyahu) understand this?” 


If so, why do they keep doing what’s failing? They even boast when they should change strategies responsibly.


Political priorities take precedence. Opposition hard-liners in both countries think they’re soft. Voices for change are absent. Hawks are dominant. Public opinion remains indifferent about what matters most.


Wallerstein suggests both leaders have delusions of grandeur. Obama wants unchallenged global hegemony. Netanyahu seeks a Greater Israel. It includes all Arab land he can grab. 


These policies fuel conflicts. They endanger world peace and humanity. They also ignore both nations in decline. Imagine what they’ll risk to restore lost supremacy.

 


Stephen Lendman
 lives in Chicago and can be reached at 
lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net


His new book is titled “How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War”

Ankara has deployed a convoy of about 30 military vehicles, including trucks loaded with missile batteries, to the Syrian border, Turkish state media say.



According to reports by Turkish state media on Thursday, the convoy left the town of Iskenderun in the southern province of Hatay, heading for the Syrian border. 

Several military vehicles have also been deployed separately to a military garrison in the border town of Reyhanli in Hatay. 

Press TV has conducted an interview with Hisham Jaber, director of Center for Middle East Studies from Beirut, to further talk over the issue. Below is an approximate transcription of the interview. 

Press TV: Hisham Jaber, what do you make of this Turkey deploying militarily along the border with Syria? 

Jaber: Personally, I was not surprised by this military deployment but I think that Turkey will not make or start or provoke any war against Syria. It is clear. Turkey made a great mistake by sending that aircraft and Turkey did not want to recognize that it made a mistake. 

And especially I think towards Turkish people and the opposition and the public opinion in Turkey, Turkey wants to show some, and also as a psychological war towards Syria, wants to show its muscles or its forces. 

If Turkey wanted to declare or start a war against Syria, in my opinion, it should make [should have made] it one year ago when Turkey was very excited and very aggressive to create a buffer zone with Syria; then Turkey did discover that to create a buffer zone along 800 kilometers with Syria, the whole Turkish army even it is that strong cannot defend that border and also Syria is not alone. 

If Turkey starts any war against Syria, it has to think that it has borders with Iran and with Russia and Iran and Russia will not stay silent towards any aggression, military aggression or war against Syria. It is clear now. I think that movement is a psychological warfare towards Syria and psychological operations, as they call it, towards the Turkish people. 

Do not forget that on Saturday they will start a conference in Geneva about Syria and Turkey will be inside that conference. And as we heard also today that Russia will continue to support Syrian regime and shipment of military equipment including helicopters and air defense system which was supposed to go to Syria by shipment by sea, now Russia will send it by air. 

And Russia responded and replied to the criticism about sending military equipment in supporting Syria that said that Russia did make and did sign agreement with Syria and Russia is not capable or able or in a position to deny those agreements. 

All of the above and the whole situation will convince everyone that there is no war between Turkey and Syria because it is very dangerous for Turkey. Turkey is not ready to start any war against Syria. 

Press TV: Let me ask you this: in terms of what they have done, the question that comes to mind, given that Turkey is a NATO member, would they or could they or do they have permission, if they want to incite war, I mean do they need to get a nod or an approval from NATO which in that case we have seen NATO really reluctant to have any type of military engagement in Syria? Could they go it alone, in other words? 

Jaber: No, they would not and even Turkey as a member of NATO. We heard in the last few days that [Anders Fogh] Rasmussen, the Secretary General of NATO, said NATO will not be involved, will not be concerned about any military operation against Syria and even he, a few months ago, said that even if a decision comes from the Security Council which is impossible with the veto of Russia and China, Mr. Rasmussen made it clear. 

He said even if there is a decision for military operation against Syria, NATO is not concerned about this operation. How come if Turkey wants to make a military adventure against Syria? I do not think at all that NATO will encourage this or will be involved in such military aggression against Syria. 

Press TV: Hisham Jaber, it seems to be not on this radar, so to speak, of news that Syria was actually acting in self-defense in a matter of speaking because it was reported that these reconnaissance planes, if there were one or two of them, were actually spying and locating the different movements of the Syrian army and then relaying that to the opposition who is on the ground and it is reported that Syria actually has proof of that. Why is that not being highlighted if it is true? 

Jaber: Yes, I think because the propaganda is against Syria. Before we talk about this, look at the incident of the aircraft. The aircraft was shot on the Syrian air and Syria was in legitimate self-defense and Syria is not attacking Turkey. 

I do not see any Syrian tanks going to the Syrian borders or across that border; I do not see any Syrian aircraft flying over Turkey. But on the other hand, you see Turkey is supporting the opposition and is moving inside even the Syrian land and Syria is always trying to avoid any military contact with Turkey. 

Look at the hostages, who are taken from Lebanon, you know the Lebanese hostages, who have been taken and are still hostages in Syrian land with the protection of Turkish intelligence. Everybody knows this but Syria does not have any interest right now to provoke any war with Turkey. 

On the other hand, I am sure that Turkey does not have any interest in starting a war or military conflict with the Syrians…. 

Do not forget [that] there is 800 kilometers [of common border] between Syria and Turkey and despite that the Turkish army is very strong, as they say it, also the Syrian army is not that weak. And Syria did prove that it has, for example, a very important, advanced and sophisticated defense [system] and Syria can defend itself.http://edition.presstv.ir/detail/248442.html

Was Turkey Jet Shootdown a Staged Provocation?

Was Turkey Jet Shootdown a Staged Provocation?

Manufactured stunts to create pretext for war one of the oldest tricks in the book
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Syria’s downing of a Turkish F-4 Phantom jet last week, an event that has threatened to escalate the threat of NATO military action against President Bashar Al-Assad’s regime, mirrors previous instances where false flag provocations have been used or considered as a tool with which to create a justification for war.
Despite initially playing down the incident, Turkey today deployed anti-aircraft guns at the border with Syria in response to the shoot down and has promised to talk with NATO about potential repercussions.
Although Turkey claimed the jet was in international airspace, footage and eyewitness testimony clearly suggests that the Phantom was inside Syrian airspace and therefore a legitimate target.
Manipulating the narrative behind naval or airborne incidents in order to manufacture a pretext for conflict is one of the oldest tricks in the book.
The Bush administration once debated staging a false flag wherein fake Iranian patrol boats would be used to attack a US ship as a means of creating a pretext for war.
In January 2008, the US government announced that it had been “moments” away from opening fire on a group of Iranian patrol boats in the Strait of Hormuz after the boats allegedly broadcast a warning that they were about to attack a US vessel.
The US claimed the Iranian boats had broadcast the message, “I am coming at you. You will explode in a couple of minutes,” and that the order to fire was aborted only at the last minute as the patrol boats pulled back.
Iran later produced a video proving that the patrol boats never displayed any kind of threatening behavior. The New York Times subsequently reported that the alleged tape containing the attack threat had no background ambient noise and did not come from an Iranian ship, but from another unnamed ship in the region.
According to Pulitzer-Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh, the incident led to a discussion in Vice-President Dick Cheney’s office about how to start a war with Iran by launching a false flag attack at sea.
The January Strait of Hormuz incident taught Cheney and other administration insiders that, “If you get the right incident, the American public will support it”. Hersh said: “There were a dozen ideas proffered about how to trigger a war. The one that interested me the most was why don’t we build, we in ‘our shipyard’, – build four or five boats that look like Iranian PT boats. Put Navy seals on them with a lot of arms. And next time one of our boats goes to the Straits of Hormuz, start a shoot-up. Might cost some lives”.
Cheney’s idea was rejected, but it was eerily reminiscent of the so-called Gulf of Tonkin incident that never occurred but resulted in the Vietnam War that ultimately claimed the lives of more than 58,000 Americans and around three million Southeast Asians.
The Gulf of Tonkin pretext established a pattern of “continuous government lies passed on by pliant mass media,”write Jeff Cohen and Norman Solomon.
In addition to Cheney’s idea of luring Iran into a conflict, the Bush administration devised a plan to trick Saddam Hussein into attacking a U.S. spy plane disguised as a United Nations aircraft.
“The US was thinking of flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colors. If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach,” Bush wrote in a memorandum to then British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
Given the innumerable examples of where provocations have been staged in other to lure the other side into war or to portray them as the villains, we should remain wary of the fact that NATO powers are determined to attack Syria under any pretext possible and will not hesitate to stage incidents in order to grease the skids for the next chapter of “humanitarian” bloodshed.