Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Will Syria Be Next? (Part 2)

Syria’s Deadly Bomb Attack on Assad Cabinet: Is This ‘The Price’ Clinton Warned Of?
By Finian Cunningham
Global Research, July 18, 2012
The deadly bomb attack on the top-level meeting of President Bashar Al-Assad’s senior cabinet ministers leaves little doubt that Western intelligence was involved.
Among the victims were defence minister Daoud Rajiha and his deputy and the president’s brother-in-law Assef Shaukat who were killed when a suicide bomber reportedly set off a powerful explosive device as the cabinet meeting got underway at the security headquarters in Damascus, Wednesday, around mid-day local time.
A third fatality was Hassan Turkomani, the country’s deputy vice president and Assad’s chief of crisis management.
The wounded included Hisham Ikhtiar, director of the National Security Bureau, and interior minister Mohammad Ibrahim al-Shaar.
This was the deadliest attack yet on the inner circle of President Assad. It is not clear if he was due to attend the meeting.
While two groups claimed responsibility – the Syrian Free Army and a little-known jihadi organisation calling itself the Lord of the Martyrs Brigade – the weight of evidence points to crucial Western military support in executing the strike.
Over the past 16 months, the armed opposition groups in Syria have been transformed from disorganised gangs engaged in hit-and-run skirmishes with the Syrian state forces to what is now a formidable insurrection capable of mounting bomb and mortar in the capital, Damascus.
During March and early April, up until the Kofi Annan peace plan was announced in mid-April, the Syrian government forces had made significant gains in routing the armed groups from strongholds in Homs and other northern towns. Since the Annan initiative was attempted, however, there has been a sea-change in military capability among the so-called rebels groups.
These groups never even pretended to implement the Annan six-point plan and were given strident support by American, British and French leaders in their rejection of any political process to find a peace settlement. Western governments have resolutely demanded that Assad step down as a prerequisite for any political transition, thus giving a green light to further violence.
The surge in opposition violence – which does not have any internal popular base among Syrians – can be traced to the Western-backed so-called Friends of Syria meeting in Istanbul on 1 April, which pledged $100 million in funding for the armed opposition groups.
The latest deadly attack at the heart of the Syrian government points to high-level intelligence and
coordination. This dramatic rise in military capability by the armed groups is a culmination of steadily increasing involvement of Western and Turkish Special Forces since conflict erupted on 15 March 2011, and the flow of weapons into Syria from Turkey funded by the Western-allied Persian Gulf Arab sheikhdoms.
Since the beginning of this year, there have been a string of sophisticated, lethal no-warning car bombs in Damascus and Syria’s second city, Aleppo. On 10 May, twin bombs outside the Syrian military intelligence headquarters claimed 55 lives. The involvement of suicide bombers also points to the Saudi and Qatari-backed Sunni extremists of Al Qaeda ilk, operating out of Libya, Iraq and Lebanon. These groups have a long, murky history of liaison with Western intelligence agencies going back to Soviet-era Afghanistan and more recently in the NATO toppling of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.
In the aftermath of the Cabinet meeting explosion, there are reports of fierce gun battles across the capital between Syrian security forces and opposition groups. The sound of grenades, mortars and other explosions were also heard in different quarters of Damascus. There were unconfirmed reports of an explosive attack near parliament buildings and on elite army barracks responsible for guarding the presidential palace.
Last night, the Syrian authorities were claiming that many arrests of armed groups had been made and that order had been restored. The information ministry blamed Arab news channels, Al Jazeera and Al-Arabiya, for exaggerating and distorting the violence.
Nevertheless, it seems clear that the armed groups have gained substantially greater military power and logistics to take their fight for the past three days to the centre of the Syrian government’s administration. The apparent confidence espoused by opposition spokesmen, in what they are calling Operation Damascus Volcano, suggests that these groups have received some kind of external assurance as to their objective of bringing down the Assad government.
The assault on the capital comes as Washington and London step up political pressure this week on Russia and China to back a UN Security Council resolution that would pave the way for a Libya-style NATO military intervention.
Speaking on a visit to Israel only two days ago, US secretary of state Hillary Clinton declared that the government of Bashar Assad “cannot survive”. Clinton said: “We are going to continue to press forward in the Security Council. We are going to continue to press the Russians. I believe – I cannot give a timescale on it – that this [Syrian] regime cannot survive.”
Earlier, Clinton had provoked international consternation when she issued a grim warning to Russia and China that they would be made to “pay a price” for not backing Western efforts to put tougher sanctions on Damascus – an ally of Moscow of Beijing.
Russia’s foreign minister Sergei Lavrov decried the use of such threatening language and said that the Western powers were trying to blackmail Moscow into adopting their adversarial position towards Syria.
Following the killing of Syria’s Cabinet members, Britain’s foreign secretary William Hague reacted immediately to renew the pressure on Russia and China to accept the Western sponsored resolution. He said: “All such events increase the arguments for a strong and decisive resolution from the United Nations. I think it is clear that situation is deteriorating rapidly.” Somewhat knowingly, Hague added that Syria was threatened with “chaos and collapse”.
Since May 24, several massacres in villages across Syria by Western-backed mercenaries have so far failed to dislodge Russia and China’s support for Damascus. Is the latest atrocity against Assad’s Cabinet and members of his own family “the price” that Hillary Clinton warned of?
Finian Cunningham is Globalresearch’s Middle East and East Africa Correspondent 
Syrian conflict exposes America’s "Axis of Evil"
By Finian Cunningham
Global Research, July 11, 2012
Press TV
The people of the world should be very thankful to Syria. For in this agonizing time, the conflict-torn country is revealing an important truth. From the bloodshed, ravages and mayhem that the Syrian people are enduring, the world is empowered to see with crystal clarity a crucial fact - the fact of who, and what, is the real cause of violence.
And this real cause of violence is not just afflicting Syria, but right across the globe.
Forget about oft-repeated Western admonishments against Islamic extremists, rogue states, corrupt regimes, authoritarian superpowers as being “the enemy” of freedom-loving people. It is the American government and its allies who are the real “axis of evil” confronting the world.
It is the system of capitalist corruption, elite exploitation and enrichment, and its corollary of imperialist warmongering that the US and its allies uphold - that is what is driving Syria and the rest of the world into poverty, conflict and the brink of catastrophe.
Ironically, it was 10 years ago when then President George W Bush coined, or rather his speechwriter coined, the phrase “axis of evil”. During his 2002 State of the Union address to the American nation, Bush warned against three countries that “aggressively pursue weapons of mass destruction” that “export terrorism” and are ruled by “an unelected few”. He named Iraq, Iran and North Korea as the “axis of evil”.
Later, the Bush administration would expand the “forces of evil” bearing down on the world to include Cuba, Libya and Syria.
Of course, being an arrogant superpower intoxicated by its own vanity, the American president offered no evidence to support such outrageous slander - a slander that is still a plank of US foreign policy because it has never been officially retracted.
If the Western corporate controlled media was truly independent, as it claims, instead of being a servile mouthpiece for elite power, then it could have provided some historical corrective to the preposterous axis of evil slur. The media might have noted that Iraqi ruler Saddam Hussein had actually been installed by the US after a murderous CIA coup against Abdul Karim Qassim. When Bush Jnr made his infamous speech, the people of Iraq had been subjected to a devastating war inflicted by his father, Bush Snr in 1991; and they had borne 10 years of crippling US-instigated economic sanctions that claimed the lives of over one million Iraqi children, which former US secretary of state Madeleine Albright once described as “a price worth paying” in the bid to oust the former American client.
Turning to Iran, the presumed Western organs of truth could have informed the public that Iran’s government had attained political and economic independence from American tyranny in 1979 after the people of Iran threw out the Washington-backed dictator, Mohammed Reza Shah Pahlavi. The Shah, along with his brutal SAVAK secret police, was installed by the US in 1953 as an absolute monarch after the CIA and British MI6 overthrow the
democratically elected government of Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh because the latter dared to harness Persian oil wealth for the benefit of the people rather than the pockets of Western capitalists.
As for North Korea and its reclusive communist regime, whatever its internal problems, the Western media could have put Bush’s axis of evil label into perspective by pointing out that the Asian country has not waged war on any neighbour and has no substantiated links to international terrorism. Indeed, North Korea’s obscurity and underdevelopment can in large measure be attributed to America’s war of aggression on the Korean Peninsula during the early 1950s in which the people of northern Korea were forced to live in caves to escape from the carpet-bombing inferno that the US unleashed. Officially, the people of North Korea still live under the threat of annihilation by the US because Washington never signed an armistice in mid-1953 when hostilities ended.
The supine Western media would never acknowledge the obvious: that the real reason for Washington creating an “axis of evil” was to bolster its fraudulent narrative of the newly minted “war on terror”. The ruling class of the US and its allies need some kind of external enemy in order to justify their militarism and foreign aggression. For over four decades, the convenient enemy was the “evil Soviet empire”. That allowed the US and its allies to invade and subjugate countries all around the world in the name of “fighting communism” and “defending the free world” when the real, hidden agenda was gaining control of natural resources for Western corporations. From 1945 to the 1990s, the US and its European allies conducted overt and covert military interventions in more than 50 countries around the world, from Latin America to the Caribbean, from Africa to the Middle East and Asia. That is an average of one military intervention for every year. It is estimated that the death toll from these US-led coups, subversions, proxy wars and all-out wars, such as in Vietnam, amount to well over 10 million people. A Western holocaust in the service of capital.
With the sudden collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990-91, the Western powers needed to come up with a new enemy to justify imperialist business as usual.
This was the beginning of the “war of terror” narrative and variations of that, such as “axis of evil” and “weapons of mass destruction”. Rather than a peace dividend manifesting from the ending of the Cold War with the Soviet Union, the American national security doctrine that dominates Western governance was permitted to continue because the US and its allies now had a “new enemy”. Trillion-dollar military budgets would therefore continue to be sustained at the expense of social development, and, crucially, military interference in the affairs of sovereign nations would again be invoked in the name of “defending the free world”. The US spends more on military than all nations of the world combined even as its own society goes into social meltdown from poverty.
What the official nomination of the axis of evil did not disclose was that the designated culprits had certain other more important attributes. They are, or were in the case of Libya, independent of Western foreign policy, and, in particular, trenchantly critical of US and European support for the decades-long criminal aggression of Israel towards Palestinian people and other Middle Eastern states. Moreover, Iraq, Iran and Libya possess some of the world’s largest known reserves of oil and gas.
The “axis of evil” epithet was therefore not only a way of maintaining the otherwise obsolete national security doctrine of the US and its allies, it also served to isolate, demonise and target the said countries for “regime change” - that is change to regimes that are pliable to the economic and political dictates of Washington and global capital.
Of the original six members of the axis of evil, as designated by the Bush administration, Cuba and North Korea are effectively quarantined by Western-imposed embargoes, isolated from balanced international relations and development. Of the other four, Iraq and Libya have been invaded by US-led forces, destroyed and realigned to serve Western interests. The remaining two are Syria and Iran, both of which are being assailed by economic sanctions and Western covert aggression.
This week, Russia, China and Iran reiterated the reasonable proposition that the people of Syria must be allowed to determine their political future without foreign interference. Even Kofi Annan, the Arab League special envoy, who has in the past been keenly accommodating to Western governments, appears to have backed this proposition. Indeed, during his visit to Tehran this week, Annan agreed with Iran’s foreign minister Ali Akhbar Salehi that Western interference in Syrian affairs and supply of weapons must stop.
What is the position of the US and its allies? Rejecting any internal Syrian solution, Washington, London, Paris and their allies Turkey and the Persian Gulf Arab monarchies have vowed to increase financial and material support for the armed groups that are waging a campaign of terrorist subversion over the past 16 months. The US-led axis insists that Syrian President Bashar Al Assad must go immediately at their say-so. Speaking like a Mafia moll, US secretary of state Hillary Clinton said that Russia and China will be made to “pay a price” for their (reasonable) position. Clinton then made the sinister warning that Assad’s “days are numbered” and that if a political transition does not occur on American terms then the Syrian people face “a catastrophic assault that would be very dangerous not only to Syria, but to the region”.
That is the mindset and language of a fascist rogue state.
What is happening in Syria is a heart-rending tragedy. But one positive thing to emerge from the suffering is the glaring truth for the world to see on who exactly constitutes the “axis of evil”. An American president’s words are coming back to haunt in a way that he never imagined. For what the world is witnessing in Syria is the American axis of evil. This truth is obliging us to look back at past decades and to recognise the ultimate source of violence, conflict and wars down through modern history. This truth is compelling us to look at the present with eyes opened as to why poverty, social decay and misery sit alongside unaccountable elite wealth, power and warmongering. The axis of US-led powers that serve a global elite are ransacking their own societies and any other that stands in their way of dominance. And this truth can set us free.
Syrian Rebels Ransack Christian Churches
NATO-backed thugs desecrate places of worship
Paul Joseph Watson
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Shocking images have emerged which show the aftermath of Christian churches ransacked by NATO-backed Syrian rebels, illustrating once again how western powers are supporting Muslim extremists in their bid to achieve regime change in the middle east.
A photograph provided to us by a Christian woman in Homs, scene of some of the bloodiest clashes of the conflict, shows a member of the Free Syrian Army posing with a looted Catholic cross in one hand and a gun in the other while wearing a priest’s robe.
“Everyone knows simply removing these garments from the church is a sin. The priest is the only one who wears them too. They even pray before putting them on. Him posing in front of the funeral car as well is disgusting to the max,” our source told us.
“They destroyed the church and went in to film it. I know this for a fact. My parents got married in that church, the priest of the church knows my dad well. They left since they were trapped in there by the FSA before.”
“The Robes can only be worn by Deacons or Priests or Sub-Deacons, and they a Christian man wouldn’t hold a Cross in one hand and a gun in another,” the woman adds
Another image shows a ransacked church in Bustan al-Diwan (Old Homs).
While Syrian rebels busy themselves ransacking Christian churches, they also rallying around the Al-Qaeda flag just as their counterparts did in Libya.
This video shows Syrian “activists” flying the Al-Qaeda flag during an anti-Assad protest in the northern Syrian town of Binnish.
In another clip, armed Syrian rebels address the camera standing behind a table draped with the black Al-Qaeda flag.
Last month we highlighted a photo published by French news agency AFP shows a Syrian rebel wearing the Al-Qaeda flag on his arm accompanying UN observers in the village of Azzara.
Why are western governments who are supposed to be engaged in a ‘war on terror’ against radical Muslim terrorists handing those very same terrorists control over entire countries?
A third image sent by our source shows another place of worship, Church Um Al Zinar, with part of its roof missing thanks to Syrian rebels who have been portrayed by the international media as saints despite their involvement in terrorist bombings and massacres.
The latest terror attack carried out by rebels occurred earlier today when gunmen stormed a pro-government TV station, bombing buildings and shooting dead three employees.
The sight of NATO-backed rebels desecrating Christian places of worship is becoming a recurring theme.
Back in March we reported on shocking video footage which showed Libyan rebels desecrating Christian and Jewish graves at a cemetery.
The clip shows Libyan rebels breaking apart headstones while shouting “Allahu Akbar”. The men later try to smash up a large Christian cross statue with sledgehammers.
Watch the clip below.
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show and Infowars Nightly News.
The UN’s Dead End In Syria
How comforting it must be for the Syrian people to know that all they have going for them today in Syria is the discredited Kofi Annan peace plan and the United Nations
Joseph A. Klein
Thursday, June 21, 2012
The United Nations Security Council met in a closed session on June 19th regarding the ongoing Syrian crisis. It heard from Maj. General Robert Mood, the commander of the three hundred unarmed UN observers who are supposed to monitor the situation in Syria but have been stymied. Herve Ladsous, the Under Secretary General for Peacekeeping Operations, also addressed the Security Council members.
Both men briefed the press following the Security Council meeting. To nobody’s surprise, they expressed frustration with the continuing level of violence in Syria, which had caused Maj. General Mood to suspend the patrols of his monitors last week. The monitors remain in limbo, staying put in their current positions. Their current mandate is due to expire on July 20th. Whether the Security Council will decide to renew it is anyone’s guess. Russia and China want to maintain its toothless status. France appears to be leading the charge to upgrade the mission somehow. In fact, on his way into the Security Council chamber, French UN Ambassador Gerard Araud indicated the possibility of moving towards a UN Charter Chapter 7 Security Council enforcement mandate. Considering the obstructionist stance taken to date by Russia and China against dealing firmly with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, France’s idea is unlikely to go anywhere.
Meanwhile, Under Secretary General Ladsou continued to hold on to the fantasy that the six-point “peace plan” put together by former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan would actually work. Chinese UN Ambassador Li Baodong, June’s President of the Security Council, also urged all parties to implement the plan “in its entirety.”
All that Kofi Annan’s efforts to mediate the conflictwith his plan has accomplished was to give President al-Assad, who has verbally supported the peace plan, more time to crush his opposition. More than 3000 Syrians are said to have lost their lives since mid-April when Annan’s plan was supposed to take effect. It is literally at a dead end.
Maj. General Mood in particular did not put all of the blame for the continuing violence on the Assad regime. Indeed, in saying that one of the factors that would influence his decision to lift the suspension of the observers’ monitoring activities would be the commitment by both sides to the conflict to commit to allowing complete freedom of movement of the observers, he went out of his way to praise the Syrian government for its positive response. He added that the opposition had not yet responded.
Syria’s UN Ambassador Bashar Ja’afari, who also spoke to the press, singled out Maj. General Mood for praise in presenting what Assad’s UN mouthpiece called a “balanced approach.” He accused unnamed Western countries of wanting the Kofi Annan plan to fail so that they can accomplish their objective of regime change.
Ambassador Ja’afari ridiculed the notion that the Syrian government crackdown on the opposition was to blame for the violence. He repeatedly referred to a “Third Force” consisting of outsider armed terrorists, backed by countries such as Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and Turkey. “Syria is committed to protecting the rights of 23 million civilians,” he claimed.
I asked Ambassador Ja’afari to address reports of Russian arms flowing to Syria’s military, including helicopter gunships. Without missing a beat, Ambassador Ja’afari said that it was Syria’s right as an independent sovereign state to purchase whatever weapons they wanted from whomever they wanted. Needless to say, he did not deny that Russia was supplying the Assad regime with weaponry.
Russia’s role in continuing to prop up the Assad regime does not appear to faze President Obama, by the way. During a press conference in Mexico following the conclusion of the G-20 Summit, Obama said the following about the Russians and Chinese, after acknowledging that they were not on the same page as the United States with regard to Syria:
“I wouldn’t suggest that at this point the United States and the rest of the international community are aligned with Russia and China in their positions, but I do think they recognize the grave dangers of all-out civil war. I do not think they condone the massacres that we’ve witnessed. And I think they believe that everybody would be better served if Syria had a mechanism for ceasing the violence and creating a legitimate government.”
Really? Does President Obama think the Assad regime separates out the arms it receives from Russia - whose state-controlled arms dealer is the biggest arms supplier to Syria’s government - and uses only non-Russian arms to carry out its massacres? To make matters even worse, Obama will not use Russia’s hopes to join the World Trade Organization as leverage to get Moscow to end its support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, particularly its flow of arms.
Finally, against all evidence, President Obama is still relying on the United Nations and the Kofi Annan “peace plan” as the solution:
“’s important for the world community to work with the United Nations and Kofi Annan on what a political transition would look like. And my hope is, is that we can have those conversations in the coming week or two and that we can present to the world, but most importantly, to the Syrian people, a pathway whereby this conflict can be resolved.”
Maybe President Obama should have a conversation with the survivors of the 1994 Rwandan massacre. Kofi Annan directed UN Peacekeeping Operations when the Rwandan genocide took place and, according to Canadian ex-General Roméo Dallaire, who was force commander of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda at the time, Annan held back UN troops from intervening to settle the conflict, and from providing more logistical and material support.
How comforting it must be for the Syrian people to know that all they have going for them today in Syria is the discredited Kofi Annan peace plan and the United Nations.
Joseph A. Klein is the author of Global Deception: The UN’s Stealth Assault on America’s Freedom. Joseph can be reached at:
Syria Strategy looks like Bloody Repeat
by Scott Taylor
Global Research, June 18, 2012
Chronicle Herald
Now that a United Nations official has declared the situation in Syria to be a civil war, it is legitimate for the western media to refer to the anti-regime forces as rebels.
Up until this juncture, those Syrians participating in the armed uprising, which began in March, 2011, were categorized as “pro-democracy demonstrators” or simply civilians. In turn, the security forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad have been labelled as monsters, goons, thugs and baby-killers.
Since the outset, the western powers, led by the U.S. and a cheerleading Canada, have declared their objective to be regime change in Syria.
Thus far, Canada’s position has entailed the tightening of sanctions, expulsion of diplomats and Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird screaming, “Assad must go!” at the now-empty Syrian Embassy in Ottawa.
In the black-and-white world of propaganda, this demonization of the Assad regime requires a counter-balance — lionizing the brave rebel forces who dare oppose him.
One problem with that is the fact that after 15 months of violent revolt, there isn’t a single pre-eminent leader emerging to unite the Syrian opposition under a single banner.
Instead, it is becoming clear that the loose coalition of rebel forces is a fractious collection based on tribal-ethnic loyalties and religious divisions. As Assad represents a secular platform, many of his enemies are in fact Islamic fundamentalists.
While that fact should automatically give one pause for thought, thinking is for sissies when the war drums are pounding — and John Baird ain’t no sissy. “Assad must go!”
One would think it would be virtually impossible to portray Islamic fundamentalists in a favourable light, especially after Canada has seen 158 killed and close to 2,000 wounded or injured battling similar fanatics in Afghanistan over the past decade.
Rick Hillier, the former chief of defence staff, referred to such individuals as “scumbags and murderers.” He denounced their tactic of employing improvised explosive devices as “cowardly.”
Now, even as our NATO allies continue to take mounting casualties in Afghanistan, western reporters embedded with Syrian rebel forces are painting the Islamic fundamentalists as heroic freedom fighters.
Last week, a report by David Enders, of the American media outlet McClatchy Newspapers, revealed that the Syrian rebels are using explosively formed penetrators to knock out Assad’s armoured vehicles. It was noted that these same penetrators were the bane of U.S. forces during their occupation of neighbouring Iraq.
Again, this might make one contemplate the possibility that Assad is not beyond reason when he claims to be combating “foreign fighters bent on establishing an Islamic republic.”
After all, this is the same type of enemy the Americans repeatedly claimed to be fighting in Iraq, and it appears they are using the same tactics and weaponry.
That would complicate things though, so it is best to just bellow: “Assad must go!”
Enders also reported that the rebels are now receiving a large influx of ammunition and weapons, presumed to be flowing across the Turkish border. This fact was somewhat contentious, as the rebels wish to continue being portrayed as defenceless underdogs by the western media.
However, as Enders wrote, “the improved supply of weapons to the rebels is clearly evident, both to reporters travelling in rebel-held areas and in the rising death toll among Syrian security forces in clashes with the rebels.”
Now there is word that Russia may supply Assad with helicopter gunships so that his security forces might regain the upper hand.
This has prompted demands from the western powers for the UN to authorize a no-fly zone over Syria, which would allow NATO’s air force to tip the balance in favour of the rebels, as they did in Libya.
That strategy, of course, brings us to look at the ongoing violence and instability in Libya these days, where tribes and militias are still battling for control in the post-Gadhafi power vacuum.
One other suggestion put forward was to furnish the Syrian rebels with sophisticated ground-to-air missiles so they could defeat the Russian helicopters in the same way the Afghan mujahedeen defeated the Soviets in the 1980s.
Yeah. That couldn’t possibly backfire on us, could it?
Scott Taylor is editor of Esprit de Corps.
Scott Taylor is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
Sectarian Genocide in Syria: US-NATO and the GCC Preparing a Coup d’état
NATO preparing vast disinformation campaign
by Thierry Meyssan
Global Research, June 11, 2012
If you want to prevent these crimes, you should act now: circulate this article on the Internet and alert your elected officials.
In a few days, perhaps as early as Friday, June 15, at noon, Syrians wanting to watch their national TV stations will see them replaced on their screens by TV programs created by the CIA. Studio-shot images will show massacres that are blamed on the Syrian Government, people demonstrating, ministers and generals resigning from their posts, President Al-Assad fleeing, the rebels gathering in the big city centers, and a new government installing itself in the presidential palace.
This operation of disinformation, directly managed from Washington by Ben Rhodes, the US deputy national security adviser for strategic communication, aims at demoralizing the Syrians in order to pave the way for a coup d’etat. NATO, discontent about the double veto of Russia and China, will thus succeed in conquering Syria without attacking the country illegally. Whichever judgment you might have formed on the actual events in Syria, a coup d’etat will end all hopes of democratization.
The Arab League has officially asked the satellite operators Arabsat and Nilesat to stop broadcasting Syrian media, either public or private (Syria TV, Al-Ekbariya, Ad-Dounia, Cham TV, etc.) A precedent already exists because the Arab League had managed to censure Libyan TV in order to keep the leaders of the Jamahiriya from communicating with their people. There is no Hertz network in Syria, where TV works exclusively with satellites. The cut, however, will not leave the screens black.
Actually, this public decision is only the tip of the iceberg. According to our information several international meetings were organized during the past week to coordinate the disinformation campaign. The first two were technical meetings, held in Doha (Qatar); the third was a political meeting and took place in Riyad (Saudi Arabia).
The first meeting assembled PSYOP officers, embedded in the satellite TV channels of Al-Arabiya, Al-Jazeera, BBC, CNN, Fox, France 24, Future TV and MTV. It is known that since 1998, the officers of the US Army Psychological Operations Unit (PSYOP) have been incorporated in CNN. Since then this practice has been extended by NATO to other strategic media as well.
They fabricated false information in advance, on the basis of a “story-telling” script devised by Ben Rhodes’s team at the White House. A procedure of reciprocal validation was installed, with each media quoting the lies of the other media to render them plausible for TV spectators. The participants also decided not only to requisition the TV channels of the CIA for Syria and Lebanon (Barada, Future TV, MTV, Orient News, Syria Chaab, Syria Alghad) but also about 40 religious Wahhabi TV channels to call for confessional massacres to the cry of “Christians to Beyrouth, Alawites into the grave!.” The second meeting was held for engineers and technicians to fabricate fictitious images, mixing one part in an outdoor studio, the other part with computer generated images. During the past weeks, studios in Saudi Arabia have been set up to build replicas of the two presidential palaces in Syria and the main squares of Damascus, Aleppo and Homs. Studios of this type already exist in Doha (Qatar), but they are not sufficient. The third meeting was held by General James B. Smith, the US ambassador, a representative of the UK, prince Bandar Bin Sultan (whom former U.S. president George Bush named his adopted son so that the U.S. press called him “Bandar Bush”). In this meeting the media actions were coordinated with those of the Free "Syrian" Army, in which prince Bandar’s mercenaries play a decisive role.
The operation had been in the making for several months, but the U.S. National Security Council decided to accelerate the action after the Russian President, Vladimir Putin, notified the White House that he would oppose by all means, even by force, any illegal NATO military intervention in Syria.
The operation has a double intent: the first is to spread false information, the second aims at censuring all possible responses.
The hampering of TV satellites for military purposes is not new. Under pressure from Israel, the USA and the EU blocked Lebanese, Palestinian, Iraqi, Libyan and Iranian TV channels, one after the other. However, no satellite channels from other parts of the world were censured.
The broadcast of false news is also not new, but four significant steps have been taken in the art of propaganda during the last decade. • In 1994, a pop music station named “Free Radio of the Thousand Hills” (RTML) gave the signal for genocide in Rwanda with the cry, “Kill the cockroaches!” • In 2001, NATO used the media to impose an interpretation of the 9/11 attacks and to justify its own aggression against Afghanistan and Iraq. At that time already, it was Ben Rhodes who had been commissioned by the Bush administration to concoct the Kean/Hamilton Commission report on the attacks. • In 2002, the CIA used five TV channels (Televen, Globovision, ValeTV and CMT) to make the public in Venezuela believe that phantom demonstrators had captured the elected president, Hugo Chávez, forcing him to resign. In reality he was the victim of a military coup d’etat. • In 2011, France 24 served as information ministry for the Libyan CNT, according to a signed contract. During the battle of Tripoli, NATO produced fake studio films, then transmitted them via Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya, showing phantom images of Libyan rebels on the central square of the capital city, while in reality they were still far away. As a consequence, the inhabitants of Tripoli were persuaded that the war was lost and gave up all resistance.
Nowadays the media do not only support a war, they produce it themselves.
This procedure violates the principles of International Law, first of all Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights relating to the fact of receiving and imparting information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” Above all, the procedure violates the United Nations General Assembly resolution, adopted after the end of World War II, to prevent further wars. Resolutions 110, 381 and 819 forbid “to set obstacles to free exchange of information and ideas” (like cutting off Syrian TV channels) and “all propaganda provoking or encouraging threats to peace, breaking peace, and all acts of aggression”. By law, war propaganda is a crime against peace, the worst of crimes, because it facilitates war crimes and genocide. Translated from French by Olivia Kroth.
Thierry Meyssan is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

The Houla Massacre: The Disinformation Campaign
Global Research, June 13, 2012
In the wake of the Houla massacre and the flow of disinformation aimed at blaming the Syrian government for the atrocities, Global Research brings to the attention of its readers a selection of key articles, which demonstrate unequivocally that the massacre was commited by the US-NATO supported Free Syrian Army (FSA).
Prof. Chandra Muzaffar, SYRIA: The Houla Massacre and the Subversion of the Peace Plan
There is no credible, independent entity that can help reveal the entire truth about the Houla massacre. The United Nations Human Rights Council which has passed a resolution condemning the massacre hastily targeted the Syrian government as the culprit without waiting for reports from the UN-Arab League Observer Mission in Syria. This is one of the reasons why China, Cuba and Russia voted against the resolution. The Council has since the outbreak of the conflict in Syria 14 months ago adopted an antagonistic attitude towards the government. In all its submissions to the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly, it has ignored or downplayed the views of the Syrian government.
According to Ronda Hauben in an article entitled The United Nations and the Houla Massacre: The Information Battlefield:
The narrative that is being spread by much of the mainstream western and Arab satellite media is a narrative that blames the Assad government for the Houla massacre. At first that media claimed that the people killed, including the women and children, had been killed by shelling from Syrian troops attacking the town.
In examining the videos and photos put online or provided by the opposition making these claims, however, it became evident that many of the victims, particularly the women and children, had been killed at close range by bullets and knives and not by the shelling of heavy weapons by the Syrian military.
Prof. Michel Chossudovsky "Humanitarian War Criminals" in High Office: Was the Houla Massacre Ordered by the Western Military Alliance?:
Several authoritative reports, including a recent report of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, confirm unequivocally that "opposition" FSA terrorists were behind these atrocities. (Neue Erkenntnisse zu Getöteten von Hula: Abermals Massaker in Syrien - Politik - FAZ, June 8, 2012) […] The FAZ report largely corroborates the report by Russian journalist Marat Musin, which includes detailed testimonies […]
These two reports dispel the lies and fabrications of the Western media. Entire pro-government families in Houla were massacred. The terrorists were mercenaries and professional killers operating under the auspices of the self-proclaimed Free Syrian Army (FSA).
An earlier report published in Der Spiegel (March 2012) suggests that the FSA is involved in a routine and organized process of mass-murder. The article focusses on extra-judicial killings in Homs conducted under the mandate of so-called "burial brigades".
The United Nations and the Houla Massacre: The Information Battlefield
by Ronda Hauben
Global Research, June 12, 2012
At a press conference held on June 4 marking the beginning of China’s presidency of the UN Security Council for the month of June, Li Baodong, China’s Ambassador to the UN, observed that there are different versions of the facts of the Houla Massacre. “Now we have different stories from different angles,” he noted. “Now we have the story from the Syrian government, and from the opposition parties, and from different sources.”
Since the Security Council has “ a team….on the ground,” he said, “We want to see first-hand information from our own people.” He hoped this would make it possible to put the different pieces of information together and to come “to our own conclusion with our own judgment.”(1)
The expectation was that Joint UN-Arab League Envoy Kofi Annan would be able to provide further information from the UNSMIS Observer mission when he came to speak with the Security Council on Thursday, June 7. It was anticipated that Annan’s presentation would help to clarify the facts of the massacre. (2)
On June 7, however, instead of providing new information from such an investigation, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and several of the other speakers at the Informal General Assembly (GA) meeting put the responsibility for the Houla Massacre on the Assad government. This was also the dominant response of the nations that spoke at the Informal GA meeting even though there had not yet been any adequate investigation into facts of the situation. (3) Also, there were claims of a new massacre.
Some of the member nations that spoke at the Informal GA meeting, however, objected to coming to such a conclusion, especially, in the absence of an adequate investigation.
In his comments referring to the massacres in Houla and on the outskirts of Hama, the Russian Ambassador to the UN, Vitaly Churkin, said, “Clearly these are the most serious crimes that require a reliable detailed investigation.”
Other nations including Venezuela, India, Cuba and Nicaragua expressed similar views. The Venezuelan Representative told the Informal GA meeting, “We suspect the fact that these criminal acts happen to coincide with these debates at the UN. We have to wonder to whom does this benefit at this time?” He urged that, “an independent and transparent investigation into these massacres must take place and we must find convincing clarity.”
India’s Ambassador to the UN, Hardeep Singh Puri, noted that the attacks against civilians and security forces in Syria “have intensified over the last few weeks and have taken a significant toll.” Also he drew attention to the sharp increase in the number of terrorist attacks in different parts of the country.” He “condemned all violence, irrespective of who the perpetrators are,” and called for the “cessation of all outside support for armed groups and serious action against the terrorist groups in Syria.” And he asked that the crimes, “including the recent incident in El Houleh, are fully investigated and their perpetrators brought to justice.”
After comparing what has happened in Syria with what had happened in Libya, the Nicaraguan Representative called for “an exhaustive investigation of these crimes and to bring the guilty to justice.”

The Cuban Ambassador noted that the “information is fragmented, imprecise and the object of frequent manipulation.” He denounced what he saw as the “complicity of the major broadcast media which are used to confusing reality and not accepting the responsibility for their acts.”
During his comments, which were twice cut off by the UN video transmission system, Ambassador Bashir Ja’afari, the Syrian Ambassador, asked how the Secretary General of the League of Arab States could render a judgment about who is responsible for the Houla massacre when such a judgment contradicts the report of the United Nations observers on the ground, and investigations of that atrocious massacre have not yet been completed. The massacre, he emphasized, had been condemned by the Syrian government. Ambassador Ja’afari announced that, “Syria is ready to receive a commission of inquiry of states known for their independence and for their respect for the UN charter and for their refusal to interfere in Syrian internal affairs.”
Later in the afternoon, after the Security Council’s informal briefing with Kofi Annan, there was a media stakeout at the Security Council. One journalist asked Ban Ki moon, “Mr. Secretary General, what steps have you taken to comply with the request of the Security Council on 27th of May through the press statement to investigate fully, independently and transparently the killing in El Houleh?” The UN Secretary General did not answer the question. (4)
It is notable that as Ambassador Li Baodong had recognized during his press conference on June 4, several different narratives have been used to describe the Houla massacre. These offer different explanations of the circumstances under which it happened and therefore what the implications are for the future of the Kofi Annan 6 point peace plan.
Those nations encouraging an investigation into the details of the Houla massacre want to determine the lessons from it toward solving the crisis in Syria. Those who were quick to jump to conclusions based on superficial information are helping to fan the flames of the conflict.
What are these major competing narratives?
Western and Arab Media Narrative
The narrative that is being spread by much of the mainstream western and Arab satellite media is a narrative that blames the Assad government for the Houla massacre. At first that media claimed that the people killed, including the women and children, had been killed by shelling from Syrian troops attacking the town.
In examining the videos and photos put online or provided by the opposition making these claims, however, it became evident that many of the victims, particularly the women and children, had been killed at close range by bullets and knives and not by the shelling of heavy weapons by the Syrian military.
It soon became obvious that only 20 of the 108 who were killed may have been killed in combat fighting over the checkpoint and that the circumstances of these deaths were not yet determined.
The opposition and the western and Arab media supporting the opposition, like BBC and Aljazeera, etc. had to quickly change their narrative. They invented a new force allegedly used by the Syrian government, the shabbiya, which they claimed is a pro government militia. (5) The shabbiya allegedly came into the homes of people and killed them at close range.
Russian News Team Narrative
A Russian news team interviewed people after the massacre. The explanation compiled from these interviews represents a very different narrative.
Their account noted that Houla is an administrative area, made up of three villages. It is not the name of a town. Some of this area had been under control of armed insurgents for a number of weeks. The Syrian army maintained certain checkpoints. This account explains that on the evening of May 24, the Free Syrian Army launched an operation to take control of the checkpoints, bringing 600-800 armed insurgents from different areas.
At the same time that there was the fight over the checkpoints, several armed insurgents went into certain homes and massacred the members of several families. Among the families targeted was a family related to a recently elected People’s Assembly representative. This family and another family that were killed were said to be families that supported the Syrian government. “Other victims included the family of two journalists for Top News and New Orient Express, press agencies associated with Voltaire Network,” reports the news and analysis site Voltairenet.(6)
Template for Media Warfare
At a press conference held in Damascus shortly after the Houla massacre by Joint UN-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan, a question was asked which provides an important context to keep in mind when trying to determine what happened in Houla.
The journalist asked: I am a Russian living in Syria and reporting for various Russian online sites. What is happening in Syria reminds me of what happened in Yugoslavia that led to its division. We have sources that tell us that the Pentagon is preparing for war. If that happens, what do we do? What do Syrians do and what does the Government do? (7)
Annan’s response was that he had no information of the Pentagon “preparing for war.” Nor did he have any indication that what was happening in Syria would be a repeat of “what happened in Yugoslavia.” Despite the fact that Annan dismissed the journalist’s question, the question provides an important perspective toward understanding what is happening in Syria.
Looking back at the form of media warfare used to prepare public opinion for the NATO aggression against the former Yugoslavia, a template emerges that reflects a pattern in these events.
In this media warfare, the mainstream western media was used to spread stories about the alleged “responsibility for” massacres in order to demonize certain forces. This demonization served to justify the NATO bombing of their country. Hence the Russian journalist’s question to Kofi Annan raised an important and serious concern.
In his book “Liar’s Poker”, which analyzes the role of the media in the Yugoslav war, Michel Collon writes “Information is already a battlefield, which is part of war.” He writes that in 1991 the Slovenian government created a “media center which unleashed a flood of disinformation to international correspondents.” (8) This disinformation created a false narrative about what was happening and about who was responsible for the violent acts that killed many innocent people. The false narrative was then used to provide the justification for foreign intervention on one side of the conflict.
Also Collon documents the use of US public relations agencies to help mold public opinion in favor of the Croatian and Muslim nationalists and as media warfare against the Serbs. In a striking way, Collon shows how “a massacre happens unexpectedly each time certain Western powers plan to escalate measures against the Serbs.”(9) He proposes what could be considered as the template used to create the climate of public opinion justifying the escalation of the attack on Yugoslavia.
Here are the components of the template he presents(10):
Step 1: Preparation of a more or less hidden agenda
Step 2: Images that shock Public Opinion
Step 3: Groundless and Wild Media Accusations Without Investigation
Step 4: Western Objectives are Achieved
Step 5: Corrections to Erroneous News Reporting: Too Late and No Impact
Collon argues that shocking events were “staged” for the international media so as to make possible a planned escalation of the attack on Serbia. The Houla massacre bears a striking resemblance to the incidents that Collon refers to in the 1990s that set a basis for the escalation of the aggression against the Serbian government.
Is this current rush to judgment, both at the UN, and in the mainstream western and Arab media but another example of support and encouragement for armed aggression against a sovereign nation, as in the Yugoslavian situation? Is it but a signal to the armed insurgents willing to carry out horrific deeds to achieve their goal of foreign intervention, that they should go ahead with their cruel agenda? These are questions that need to be asked as they may help to explain the underlying motives of one of the narratives.
The failure of mainstream western and Arab satellite media and of a number of nations at the UN to acknowledge that there are different views of the underlying cause and implementation of the Houla massacre impedes the urgency with which the needed investigation and analysis are to be organized.(11) Such an investigation is critical to identify the actual problems and to understand what is needed to solve them.
It is important to acknowledge that there are two major narratives about the events of the Houla massacre. Such an acknowledgment recognizes, as Ambassador Li Baodong did, the need for evidence to determine what is an accurate narrative of the Houla Massacre. There are a number of blogs and news sites on the Internet where netizens contribute articles and comments that are helpful toward analyzing what is happening in Syria and at the UN and whether the actions at the UN are helpful or harmful for resolving the crisis in a way that is in line with the principles of the UN charter. There are examples of a substantial new netizen journalism developing on the Internet which is taking up the needed work to investigate the facts of the Syrian conflict so as to understand what is needed to contribute to a peaceful resolution.(12)
(2) The press statement issued by the UN Security Council on May 27 called for the Secretary General and UNSMIS “to continue to investigate these attacks and report the findings to the Security Council.”
(4) “Joint press encounter with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Kofi A. Annan, Joint UN-Arab League Special Envoy on Syria and Nabil El-Araby, Secretary General of the League of Arab States.”
(5) See for example the account by AP: “The assault came nearly a week after 108 people, many of them women and children, were killed in the area. Activists said government forces first shelled the area on Friday, then pro-regime fighters known as shabiha stormed the villages. The Syrian government denied its troops were behind the killings and blamed ‘armed terrorists’.”
(6) See for example: Thierry Meyssan, “The Houla Affair Highlights Western Intelligence Gap in Syria”, See also: Wassim Raad, “The Set Up Massacre and the American Fingerprint” In German see for example Mathias Broeckers, “Der Hula-Hoax”
and Rainer Hermann,“Abermals Massaker in Syrien” in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, June 7, 2012. (An English translation FAZ is available at Moon of Alabama blog: )
(7) Transcript of JSE Press Conference in Damascus, 29 May 2012, p. 4. For video see:
(8) Michel Collon, Liar’s Poker, International Action Center, New York, 2002 p. 45. (This is an English translation of the book which was originally published in French.)
(9) Ibid., p. 28.
(10) Ibid., p. 26.
(11) The Human Rights Council has passed a resolution calling for an investigation into the Houla Massacre. Several sources, however, document that the Human Rights Council only considers information supplied by activists in support of the armed opposition. See for example “UN Commissions report on Houla? But they only talk to Syrian opposition – by phone”, May 31, 2012 “Anti-war campaigner Marinella Corregia worries the HR commissioner talks only to its sources: the opposition.”
(12) A few of the English language web sites providing news and analysis of the Syrian conflict toward a directed peaceful resolution include: Moon of Alabama Centre for Research on Globalization, Syria News The 4th Media  A version of this article appears on my netizenblog:
Ronda Hauben is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

The Houla Massacre: Opposition Terrorists "Killed Families Loyal to the Government"
Detailed Investigation
By Marat Musin
Global Research, June 1, 2012
Global Research Editor's Note
This incisive report by independent Russian journalist Marat Musin dispels the lies and fabrications of the Western media.
The report is based on a chronology of events as well as eyewitness accounts. Entire pro-government families in Houla were massacred. The terrorists integrated by professional mercenaries were not pro-government militia as conveyed in chorus by the mainstream media, they were in large part mercenaries and professional killers operating under the auspices of the self-proclaimed Free Syrian Army (FSA):
"When the rebels seized the lower checkpoint in the center of town and located next to the local police department, they began to sweep all the families loyal to the authorities in neighboring houses, including the elderly, women and children.
Several families of the Al-Sayed were killed, including 20 young children and the family of the Abdul Razak.
The people were killed with knives and shot at point blank range. Then they presented the murdered to the UN and the international community as victims of bombings by the Syrian army, something that was not verified by any marks on their bodies."
We call on our readers to forward this report far and wide. The massacre in Houla is being blamed on the Syrian government without a shred of evidence. The objective is not only to isolate Syria but to develop a pretext and a justification for waging an R2P humanitarian war on Syria.
It is essential to reverse the tide of war propaganda which uses civilian deaths as a pretext to wage war, when those civilians deaths were carried out not by the government but by professional terrorists operating under the helm of the US-NATO supported Free Syrian Army.
- Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, Montreal, June 1, 2012
In the weekend of May 25, 2012, at about 2 PM, big groups of fighters attacked and captured the town of Al – Hula of the Homs province. Al-Hula is made up of three regions: the village of Taldou, Kafr Laha and Taldahab, each of which had previously been home for 25-30 thousand people.
The town was attacked from the north-east by groups of bandits and mercenaries, numbering up to 700 people. The militants came from Ar-Rastan (the Brigade of al-Farouk from the Free Syrian Army led by the terrorist Abdul Razak Tlass and numbering 250), from the village of Akraba (led by the terrorist Yahya Al-Yousef), from the village Farlaha, joined by local gangsters, and from Al Hula.
The city of Ar-Rastan has long been abandoned by most civilians. Now Wahhabis from Lebanon dominate the scene, fueled with money and weapons by one of the main orchestrators of international terrorism, Saad Hariri, who heads the anti-Syrian political movement “Tayyar Al-Mustaqbal” (“Future Movement”). The road from Ar-Rastan to Al-Hula runs through Bedouin areas that remain mostly out of control of government troops, which made the militant attacks on Al Hula a complete surprise for the Syrian authorities.
When the rebels seized the lower checkpoint in the center of town and located next to the local police department, they began to sweep all the families loyal to the authorities in neighboring houses, including the elderly, women and children. Several families of the Al-Sayed were killed, including 20 young children and the family of the Abdul Razak. Many of those killed were “guilty” of the fact that they dared to change from Sunnis to Shiites. The people were killed with knives and shot at point blank range. Then they presented the murdered to the UN and the international community as victims of bombings by the Syrian army, something that was not verified by any marks on their bodies.
The idea that the UN observers had heard artillery fire against Al-Houla in the Safir Hotel in Homs at night I consider nothing short of a bad joke. 50 kilometers lie between Homs and Al-Houla. What kind of tanks or guns has this range? Yes, there was intensive gunfire in Homs until 3 am, including heavy weapons. But, to give an example, on the night of Monday to Tuesday shooting was due to an attempt by law enforcement to regain control for a security corridor along the road to Damascus, Tarik Al-Sham.
After a visual inspection of Al Hula it is impossible to find traces of any of fresh destruction, bombing and shelling. During the day, several attacks by gunmen are made on the last remaining soldiers at the Taldou checkpoint. Militants used heavy weapons and snipers made up of professional mercenaries were active.
Note that once, the exactly same provocation failed at Shumar (Homs) and 49 militants and women and children were killed, when it was organized just before a visit of Kofi Annan. The last provocation was immediately exposed as soon as it became known that the bodies of the previously kidnapped belonged to Alawites. This provocation also contained serious inconsistencies – the names of those killed were from people loyal to the authorities, there were no traces of bombings, etc.
However, the provocation machine is running all the same. Today, the NATO countries directly threat to bomb Syria, and a simultaneous expulsion of Syrian diplomats has begun. As of today, there are no troops within the city of Al Hula, but there are regularly heard bursts of automatic fire, nonetheless. Moreover, it is unclear whether the militants are fighting with each other, or whether supporters of Bashar al-Assad are being cleaned out.
Militants opened fire on virtually everyone who tries to get closer to the border town. Before us a UN convoy was fired upon and two armored jeeps of the UN observers were damaged, when they tried to drive up to an army checkpoint in Tal Dow.
In the attack on the convoy a twenty-year-old terrorist was spotted. The fire was directed on the unprotected slopes of the first jeep, the back door of the second armored car was hooked by a fragment. There are wounded among those accompanying.
According to a wounded soldier:
“The next day, UN observers came to us at the checkpoint and as soon as they arrived, gunmen opened fire on them. And three of us were injured. One was wounded in the leg, the second – in the back, and I was hit in the hip.
When the observers came, they could hear a woman who was standing next to them and cried, the woman stood and pleaded the observers’ help – to protect her from the bandits. When I was wounded, the observers watched as I fell, but none of them tried to help. Our checkpoint no longer exists. There are no civilians any longer in Taldou, only militants remain. Our relationship to the locals was excellent. They are very good to us; they called on the army to enter Taldou. We were attacked by snipers.”
Unfortunately, many of the militants are professional snipers. 100-200 meters from our group TV-crew, militants attacked a BMP that went to replace soldiers at the checkpoint. During this a soldier – draftee got a concussion and slight tangential wound in the head by a sniper bullet. Looking at the pierced Kevlar helmet, it seems he did not even realize that he survived by a miracle.
Snipers kill up to 10 soldiers and policemen at checkpoints each day. It is true, that the daily casualties of law enforcement agencies in Homs were dozens of victims daily. But, unfortunately, at 10 am, six dead soldiers were taken to the morgue. Most were killed by a shot in the head. And the day had just begun
So, these are the names of those were killed by snipers in the early morning hours of May 29:
1. Sergeant Ibrahim Halyuf
2. Sergeant Salman Ibrahim
3. Policeman Mahmoud Danaver
4. Conscript Ali Daher
5. Sergeant Wisam Haidar
6. the dead soldier’s family name could not be clarified
The bandits even fired an automatic burst on our group of journalists, although it was clear that this is a normal filming crew, consisting of unarmed civilians.
How the Attack Began
After Friday prayers at about 2 PM on May, 25th a group from the Al Aksh clan started firing on a checkpoint of law enforcement officers from mortars and rocket-propelled grenades. Returning fire from a BRDM hit the mosque, and this was the very aim to lead to a bigger provocation.
Then, two groups of militants led by the terrorist Nidal Bakkour and Al-Hassan from the Al Hallak clan, supported by a unit of mercenaries, attacked the upper checkpoint on the eastern outskirts of the city. At 15.30 the upper checkpoint was taken, and all the prisoners executed: a Sunni conscript had his throat cut, while Abdullah Shaui (Bedouin) of Deir-Zor was burned alive.
During the attack on the upper checkpoint in the east the armed men lost 25 people, which were then submitted to the UN observers, together with the 108 dead civilians – “victims of the regime”, allegedly killed by bombing and shelling of the Syrian army. As for the remaining 83 bodies, including 38 young children, they were from the families that were executed by militants. These families were all loyal to the government of Syria.
Interviews: with a law enforcement officer:
“My name is Al Khosam, I am a law enforcement officer. I served in the village of Taldou, the district of Al-Hula, a province of Homs. On Friday, our checkpoint was attacked by a large group of militants. There were thousands.
Q: How do you protect yourself?
Answer: A simple weapon. We had 20 people, we called support, and when they were coming for us, I was wounded, and regained consciousness in the hospital. The attackers were from Ar-Rastan and Al-Hula. Insurgents control Taldou. They burned houses and killed people by the families, because they were loyal to the government. Raped the women and killed the children.”
Interview with a wounded soldier:
“I am Ahmed Mahmoud al Khali. I’m from the city Manbej. Was wounded in Taldou. I come from a support group that came to the aid of our comrades, who were stationed at the checkpoint.
Militants destroyed two infantry fighting vehicles and one BRDM standing at our checkpoint. We moved out to Taldou in a BMP, to pick up our wounded comrades from the checkpoint within the city. We drove them back in the BMP, and I filled in their place.
And after a while the UN observers came. They came to us, we led them to the homes of families who were cut by thugs.
I saw a family of three brothers and their father in the same room. In another room we found dead young children and their mother. And another one- an old man killed in this house. Only five men, women and children. The woman raped and shot in the head, I covered her with a blanket. And the commission had seen them all. They put them in the car and drove away. I do not know where they took them, probably for burial.”
A resident of Taldou on the roof of the police department:
“On Friday afternoon I was home. Hearing the shots, I came out to watch what was happening and saw that the fire came from the north side, towards the location of army checkpoint. As the army did not respond, they started to approach the homes, were subsequently the family was killed. When the army started to return fire, they used the women and children as human shields and continued firing at the checkpoint. When the army began answered, they fled. After that, the army took the surviving women and children and brought them into safety. At this time, Al Jazeera aired pictures and said that the Army committed the massacre at Al Hula.
In fact, they killed the civilians and children in Al-Hula. The bandits did not allow anyone to carry out their work. They steal everything that they can get their hands on: wheat, flour, oil and gas. Most of the fighters are from the city of Ar Rastan.”
After they captured the city, they carried the bodies of their dead comrades, as well as the bodies of people and the children they killed to the mosque. They carried the bodies in KIA pickups. On May, 25th, at around 8 PM, the corpses were already in the mosque. The next day at 11 o’clock in the morning the UN observers arrived at the mosque.
Media Disinformation
To exert pressure on public opinion and change the positions of Russia and China, texts and subtitles in Russian and Chinese languages were prepared in advance, reading: “Syria – Homs – the city of Hula. A terrible massacre perpetrated by the armed forces of the Syrian regime against civilians in the town of Hula. Dozens of victims and their number is growing, mainly women and children, brutally killed by indiscriminate bombing of the CITY.”
Two days later, on May 27, after the residents’ stories and video recordings made showed that the facts do not support the allegation of shelling and bombing, the bandits’ videos had undergone significant changes. At the end of the text appeared this postscript: “And some were killed with knives.”
Marat Musin, Olga Kulygina, Al-Hula, Syria
video: Russian
The translation is based on the impressive work of Soldatovich and Elena. Thank you very much for the translation of this text about the recent events near the Syrian city of Homs and in the area of al-Houlah.
Syria: Killing Innocent Civilians as part of a US Covert Op. Mobilizing Public Support for a R2P War against Syria
by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, May 30, 2012
US military doctrine envisages the central role of "massive casualty producing events" in which innocent civilians are killed.
The killings are deliberately carried out as part of a covert operation. The enemy is blamed for the resulting atrocities.
The objective is to justify a military agenda on humanitarian grounds. The doctrine dates back to 1962: Operation Northwoods.
Under a secret 1962 Pentagon Plan entitled Operation Northwoods, civilians in the Cuban community in Miami were to be killed as part of a covert operation. The objective was to trigger a "helpful wave of indignation in US newspapers". The killings and "acts of terrorism" were then to be blamed on the Cuban government of Fidel Castro.
The objective of this sinister plan --which Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara and President J. F. Kennedy-- refused to carry out, was to drum up public support for a war against Cuba:
"In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.
Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.
The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.
America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."
.... The documents show "the Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up and approved plans for what may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government," writes Bamford. (U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba - ABC News emphasis added. This Secret Pentagon document was declassified and can be readily consulted (See Operation Northwoods, See also National Security Archive, 30 April 2001)
The Northwoods 1962 document was titled “Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba". ”The Top Secret memorandum describes U.S. plans to covertly engineer various pretexts that would justify a U.S. invasion of Cuba. These proposals - part of a secret anti-Castro program known as Operation Mongoose - included staging the assassinations of Cubans living in the United States, developing a fake “Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington,” including “sink[ing] a boatload of Cuban refugees (real or simulated),” faking a Cuban airforce attack on a civilian jetliner, and concocting a “Remember the Maine” incident by blowing up a U.S. ship in Cuban waters and then blaming the incident on Cuban sabotage."
Flash Forward, Cuba 1962, Syria 2012...
While the implementation of Operation Northwoods was shelved, its fundamental premise of using civilian deaths (described by the Pentagon as a "massive casuality producing event") as a pretext for intervention (on humanitarian grounds) has been applied on several occasions in the post 9/11 era.
The fundamental question: Were the May 2012 killings of civilians in the city of Houla part of a carefully planned covert operation, with the intent to drum up public support for a war on Syria.
The deaths are blamed on the Al Assad government, with "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers causing a helpful wave of indignation.". Meanwhile, several European countries, Canada and Australia have cut off diplomatic relations with Syria. This decision to isolate Syria was carried similtaneously by several governments. It was taken prior to the conduct of an investigation.
A military intervention by NATO --which is already on the drawing board-- is now being contemplated, following the statement of France's newly elected president Francois Hollande.
An outright war on Syria could potentially evolve towards a broader regional war extending from the Eastern Mediterranean to Central Asia. It is, therefore, crucial that World public opinion take cognizance of the media lies and war propaganda pertaining to the Houla massacre, not to mention the insidious role of the US-NATO sponsored death squads.
Was the Houla massacre part of a sinister covert operation bearing the fingerprints of Operation Northwoods?
There is absolutely no evidence that the Syrian government was behind these killings.
There are indications as well as documentary evidence that, from the outset of the insurgency in the border city of Daraa in mid-March 2011, terrorists supported by foreign powers have been involved in the killings of innocent civilians. Israeli intelligence sources (August 2011) confirm an organized process of recruitment of terrorist fighters by NATO:
NATO headquarters in Brussels and the Turkish high command are meanwhile drawing up plans for their first military step in Syria, which is to arm the rebels with weapons for combating the tanks and helicopters ...
Also discussed in Brussels and Ankara, our sources report, is a campaign to enlist thousands of Muslim volunteers in Middle East countries and the Muslim world to fight alongside the Syrian rebels. The Turkish army would house these volunteers, train them and secure their passage into Syria. (Ibid, emphasis added)
(DEBKAfile, NATO to give rebels anti-tank weapons, August 14, 2011)
Terrorists Portrayed as Opposition: BBC Wages Propaganda War on Syria
by Stephen Lendman
Global Research, May 30, 2012
Millions globally follow BBC reports regularly. Most perhaps don't know they get propaganda, not real news, commentary and opinion.
Since established in October 1922, it's operated as a UK imperial tool. Its first general manager, John Reith, set the tone, saying:
"They (meaning the UK government) know they can trust us not to be really impartial."
Straightaway he betrayed the public trust. Operating as a reliable business and government partner got BBC labeled the "British Falsehood Corporation." Some today call it the "British Bombing (or Bombast) Club."
Reith used BBC as a strikebreaker. He secretly wrote anti-union speeches. He refused air time for worker representatives. He and current officials represent elitist interests, not public ones media outlets are supposed to serve.
Job applicants are vetted to assure pro-government, pro-business credentials. Aberrant ones aren't wanted. Whether on domestic or foreign issues, fair and balanced reporting isn't tolerated.
How can it be when government officials appoint senior managers. Any stepping out of line get fired. Nothing changed from inception to now.
Its claim about "honesty, integrity (being) what the BBC stands for, free from political influence and commercial pressure" is willful, deceptive hype.
UK-based Media Lens offers independent, "authoritative criticism." Its reports reflect "reality." It's free from corporate or government influence.
It covers BBC reporting. It once called it fundamentally one-sided, imbalanced, "biased, blinkered and culpable."
"Anyone can spot the propaganda with a modicum of vigilance while watching the news."
Western interests alone are represented. Viewers and listeners get one side only. They're "clearly expected to identify with NATO." They're "asked to assume there is a moral basis to (its) killing."
Attacking nations Washington and Britain declare "officially-decreed enemies" is supposed to be just and righteous no matter how lawless and indefensible.
BBC does what it's told. It's government funded, operated and controlled. It's Britain's official voice. It pretends to be independent and impartial.
"Propaganda merchants R Us," says Media Lens.
"In each decade, from its inception to the present day, the BBC bears the scars of its entanglements with those in power."
Media Lens quoted BBC news director, Helen Boaden. On June 10, 2011, she spoke the above words. She discussed the "value of journalism speech."
She quoted Groucho Marx once saying:
"The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing....And if you can fake that, you've got it made!"
Journalists are supposed to speak truth to power. Few, in fact, do it. None working for scoundrel media. BBC falls woefully short. It represents interests it's supposed to confront and hold to account.
Instead it serves wealth and power. It's a "propaganda system for elite interests," says Media Lens. Viewers and listeners are betrayed, especially on issues mattering most.
What's more important than war or peace? When Britain and America rage to fight, BBC marches in lockstep.
On February 1, 2012, the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran (CASMII) headlined "BBC Peddles War Propaganda," saying:
BBC willfully misrepresents Iran's nuclear program. For example, on January 26, it "explicitly stated that Iran has nuclear bombs!"
A "tirade of demonization and misinformation" followed. Spurious accusations claimed Iran threatens world peace. Question Time host David Dimbleby breached journalistic fairness and accuracy codes. He featured guests stating spurious misinformation, not truth and full disclosure.
Journalist Melanie Phillips claimed "Iran is threatening genocide against Israel virtually every week, and it means it." She referred to the canard about wiping Israel off the map.
She continued saying:
"You are dealing in Iran with people who are not rational. You are dealing with people who believe that if they provoke the apocalypse, the end of days, they will bring to earth the Shiia Messiah, the Mahdi, and so they are in the business of provoking an apocalypse."
"It does not matter to them that in a nuclear exchange they may lose half of their own country. It doesn’t matter. This is the mentality that you are dealing with. And the threat is to all of us."
Broadcasting these type comments is unconscionable. Other guests say similar things. BBC features them. Viewers and listeners are misinformed. It repeats daily, especially when Britain and America plan war. CASMII had every right to complain. Doing so fell on deaf ears.
Last March, Alastair Crooke headlined his Asia Times article "Syria: Straining credulity?"
He quoted an unnamed US officer defining the future of warfare. In a 1997 US Army War College Quarterly article, he said:
"....we are already masters of information warfare. Hollywood is 'preparing the battlefield.' (We) will be writing the scripts, producing them, and collecting the royalties. Our creativity is devastating."
"Hatred, jealousy, and greed - emotions, rather than strategy - will set the terms of (information warfare) struggles."
Media scoundrels play the same role. The Syrian conflict "is scripted in emotional images and moralistic statements that always....trump rational analysis."
Baseless suspicions bring charges of crimes against humanity. Opposition and Western sources are cited. Warmongering officials write the scripts. Media scoundrels regurgitate their misinformation.
"Those who try to argue that Western intervention can only exacerbate the crisis are confronted (with images) of dead babies."
Those who write the scripts set the tone. Who'll contradict them without major media support? Expect none from BBC.
"Are we now to (believe) that armed opposition (insurgents are) motivated by" humanitarian concerns? "Will a Kosovo-type solution (improve things) in Syria?"
Does "anyone really believe American and European objectives in Syria (are) purely humanitarian?" Info-wars have other things in mind. At issue is regime change, not reform. It's about isolating Iran. It's about setting the stage for toppling its government after disposing of Syria.
"Do these reporters really believe" the agitprop they air? "Perhaps some do, but others (say things) to prepare the battlefield."
It bears repeating. When America, Britain, and rogue partners go to war or plan one, media scoundrels march in lockstep. BBC's done it for decades. Now it's at it again.
Spurious accusations claim Iran is developing nuclear weapons. In fact, none exist, and Iran threatens no one.
On May 27, Houla's massacre was featured. Reporting from Beirut, Jim Muir said:
"Some opposition groups are saying this could be a turning point."
"Western nations are pressing for a response...."
America wants "an end to (Assad's) 'rule by murder.' "
"The killings have sparked a chorus of international condemnation."
US, UK, French, and UN officials were quoted. They all pointed fingers one way. So did BBC by featuring them. The blame game accuses victims. Perpetrators get scant mention. Heated interventionist calls increase. "(I)ndiscriminate and disproportionate use of force" was charged.
On May 29, BBC reported on "how a massacre unfolded," saying:
"Anti-government activists, eyewitnesses and human rights groups - including the UN's high commissioner for human rights - point the finger at the Syrian army and the shabiha, a sectarian civilian militia that supports the regime of Bashar al-Assad."
BBC claimed army shelling began the attack. Syria categorically denies it. No tanks or artillery targeted Houla. None were positioned nearby. Hundreds of heavily armed Western-sponsored gunmen bear full responsibility.
Like other scoundrel media, BBC reported a tsunami of misinformation and lies.
On May 27, the London Telegraph headlined "BBC News uses 'Iraq photo to illustrate Syrian massacre," saying:
Willful deception was caught red-handed. The image used "was actually taken on March 27, 2003...." It "shows a young Iraqi child jumping over dozens of white body bags containing skeletons found in a desert south of Baghdad."
BBC posted it on its web site under the heading "Syria massacre in Houla condemned as outrage grows." The caption suggests Houla bodies awaited burial.
Photographer Marco di Lauro spotted the deception. He took the photo. When he saw it he said he nearly "fell off his chair," adding:
"One of my pictures from Iraq was used by the BBC web site as a front page illustration claiming (Houla body images were) sent by an activist."
BBC pulls stunts like this often. So do US and other Western media. Notoriously they misreport on imperial wars and events preceding them. Propaganda substitutes for real news and information. Apologies after the fact when caught don't matter. Damage done can't be reversed.
What could Assad gain by killing babies, young children, women and the elderly? How would cutting their throats or shooting them at point blank range help? Obvious questions go unanswered. Regurgitated lies substitute.
The pattern repeats when Washington, Britain, and rogue partners want independent governments toppled. Media propaganda promotes wars.
It rages against Syrian civilians. Insurgent death squad assassins target them. They've been doing it since early last year. Like other scoundrel media, BBC ignores truths and features willful misinformation and lies. Fake images are prominently featured.
Viewers and listeners are misinformed and betrayed. Many wonder what's next. Domestic needs suffer to serve ravenous imperial appetites. No end of conflicts appear near.
Iran parliamentarians condemned the Houla massacre. They compared it to Israel's Sabra and Shatila slaughter. They called it "blatant....terrorist acts (of) mass murder...." Insurgents bear full responsibility. Assad is wrongfully blamed.
America should be held accountable, they said. Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said it was done "to create chaos and instability." It's also about preventing peace and paving the way for war.
On May 29, Press TV reported that the Habilian Association human rights group said:
"We have conclusive proof and documents showing that the MKO (Mujahedlin-e Organization) has a strong and significant presence in Syria."
"The terrorist group has begun, in an all-out fashion, acts of sabotage and terrorism against the Syrian government and nation, and has found major influence among the Syrian rebels."
Washington is directly involved. So are Western and regional partners. MKO plans a "large-scale attack." Preparations are underway.
Everything ongoing facilitates Washington's war plans. The worst could erupt any time. First Syria, then Iran, then new targets in an endless cycle of violence, killing, and destruction. Expect it. It's coming.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at
What Drives the Fevered Response to the Massacre at Houla?
by Ralph Schoenman
Global Research, May 29, 2012
The evidence that 32 children under the age of ten were slaughtered at Houla, specifically by forces of the government of Bashar al Assad or its instruments is based upon claims that have not in fact been verified. While the role of forces supporting the regime in Damascus can not be ruled out, the actual events that gave rise to it are rooted in daily escalating operations of specific foreign funded terror forces of imperialism derived from Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, Kuwait and Libya.
The horrors of Houla are thus deployed in an identical manner in which the N.A.T.O - U. S. war on Libya was managed. Coordinating U.S., British and cognate foreign intelligence and mercenary forces were installed specifically in Libya to hijack popular disaffection and displace it for the purpose carving up the country.
In Libya, the slaughter of fifty thousand people ensued while competing foreign run militia ravage Libya whose 44.2 billion barrels of oil assets and resources are parceled out among scavenging imperial predators who set the process in motion when they hijacked the uprising that began with the oil workers of Ras Lanuf. Similarly, the current armed attacks in Syria are foreign in origin bearing the same imprint as that which ensued in Libya and engendering escalating violence and terror bombings, ascribed invariably to the target regime.
With imperialism, its hands dripping in the blood of the peoples of Iraq, Afghanistan, Bahrain, calling for military removal of the al Assad regime, claims regarding specific responsibility for the butchery at Houla of these children under the age of ten must be subject to evidence beyond proclamations by U.S. commanders. The same is true of the daily media campaign by CIA's talking heads at CNN, who conjoin their propaganda "reports" to orchestrated demands that a U.S/ NATO military invasion overthrow the government in Damascus.
Major General Robert Mood, the head of the U.N. international unit in Syria pointedly avoided ascribing responsibility for the massacre of the children in Houla, stating. "Whatever I have learned on the spot in Syria is that one can not jump to conclusions."
The collection of killer squads run in Syria by Saudi, Qatar, Libyan and mercenary forces have transformed what was a movement of popular disaffection into a foreign and imperial-run terror operation with the specific objective of removing the government and sidelining, not empowering popular opposition.
The imperial campaign is intended to liquidate popular opposition not merely to the regime in Damascus but to the foreign terror squads put in place and set in motion by imperial sponsors whose agenda in Syria as elsewhere is to carve up Syria and render it a non-viable state.
The U.S. and N.A.T.O military and political functionaries who are orchestrating imperial overthrow in Damascus continue apace to slaughter and torment the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Libya. In their daily predations they deploy the same methods and ideological cover.
Imperial killer squads are the fitting instruments of U.S. and N.A.T.0. rulers whose power is predicated upon the permanent destruction of democratic aspirations and of political movements and programs capable of displacing a dying order.
The last thing the imperial carvings-up of target countries intend is to facilitate popular control over national economic and social resources.
The real political agenda of which "Target Syria" is the current expression, is permanent subjugation of the mass of the Syrian people, the very condition obtaining in the countries whose mercenary forces have been organized, armed and insinuated in Syria by U.S. and N.A.T.O. rulers.
This is the abiding political and military setting for the war proclamations emanating yet again from Washington and N.A.T.O. capitals, and punctuated ad nauseam by the scripted declarations of the country-selling regimes of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait.
Ralph Schoenman is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
Lies and Fabrications: The Houla Massacre
Full text of Syria's Amb. to the UN Dr Bashar Al-Ja’afari’s Press Conference
Global Research, May 29, 2012
In response to the UN statement regarding al-Houla massacre
Full text of Dr Bashar Al-Ja’afari’s Press Conference at the UN
The full text of the Press Conference in which the Syrian Ambassador to the United Nations, Bashar Al-Ja’afari denounced "the tsunami of lies that were said a few minutes ago by some members of the Council". – Silvia Cattori
Full text of the Press Conference
transcribed by JPH for
In Syria is an appalling, horrific, unjustified, and unjustifiable crime. This massacre was condemned by my government in the strongest terms possible. And here my government’s version of the condemnation has joined exactly the wording adopted a few minutes ago by the Security Council.
I would like here to condemn also, on behalf of my government, the tsunami of lies that were said A few minutes ago by some members of the Council who tried to mislead you by saying that their way of levelling accusations against my government is based on what they said “evidences”. They are wrong and they are misleading you. Neither General Mood, nor anybody else told the Security Council and the informal session that he would blame the Syrian government’s forces for what happened. It is really pitiful and regrettable that some members of the Council came out just a few minutes after General Mood had finished his briefing to mislead you to tell you lie about what happened.
I invite you all to look to what happened in al-Houla in its entirety. In the comprehensiveness of the picture, what happened in al-Houla yesterday has a background and we should understand this background in order to catch and understand who perpetrated this crime.
Yesterday, after the Friday prayer, two hundred to three hundred armed men gathered around two o’clock pm. They gathered in several points actually, and then they moved and they met in one point, in al-Houla. They had pick-up cars loaded with heavy weapons such as anti-tanks missiles, mortars and machine guns, the Libyan way you saw a couple months ago, and they started attacking the law enforcement forces in the area who were positioned in five different points and at the same time the military attacks lasted from two o’clock pm. up to eleven o’clock in the evening.
So here we are not talking about a military attack that took place and ended in a matter of half an hour. It is a full fledge military operation planned in advance with multi task purposes. After attacking the law enforcement orders positions, the military forces turned towards the civilians, and then they moved to another village which is very next to al-Houla, one kilometre away, were they burned the national hospital, they burned the crops of the farmers and they burned houses. And they killed also dozens of innocent civilians in another village also next to al-Houla, called Shomaria. So here we are not talking about only one incident that took place in one precise area, we are talking about a theatre of operations that engulfed many small villages in the area.
My government has established a national Commission of enquiry tasked with the mission of finding out who are the perpetrators of this horrific massacre so that they will be brought to justice. Whoever committed this crime will be held accountable by the Syrian authorities, by the Syrian government’s law in the country.
The press statement adopted by the Security Council today, adopted somehow the version of events submitted by General Mood. If you go to the language in which the press statement was written, you will find that nothing indicates that the Council is blaming the Syrian government’s forces for the killings and the perpetration of the massacres. On the contrary it identifies that other elements in the picture may be responsible for what happened. I am saying this because the press statement says that the Security Council condemns in the strongest possible terms the killings confirmed by the United Nations observers. I am here also confirming on behalf of my government that there were killings of dozen of civilians, one hundred fourteen – and then an attack that involves a series of government artillery and tank shelling on residential neighbourhood.
Then the members of the Security Council also condemned the killing of civilians by shooting at close range and by severe physical abuse. Most of the killings that took place in al-Houla are due to this kind of assassinations, killing at close range, not killed due to the artillery shelling because artillery shelling would not leave the body of the victims the way you saw them. Here we are talking about the Algerian killing style in the early nineties.
My government will spare no efforts, whatsoever, to find out the perpetrators of these massacres, and to bring them to justice.
I would like to add to that, that the Security Council should meet also to identify and call on those who are arming the terrorist groups in Syria, who are hosting them, instigating them and inciting them to violence, and protecting them, also to be brought to justice. Some members in the Council, their officials said it publicly. Some of them are permanent members. Their high level officials said it publicly that they would spare no efforts to present and to provide the Syrian opposition with weapons, and some of them said “non lethal weapons”, I do not know what does it mean. But the immediate outcome of this weaponisation of the opposition was the result in the form of kidnapping the Lebanese pilgrims coming back from Iraq through Turkish territory, and in the form of suicide bombings and the infiltration by al-Quaida of the Syrian territory.
So we do not need double language in the Security Council. We need to bring everybody accountable to the justice, even though if we touch upon some permanent members. Those who have great interest in stopping violence and bringing to success the national inclusive dialogue in Syria should stop interfering in our domestic affairs, stop arming, hosting, financing and protecting the armed terrorist groups in my country. You cannot be an arsonist and a fireman at the same time. And this is exactly, unfortunately, the case of some members in this Security Council. The Arabic, the regional and the international dimensions of the Syrian crisis are not murky situation any more, and everybody knows what we are talking about.
I am in your hands.
Question: In the statement it said “Attacks involved the Syrian government artillery and tank shelling in residential neighbourhoods”. You disagree with that?
Bashar Al-Ja’afari: I disagree with the interpretation provided to you of this sentence by the German ambassador, the British ambassador, and others. The interpretation was wrong. It is up to General Mood to present the facts. It is not up to the German ambassador or the British ambassador, or other ambassadors.
Question: But the fact that there was government shelling on a residential neighbourhood, was that a fact?
Bashar Al-Ja’afari: General Mood did not say that.
Question: Given the circumstances were unclear, is General Mood more factual than the Secretary general?
Bashar Al-Ja’afari: This is exactly what I was trying to say to your colleague. General Mood said that, that the circumstances were unclear with regard who to blame for these attacks. Yes, he did say that, but in this context, not in the context provided to you by some ambassadors.
Question: Do you feel that this letter of the Secretary General is it more akin to the statement of the German and the UK ambassadors or to the statement made by General Mood in consultations?
Bashar Al-Ja’afari: More inclined to sympathise with the German and the British ambassadors, of course.
Question: What about the investigation?
Bashar Al-Ja’afari: There is a close cooperation between the Syrian Government and UNSMIS [United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria] in Syria. Of course after establishing the Syrian national inquiry commission of investigation, the Syrian authorities will share with General Mood the outcome of these investigations, and then, of course, General Mood will share this information with the Security Council and Mr. Kofi Annan. One important point, gentlemen : you may remember that every time the Security Council has scheduled a session to discuss the Syrian crisis, something should happen in Syria. Either suicide bombing, or a terrorist attack, or a kind of massacre, the one unfortunately we are discussing today. So, it is not an innocent coincidence that the massacre took place only one day before the arrival of Mr. Kofi Annan to Syria. This dimension is very important because it casts shed of doubts about the real motivations of those who perpetrated this horrific crime. They are seeking escalation, they are seeking mobilisation of the Security Council against the Syrian government. No government whatsoever would massacre its own citizens for achieving political victory over its opponents. Using artillery and shelling and tanks and missiles would not kill these innocent civilians the way they were killed by. And this has been notified by the Security Council press statement when they said that they were killed at close range. That means that is a pure assassination, it is not about using artillery and tanks shelling.
Question: You say it is not the Syrian government, but who did it?
Bashar Al-Ja’afari: The armed terrorist groups have initiated this kind of terrorist attacks from the beginning of the crisis in Syria. Here we are not talking about the first incident that takes place in Syria. Of course what happened yesterday is horrific, appalling, unjustified and unjustifiable crime. But this type of killings is not done by any government on earth. It is about armed groups, it is a terrorist crime. We cannot describe it with different terms. Whoever committed this crime will be held accountable to the Syrian justice, and the national investigation Committee established by the government yesterday should submit its report in three days from now. So we will know for sure who is behind this horrific crime in a matter of three days.
Question: Would it not give a pretext for members of Council Security members to blame the government that they are giving this by proxy?
Bashar Al-Ja’afari: As I said in the beginning, we should look at the picture in its entirety. The issue is not to go into details. Sometimes details are important but sometimes they are not. The issue is to have the right judgement on what happened. And in order to have the right judgment you have to look at the picture in its entirety with its historical background, with its geopolitical dimensions. As I said, there is an Arab dimension, there is a regional dimension and an international dimension of the Syrian crisis. And some countries are publicly saying that they would support - and they have already supported - the Syrian military wing of the opposition with weapons. People should very cautious and very careful while reading the map of what is going on in Syria.
Question: Would it be for pushing to the increase in size of UNSMIS mission, maybe to arming their personnel, for some kind of internationalisation?
Bashar Al-Ja’afari: That might be one of the targets seek by those who perpetrated the crime. That might be one reason. One very important reason for perpetrating this kind of horrific crime: to increase the internationalisation of the Syrian crisis, and to increase the number of the staff of UNSMIS.
Thank you.
Unholy Alliance Forming Against Syria
Washington, Tel Aviv, Ankara, Brussels, Arab puppet regimes, Extremist Wahhabis, Al-Qaeda
by Ismail Salami
Global Research, May 29, 2012
Syria is bracing for more political chaos as all antagonistic forces appear to have entered into an unholy alliance to bring the government to its knees by ingeniously choreographing massacres and attributing them to Syrian government, thereby turning the country into fertile soil for US-led invasion.
Deadly clashes broke out on Friday between Syrian forces and armed groups in the township of Houla in Homs and claimed the lives of 108 people including at least 32 children according to the head of the UN observer mission in Syria. However, Syrian authorities on Sunday denied having a hand in the carnage. "Women, children and old men were shot dead. This is not the hallmark of the heroic Syrian army," Foreign Ministry spokesman Jihad Makdesi told reporters in Damascus.
Makdesi said the massacre was carried out by "terrorists" after fighting between rebels and forces loyal to al-Assad.
"They (rebels) were equipped with mortars and anti-tank missiles, which is a quantitative leap," he said. Violence is spiraling drastically despite the presence of 260 UN observers who are currently monitoring the ceasefire as part of a six-point peace plan proposed by UN-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan in March. Earlier this month, 55 people were killed and about 400 others injured in two strings of terrorist bombings near a military intelligence building in Damascus.
What deserves due attention in the carnage that happened in Houla is that many were shot dead at close range, many were Shia Muslims and many were women and children. In other words, these atrocities are conjectured to have been carried out at the hands of the extremist Wahhabis and al-Qaeda elements who are notorious for targeting women and children in their terrorist operations.
Another element which reinforces this speculation is that many among those who were killed were Shia Muslims for whom the Wahhabis nurse inveterate loathing. Despite the prevailing trend in western media to rule out the possible presence of the al-Qaeda in the country, the presence of al-Qaeda terrorists is gradually gaining strength in Syria. They are believed to have penetrated the country from Iraq, Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon.
Washington is funding the rebel groups in Syria. A report reveals that the rebels in Syria “have begun receiving significantly more and better weapons in recent weeks, an effort paid for by Persian Gulf nations and coordinated in part by the United States” (The Washington post, ).
“We are increasing our nonlethal assistance to the Syrian opposition, and we continue to coordinate our efforts with friends and allies in the region and beyond in order to have the biggest impact on what we are collectively doing,” said a senior State Department official, one of several US and foreign government officials on the condition of anonymity.
Besides, Washington is pressing Qatar and Saudi Arabia to fund and provide the rebels with heavy weaponries.
This behavior on the part of Washington runs counter to the fact that many rebels are linked with al-Qaeda and that the US claims to be fighting terror group. Along with Washington, the British government acknowledged early in March that it has provided an extra 2 million to the Western-backed rebels fighting the Syrian government. Prime Minister David Cameron told a hearing at the House of Commons Liaison Committee that his government had provided cash and equipment to western-backed rebels in Syria in the name of emergency medical supplies and food.
The government of al-Assad is losing ground thanks to the influx of the extremist Wahhabis and al-Qaeda members and on account of the financial and military support the rebels receive from the West and the Persian Gulf regimes.
The noose is getting tighter and tighter and all Washington and the extremists want is an absence of Bashar al-Assad. The implication is not that they are consciously united to topple the government of al-Assad but that they are united in a malicious cause to do so, each with its own benefits to reap. In other words, all these groups are fomenting unrest in Syria, and dragging the country into shreds of despair in their own way. Although these groups may ostensibly be at daggers drawn over different issues, they share one common point: the fall of al-Assad and therefore turning the situation to their own interest.
Metaphorically speaking, Syria is now going through a sea of troubles where there are many opportunists who will readily make the best of the crisis in the country.
Most importantly, Israel is silently and ironically funneling millions of dollars to the rebels in Syria. In fact, Israel is capitalizing enormously on the collapse of Bashar al-Assad government. The fall of al-Assad in Syria means a lot to Israel. It is in fact tantamount to immense latitude and a capacious place of potency in the Middle East.
Syria is now a nightmarishly humanitarian catastrophe lavishly brought about by the regional Arab puppet regimes, extremist Wahhabis, al-Qaeda, Washington and Israel.
Ismail Salami is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
US threatens military intervention in Syria following Houla massacre
by Chris Marsden
Global Research, May 29, 2012
The massacre of over 100 people in Houla is being utilized by the United States, other Western powers and the Gulf States to step up their drive for regime-change in Syria. Thirty-two children and 34 women were among Friday’s dead, the United Nations has said.
Speaking yesterday to Fox News, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey said, “Of course, there is always a military option… it may come to a point with Syria because of the atrocities.”
His comments follow a series of bellicose statements by Washington. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, “The US will work with the international community to intensify our pressure on [Syrian President Bashar] Assad and his cronies, whose rule by murder and fear must come to an end.” The White House called the Houla attack “a vile testament to an illegitimate regime.”
The Gulf Cooperation Council, led by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, is also once again urging direct military intervention. Kuwait, which currently heads the Arab League, announced it is calling for a ministerial meeting to “take steps to put an end to the oppressive practices against the Syrian people.”
The Free Syrian Army (FSA), based in Turkey and funded and organized by Washington and its allies, declared it was no longer committed to the truce brokered by former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan. It issued a statement saying that “unless the UN Security Council takes urgent steps for the protection of civilians, Annan’s plan is going to go to hell.”
The Western-backed Syrian National Council (SNC) has called on the UN Security Council to convene an emergency meeting and take binding decisions to “protect the Syrian people” by invoking Chapter VII, which sanctions the use of force.
The Obama administration has to date confined its efforts to destabilize the Assad regime to covert support for proxy Sunni-based forces such as the FSA and SNC. But it is seeking to capitalise on the tragic events in Houla to secure the necessary political backing for direct intervention. This means either enlisting Russia’s support or neutralizing Moscow’s opposition to any move to depose Assad.
On Sunday, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted a nonbinding statement condemning the killings in Houla “in attacks that involved a series of government artillery and tank shellings on a residential neighbourhood.” The statement went on to condemn “the killing of civilians by shooting at close range and by severe physical abuse.”
Clear differences remain, however. Moscow fears that regime-change would deprive it of its main base in the Middle East and secure undisputed US hegemony over the region’s oil riches by surrounding Shia Iran with a ring of pro-Washington Sunni regimes.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, speaking yesterday at a news conference with UK Foreign Secretary William Hague, said he wanted Damascus to resolve its problems “without foreign interference.”
He continued: “Both sides have obviously had a hand in the deaths of innocent people, including several dozen women and children. This area is controlled by the rebels, but it is also surrounded by government troops.” There was no doubt that government forces had used artillery and tanks to shell Houla, he said, but many of the dead appeared to have been shot at close range or tortured.
Assad’s government “bears the main responsibility for what is going on,” he added, but it was facing terrorists whose bombings have the “clear signature of Al Qaeda.”
Publicly, the Obama administration is focusing its efforts on securing Russian support for a phased departure of Assad, modeled on the transition of power in Yemen. Republican Senator John McCain denounced Obama for embracing a “feckless” foreign policy in negotiating with Russia, while Obama’s Republican opponent in the presidential election, Mitt Romney, insisted that the US “should work with partners to organize and arm Syrian opposition groups so they can defend themselves.”
Obama has been reluctant to wage the type of direct NATO-led offensive carried out last year in Libya. But his Republican critics only state openly what the White House is already doing covertly in what may soon become a full-scale proxy war waged by Turkey and the Gulf regimes on America’s behalf.
Nothing that is said by the major powers or the mass media on Houla and the civil war in Syria can be taken at face value. Houla is being lined up to serve the same political function as atrocities in the former Yugoslavia and elsewhere in providing a justification for imperialist intervention.
First, there is as of yet no full account of the events themselves, which remain in dispute.
Syrian Foreign Ministry spokesman Jihad Makdissi said that the fighting began after “hundreds of heavily-armed gunmen carrying machine guns, mortars and anti-tank missiles” launched an attack on five Syrian army positions that continued for nine hours. Five army positions in the area came under attack, leaving three soldiers dead and 16 wounded, he said. Blaming terrorists for the deaths that followed, he said that during the conflict, “Children, women and other innocent people were killed in their homes, and this is not what the Syrian army does. The method of killing was brutal.”
Opposition activists have admitted clashes between the army and the insurgency, but blame the deaths on pro-regime “shabiha” militia.
The head of the UN observer mission in Syria, Major-General Robert Mood, issued a report stating that “artillery and tank shells were fired at a residential neighbourhood,” while acknowledging that close-range shotgun wounds, stabbings and “severe physical abuse” were the main causes of death.
Mood has been quoted as saying, “Whatever I learned on the ground in that I should not jump to conclusions.”
It should also be recalled that the media and Western politicians responded to previous atrocities, like the May 10 car bombs in Damascus that killed 55 people, with far less outrage and far greater caution when it came to apportioning blame. At the time, they concurred that this and similar terror attacks should not be presumed to be the work of Al Qaeda and uncritically cited opposition charges that they were provocations by the Assad regime. Yet, on May 18, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon declared publicly to little media comment, “I believe that there must be Al Qaeda behind it. This has created again very serious problems.”
The US and its European and Middle-Eastern allies are as wholly indifferent to what really happened in Houla as they are to the more general suffering of the Syrian masses. As British Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant declared, “So, it does not matter, to be honest, what the exact circumstances in the run-up to this atrocity were. The fact is that it is an atrocity, and it was perpetrated by the Syrian government.”
Ultimate responsibility for Houla rests with Washington and its allies, who have fostered and armed a sectarian Sunni insurgency dedicated to the overthrow of the Assad regime and its replacement by a government entirely subordinated to a strategic Middle East alliance dominated by the US.
The only legitimate response to the Houla massacre is to redouble the demand for Washington and its accomplices to end their intrigues and subversion against Syria. It is up to the Syrian workers and peasant masses to determine their own future and to make a political reckoning with both the bourgeois Assad regime and the bourgeois and sectarian forces that presently dominate the opposition, thanks to their international sponsors.
Chris Marsden is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
Media Disinfo: BBC criticised for using Iraq 2003 photo to illustrate Syrian massacre
BBC acknowledges "Mistake"
Global Research, May 28, 2012
The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has been slammed for mistakenly using a photo taken in Iraq in 2003 to illustrate the Syria massacre, in which over 100 people, including 32 children, were brutally killed.
The picture, taken on March 27, 2003, showed a young Iraqi child jumping over dozens of white body bags containing skeletons found in a desert south of Baghdad.
It was posted on the BBC news website under the heading "Syria massacre in Houla condemned as outrage grows".
According to The Telegraph, the caption stated the photograph was provided by an activist and cannot be independently verified, but said it is "believed to show the bodies of children in Houla awaiting burial".
A BBC spokesman said the image has now been removed from the website.
"We were aware of this image being widely circulated on the internet in the early hours of this morning following the most recent atrocities in Syria. We used it with a clear disclaimer saying it could not be independently verified," the spokesman said.
"Efforts were made overnight to track down the original source of the image and when it was established the picture was inaccurate we removed it immediately," he added.
Meanwhile, a professional photographer, Marco di Lauro, said he nearly "fell off his chair" when he saw the image being used, and said he was "astonished" at the failure of the corporation to check their sources.
"What I am really astonished by is that a news organization like the BBC doesn't check the sources and it's willing to publish any picture sent it by anyone activist, citizen journalist or whatever. That's all," the paper quoted him, as saying. (ANI)
Syria: Guardian's Houla Massacre Propaganda Stunt Uses Little Kid". Another case of reckless journalism aimed at selling war
by Tony Cartalucci
Global Research, May 28, 2012
The Guardian in their piece titled, "Houla massacre survivor tells how his family were slaughtered," admits that the heart-wrenching emotionally manipulative narrative it published comes straight from a nameless boy allegedly produced by "a town elder who is a member of the Syrian Revolutionary Council and is now caring for him." This fact, however, is buried paragraphs below, hopefully read long after the Guardian's intended message takes hold in the minds of readers.
The account raises serious suspicion as it contradicts the West's own original narrative of the Syrian military "shelling" the victims to death in their homes, and instead appears to be a deceitful, quickly prepared response crafted in the wake of verified evidence presented by Russia before the UN Security Council this week.
The Guardian itself previously published an article titled, "Syria shelling 'kills at least 90'" as well as a statement by UK Foreign Office Minister Alistair Burt claiming the deaths were the result of artillery. Upon that narrative falling apart, the West is apparently retrenching itself in the face of Russian skepticism and reports coming from the people in Houla itself claiming militants, not soldiers, stabbed and shot the victims at close range, not shelled them with artillery.
The Guardian proclaims proudly in their newly crafted narrative that "the young survivor's chilling account emerged as Russia continued to blame both Syrian troops and opposition militias for the weekend rampage in the town that left at least 116 people dead and prompted fresh outrage against the regime's crackdown." The Guardian's revised account specifically claims the nameless boy supplied by the opposition, saw Syrian troops dismount from their tanks, and kill his entire family in front of him. Paradoxically, the Guardian then claims they weren't troops, but rather "al-Shabiha" irregular forces who dismounted from armored vehicles with "guns and knives."
Throughout the entire length of the Guardian's article, not a single shred of verified evidence was presented. Answering a question as to how the "boy" knew the gunmen were pro-regime militia men, he responded, "why are you asking me who they were? I know who they were. We all know it. They were the regime army and people who fight with them. That is true." Hardly conclusive evidence, hardly fit for print by any reputable journalist, but, however, a textbook example of manipulative war propaganda.
Hopefully the serial lies told by the Guardian, the BBC who recently included pictures of mass graves in Iraq in their Houla, Syria coverage, and Western leaders who have lied their populations into over 10 years of constant warfare, have finally reached a point where they will no longer be able to advance their agenda with even a fig leaf of credibility. Hopefully, if the West intends to carry forth with its wars of global aggression, they will do so as overt war criminals and invite the measures and penalties demanded when dealing with such war criminals.
Phony ‘Houla Massacre’: How Media Manipulates Public Opinion For Regime Change in Syria
by Patrick Henningsen
Global Research, May 28, 2012
Intelligent skeptics should see through the media’s smoke screen in order to work out what is really going on in Syria
If you are still needing an academic tutorial on exactly how the mainstream media is able to generate a completely phony public consensus to support foreign intervention projects, you need look no further than the dangerous, fictional narrative currently being rolled out regarding Syria.
This past Saturday and Sunday morning, almost every major corporate mainstream newspaper and TV network in North America and in Europe ran with the average headline, “Massacre of the children as Syrian forces hit rebels”, giving hundreds of millions of readers and viewers to artificial impression that it was Syrian government forces – and not western-backed terrorist groups, who carried out a massacre on children and others days ago - even though, the true culprit of these attacks has not yet been determined – a fact which was only briefly mentioned later on in these very same media reports.
One of the UK best-selling weekend papers and most widely read online journals, Guardian media group’s The Observer, ran such a headline – one which shamelessly implied that the Syrian government carried out a massacre in Houla. This was used to shape public opinion in Europe, a reality which is later shaped for the North American market.
Corporate Journalism: The Art of Deception
It shouldn’t take a genius to see through this relentless western effort to takeover Syria, but not having learned their lesson from Libya, so many hard working and well educated westerners are bound to fall for it all over again.
Cui bono? Who benefits… from another civilian massacre? Clearly not the Syrian government. But western-backed terrorist groups who have been working to destabilize the country for over one year now, do clearly benefit.
Who would be the chief suspect for this latest massacre? How about the western-backed terrorists in Syria – the very same terrorist groups admitted to their own bombing campaign that killed many innocent people in Syria only weeks ago.
Important to add here also, that the latest child massacre in Syria has been reported as being “done with knives” – which doesn’t sound like a government attack to any intelligent reader.
Do not underestimate for one second just how pivotal the western corporate media is in advancing an agenda of global destabilization:
As we have seen used before in Syria and Libya, the alleged massacre in question is based entirely on unsubstantiated evidence, in this case its more uploaded ‘Youtube’ footage:
“Videos uploaded to the Internet and purporting to be from Houla show many dead and badly mutilated infants. Residents say some victims were killed with knives, while many more died from 18 hours of relentless shelling that left buildings wrecked and homes destroyed in a large residential area near the centre of town.”
Origins of these ‘Youtube video’ are still unknown, but the media machine and certain UN officials have already cited them as “evidence”.  Also note that in the YouTube videos, many of the dead children appear to be shot in the heads with fire arms at close range, but this has not stopped certain ‘UN observers’ from accusing the Syrian government from killing children with tank shelling.
Mainstream Media 101
In order to shape consensus reality, first you need to frame the event. Here the story begins by laying soft blame on the Syrian government…
Syria‘s fragile peace process is in shreds after what was claimed to be a regime-backed massacre…”
… and then proceeding to carefully cover themselves, so to speak, but retracting the allegations deeper into the article:
“Major General Robert Mood, head of the UN team in Syria, deplored the attack, which began at midday on Friday, as “indiscriminate and unforgivable” but did not say who had been to blame.”
Notice how the article itself states clearly that the persons responsible for the massacre is yet to be known, but The Observer has already framed the conclusion within the headline and in the beginning of the story, in order to fit a pre-determined conclusion. This conclusion happens to be directly in line with Washington and London’s foreign policy objective of regime change in Syria.
Take notes. Because this is how it’s done, time and time again – another clear example how large media outlets can effectively drive reality in the direction of their choosing, and this is why so many millions of public media consumers are left misinformed and dis informed, eventually leading to a marginal public endorsement of Washington, London and Tel Aviv’s interventionist foreign policy objectives. 
Hours after this fake story was circulated in the GMT timezone, it made its way to EST, as the New York Times picks up the ball and runs it down the field. Here the story is further refined to streamline it with regime change policy objectives, codifying reality within North American sector, claiming that:
“More than 90 people, including at least 32 children under the age of 10, were killed in a central Syrian village, top United Nations officials said Saturday, accusing the government of perpetrating the “indiscriminate” shelling of civilian neighborhoods.”  
No real details are actually given to support this media-generated verdict, only that, “A United Nations statement said the observers confirmed that “artillery and tank shells were fired at a residential neighborhood.”
And finally, the Washington Post weighs in with their attempt to corner Russia and China on the issue, rounding out the artificial verdict today with their headline, “U.N. Security Council blames Syrian government for civilian massacre”, claiming that:
“The U.N. Security Council on Sunday blamed the Syrian government for most of the deaths in a massacre of 116 civilians in the village of Houla, issuing a unanimous statement condemning the killings that was supported by Syria’s staunch allies Russia and China.”
Shortly thereafter, the UN’s Ban Ki Moon and Save the Children charity weigh in with carefully-craft statements, but statements that are obviously framed and directed towards Syria’s Assad government, and not Gulf States, Washington and London-backed terrorist gangs currently operating under an all but official western mandate within Syria and from their NATO-sanctioned base over the border in southern Turkey. Reality is further shaped by the London Guardian’s Observer and others, with an official “international outcry”:
“The international community was united in its condemnation. UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon said the killings were a “flagrant violation of international law” while the White House called the violence acts of “unspeakable and inhuman brutality.” Arab League head Nabil Elaraby said the killings were a “horrific crime” and urged UN action.
Save the Children’s chief executive, Justin Forsyth, echoed calls for intervention. He said: “This indiscriminate killing must stop now. The world cannot sit back and allow this to happen. Children are suffering terribly in this conflict.”
Even the BBC have gone so far as to run 9 year old photographs from Iraq, and sell them as from this latest massacre of children in Syria. Any other foreign media outlet in the UK would have its broadcasting license pulled for such a propaganda stunt. In the face of such damning manipulation, why then would so many people still believe the mainstream media’s version of reality in countries like Syria?
But what is a more closer version of reality is this:
Western-backed terrorists, many of whom are al-Qaida, mostly hailing from outside of Syria, are fomenting civil war and carrying out a series of attacks on UN observers and civilians, in order to create the preferred western narrative that “Assad must go.”
Western readers should be under no illusion – your government operators are sanctioning civilian killing in places like Syria, and your corporate media are being used to place the blame on the west’s political enemy in the region – and therefore influence western public support for regime change.
After over one year of intervening through their own favored terrorist guerrilla proxy fighters and running arms into Syria – arms that are admittedly for going into the hands of western-backed al-Qaida groups there, the west has not yet succeeded in toppling the Assad government and installing a new puppet regime, as they did by using NATO military force in Libya last autumn. But western project managers like Hillary Clinton and William Hague have not given up, and if their corporate media outlets are allowed to determine their version reality in Syria, they will eventually get their “humanitarian intervention”, and the country will slowly be destroyed from within. Then regime change will happen.
It’s as simple as that.
The Syrian people are the ones who will eventually lose if Washington, London, Tel Aviv and the Gulf States succeed in destroying that country, as they have done in Libya and Iraq.
When this is done, then they will move on to destabilize Lebanon in order to unseat and neutralize Hezbollah.
After that, the door to attack Iran will be wide open.
There’s your World War Three in earnest.
Syria: The West Undermines UN Monitors. Paves the Way for NATO Intervention
Western propagandists unanimously defer to "activists" despite hundreds of UN monitors on the ground in Syria.
by Tony Cartalucci
Global Research, May 27, 2012
Reports this week of the Syrian military "slaughtering civilians" near Homs have been reported relentlessly by Western media outlets, citing solely "activists" who have been consistently exposed as manipulating and purposefully distorting the reality on the ground in Syria. After episodes including "Gay Girl in Damascus," who turned out to be in fact a "middle-aged American man in Scotland," and "Syrian Danny" who was caught directing fake gunfire before a staged "casualty report" given to CNN's Anderson Cooper, the word of "activists" in Syria, openly sympathetic to the Free Syrian Army, is clearly less than credible.
Image: Brookings Institution's Salman Shaikh, a chief proponent of the engineered violence plotted by Brookings and others since as early as 2007, makes veiled threats against the safety of UN monitors in Syria. Corporate-financier elite, through their think-tanks have made a concerted effort to undermine the UN mission now that the rebels have been successfully rearmed, reorganized, and redeployed. The next step, as stated by Shaikh's peers over at the Henry Jackson Society, after feigning attempts to diplomatically resolve the conflict, is to begin NATO military intervention.
Then there are aggregators like the London-based "Syrian Observatory for Human Rights" who cites anonymous phone-calls and regularly consorts directly with the British Foreign Ministry, and convicted criminal George Soros' Open Society-funded Amnesty International (annual report page 8), Human Rights Watch, and Doctors Without Borders (page 39) (advised by a myriad of lawyers, PR firms, and even a representative of Goldman Sachs), who have already undermined their legitimacy in Libya after peddling verified-lies provided by the Libyan rebels while downplaying verified atrocities committed by NATO-backed militants that continue to this very day.
Despite this constant torrent of disinformation put out by dubious institutions possessing clear conflicts of interest, funded literally by convicted criminals and serial warmongers, a great deal of evidence has still emerged painting a very contradictory picture of events in Syria, and alleged "massacres" like the one supposedly unfolding once again near Homs. A picture of the Syrian military attempting to restore order in the face of a heavily armed, foreign-backed army of sectarian militants.
It is confirmed that indeed the "pro-democracy" "freedom fighters" in Syria are in fact carrying out horrific atrocities, including the kidnapping, torture, and murder of civilians - this according to Human Right Watch itself, as well as a recent report provided by the UN. These atrocities are revealed to be the result of sectarian violence, not aspirations for "democratic" reform, with ethnic and religious minorities being hit hardest by rebel attacks.
There are also admissions of Syrian rebels carrying out a campaign of indiscriminate terrorist bombings conducted by Free Syrian Army militants with ties to fighters who killed US troops in neighboring Iraq. Finally, there are revelations that the violence in Syria was not in fact "inspired" by the "Arab Spring," but instead the result of years of meticulous preparations by the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia to create a violent extremist front with which to destabilize a vast region extending from Iran all the to Lebanon, including Syria in between - this according to a 2007 New Yorker article titled, "The Redirection" by Seymour Hersh.
And despite the West's narrative unraveling, and it becoming abundantly clear that the unrest is being perpetuated by terrorist organizations funded and armed by foreign interests, the US has pressed on with Israel and Saudi Arabia in continuing this funding and arming - even in the midst of a UN brokered ceasefire. The Washington Post reported that indeed the Gulf States with the US' help, were arming militants operating in and around Syria despite the ongoing efforts by the UN to end the violence. Associated Press confirms that the US is further planning to arm Syrian militants, despite reports out of the Pentagon itself that Al Qaeda is demonstratively present and operating alongside the so-called Free Syrian Army. Again, it should be noted that as early as 2007, the Pentagon was well aware that arming extremists to destabilize Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah in Lebanon required using groups affiliated directly with Al Qaeda.
What is Next for Syria.
As stated previously, the UN "ceasefire" was never intended to end the conflict, but rather allow militants and their foreign sponsors regroup and redeploy for the next leg of destabilization, hoping to fulfill public expectations that a "diplomatic" solution would be tried and "exhausted" before resorting to a NATO-led military intervention. Despite the trappings of a "Democratic" presidency under "Nobel Laureate" Barack Obama, the agenda pursued in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Iran, and Syria represents a "continuity of agenda" stretching back to George Bush Sr.'s presidency, cultivated, defined and promoted by corporate-funded think-tanks and dutifully carried out by each successive presidency.
Video: Michael Weiss of the Neo-Con "Henry Jackson Society," openly admits that diplomatic options are being paraded publicly to satisfy public opinion, but ultimately NATO plans to unilaterally intervene militarily in Syria, and will do so with the UN's purposefully sabotaged "humanitarian operation" as its pretext.
The 2007 plot described by Seymour Hersh in his article, "The Redirection" began under the Bush Jr. presidency and has continued on in earnest under Obama. So when representatives of the Henry Jackson Society, a corporate-financier funded (beginning on page 18, .pdf), Neo-Conservative led think-tank speaks with Qatari government propaganda outlet Al Jazeera, declaring that the current UN "peace deal" is simply a means of satisfying public expectations that "diplomacy" will be tried before an inevitable, premeditated, unilateral NATO military intervention commences, the public should take notice that this is in fact the next intended step.
Similar calls from similarly affiliated Neo-Con think-tanks dictated US foreign policy leading up and into NATO's intervention in Libya, again despite America allegedly being "led" by a "liberal" "Democratic" president. World peace hinges on public awareness, the public boycotting and replacing the corporate-financier interests driving this global agenda and the war crimes that result, regardless of who is allegedly "president." World peace also depends on Syria along with its allies creating a diplomatic and tactical environment within and beyond Syria's borders that will make NATO military intervention, as well as their continued arming and funding of terrorist factions, untenable, unsustainable, and ultimately impossible.
The violence in Syria was premeditated and facilitated solely by malicious foreign powers openly seeking to effect regime change since as early as 2002 and arming and organizing violent extremists with direct ties to Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood since as early as 2007.
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 "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."
There is no doubt, then, that the destabilization across the Middle East, and specifically in Syria now, is a result of foreign aggression, exploiting, not assisting, democratic aspirations for neo-imperial hegemonic expansion. The goodwill, intentions, and courage of genuine NGO workers, activists, and regular people around the world has been harnessed to facilitate this malicious agenda, not unlike how imperial armies throughout time have lured their nation's youth to fill the ranks of a military built for extraterritorial conquest, not defense. The dual nature of modern empire - military conquest and NGO system administrators - using "national defense" and "human rights" in tandem to prod the public into one unjust war of conquest after another, continues only as long as the public's ignorance and apathy allows.
With the Western media now admitting that Syria's opposition consists in fact of very real terrorists, funded by despotic Gulf States and the West, carrying out systematic atrocities against the civilian population, we have only apathy left to blame if NATO is allowed to carry on with its campaign of military aggression - a Nuremberg offense we as a Western society swore after World War II, "Never Again!"
Tony Cartalucci is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
Also See:
Will Syria Be Next?
(Part 1)
14 February 2012
Unrest in Syria!
31 March 2011