Syrian Opposition Officially Abandons UN Peace Plan
UN fails to condemn rebel army’s pledge to expand violence.
by Tony Cartalucci
Editor’s Note: It is curious that the West is so seemingly outraged by the “massacre” in Houla Syria when NATO has been committing such atrocities along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border for now well over a decade. Hundreds of civilians have been murdered by US drone attacks (here, here, here, and here) with the only difference seeming to be the manner in which these atrocities are reported – US mass-murder downplayed, obfuscated and buried under terms like “suspected militants” while any death in Syria, regardless of evidence is boldly pronounced as the work of the Syrian government.
May 27, 2012 – One can only imagine the international outcry should the Syrian government have declared it was abandoning the UN-brokered “cease-fire” and was resolved to dealing with its opponents in the “only language they understand, violence.” However, the Syrian government has not abandoned the ceasefire, and has played host to hundreds of UN monitors. Instead, it is the opposition making such claims – claims that have gone unchallenged by the so-called “international community.”
Since the beginning of the UN mission led by Kofi Annan, an open conspirator with the very foreign-interests on record intentionally seeking to destabilize and overthrow the Syrian government, the West has berated Syria for violating the ceasefire, even as they openly armed and encouraged the rebels to carry on their campaign of violence. Reuters reported at one point that the Syrian rebels were overtly shifting to indiscriminate terrorist bombings during this “ceasefire,” which have claimed scores of lives, and left hundreds maimed, mostly civilians. Again, the UN and the “international community” gave only the vaguest condemnations, never mentioning or addressing the opposition directly. These bombs have even been directed at the UN monitors themselves, with the West, France specifically, then inexplicably condemning the Syrian government for not doing enough to provide security.
It is assumed that the Syrian government was expected to allow entire cities to be overrun by demonstrative sectarian violence, targeting Alawites, Christians, Druze, and Kurds, as well as any, including Sunnis, who were suspected of supporting the ruling government. It is imagined that had the government even conceded to allowing this to pass, it would be paradoxically accused of then not maintaining security and order under the “responsibility to protect,” or “R2P” doctrine.
It is clear that both the UN and NATO have determined that regime change will take place, and the violence unfolding in Syria will be used as a tool, regardless of the reality on the ground, as a means of accomplishing this predetermined goal. The West declared the UN mission a failure before the first UN monitor stepped foot in Syria, using its massive media machine to convince the world that only force, either through terrorist proxies like the “Free Syrian Army,” or a direct military intervention by NATO itself, would solve the unrest.
Clearly, looking at Libya, NATO’s previous intervention, this too is an obvious fabrication.
The UN is dangerously flirting with losing all credibility permanently by failing to condemn the Syrian opposition’s open discarding of the UN’s own peace plan, regardless of the excuse. The excuse the opposition is using is an alleged “massacre” in Houla Syria, near Homs, where the Western media and the UN have already repeatedly backpedaled after claiming government troops shelled 90 people, or “nearly a hundred” including many children to death, only to retract these reports and admit the majority of the victims were killed by death squads, and reducing the body count to 85. The Western media has also conceded that Syrian government troops were not responsible for these deaths, but that it was the work of what they call “pro-regime thugs.” Despite this shifting reality, the resolve to punish the government regardless remains.
Clearly sensationalized reporting was done in coordination with the “Free Syrian Army’s” declaration of abandoning the peace plan for maximum effect. And as more evidence comes out of Houla after numerous false reports, it is becoming even more nebulous as to who is actually responsible, with many of the corpses bearing slashed throats, a tactic generally employed by Al Qaeda terrorists, known to be operating not only in the area, but side-by-side with the Free Syrian Army, against Syrian troops.
Unlike in Libya, where the pace of military intervention moved faster than the public’s awareness of the true nature of the Libyan rebels, that they were indeed violent, listed terrorist organizations committing horrific atrocities, the Syrian violence has dragged on allowing independent observers to see the full scope of the “Free Syrian Army” with even Western agencies and the UN itself having to concede they are guilty of an increasing array of atrocities and utilizing terrorist tactics to achieve what appear to be sectarian, not “democratic” objectives.
Despite this, the UN is still playing along with Western ambitions to continue the narrative, even as the stage lies in ruins. It is left to Syria, its allies, and all nations interested in world peace, to condemn vocally the rebels for abandoning a ceasefire they never observed to begin with, and to recognize that any further aid, weapons, or support for such an opposition is the height of irresponsibility, sure to provoke, not prevent further bloodshed, and a crime against world peace.
Slaughter Slant: Houla massacre sparks media blame-game [video]
Russia Today
May 29, 2012
The most gruesome episode in Syria’s uprising is quickly turning into a PR battle, as each side, and their allies, portion blame for the slaughter in Houla. Just four days after the murders of over a hundred men, women and children – the media has been flooded with images furthering one, or the other agenda.
Commenting on the BBC’s blunder with the Iraq picture, journalist and human rights investigator Keith Harmon Snow says there’s simply no way it could have been posted by mistake.
Subscribe to RT! http://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=RussiaToday
Watch RT LIVE on our website http://rt.com/on-air
Houla Massacre: False Flag for Syria? [video]
The Truther Girls
May 30, 2012
On May 26, 2012, 108 people including 49 children were brutally murdered in Houla, Syria. The blame has been attributed to the Syrian government’s own military, but this makes little sense, given how and under what circumstances the victims were killed. It looks to me like this atrocity may have been committed by emissaries of the globalists who are blaming it on their next target in their military overhaul of the Middle East.
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2012/0529/After-Houla-massac…
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1201955–what-happened-at-syria-s-h…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ngUJsfr5rrA#!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2_owegdPms&feature=related
http://www.blacklistednews.com/BBC_uses_fake_photo_for_Houla_massacre/19712/0…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lWB5ssifTg
Syria, Yemen, and America’s Quest for Imperial Dominance
Neo-Imperialism by Faux-Democracy, Terrorism, and Propaganda.
guest post by Eric Draitser of StopImperialism.com,
May 25, 2012 – At the G8 summit last week, President Obama and other officials in his administration, began utilizing the talking point of Yemen being a model to be emulated in Syria. Ostensibly, they were referring to the “peaceful” transition of power in Yemen as an example of what they would like to see in Syria. However, the comparison goes much deeper than simply this superficial connection. The truth is that Yemen represents, in more ways than one, the blueprint that the US imperialist ruling class would like to see applied to the escalating conflict in Syria.
Puppet Regimes and Faux Democracy
The “transition” of power in Yemen, from Saleh to Hadi, is a prime example of the hypocrisy of US policy, touting it as a victory for democracy while concealing the obvious fact that it was the creation of a puppet regime. Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi has been presented as the legitimate leader of Yemen, despite the fact that he was the U.S. choice to govern that country. His legitimacy depended on the myth of a democratically elected regime; the US propagates this myth wantonly, pretending that people won’t remember that Hadi ran unopposed in February.
If the purpose of democracy is to create forms of governance accountable to the citizenry and to establish a government that is truly representative of the people’s desires, then it would be an outright lie to call the Hadi administration anything close to a democracy. In fact, as recent developments in Yemen have shown, his regime is nothing more than a puppet government, put in power by the United States in order to allow the CIA and other shadowy entities free reign to use drones, Special Forces, and other covert operations in what is supposedly a sovereign nation.
Not only is Hadi, the former vice President under Saleh, not democratically elected, he is the antithesis of progress in a country that was on the front lines of the Arab Spring. The people who marched through the streets of Sanaa and other cities across Yemen did so with the intention of effecting change in a country which, in the eyes of many, was seen as a backwards dictatorship. However, despite all the rhetoric about hope, change, and progress from the US State Department and the White House, President Obama and his minions, including John Brennan (counter-terrorism advisor and frequent representative of Obama in Yemen), immediately lent their support to Hadi. The betrayal came as no surprise to any informed observer as the United States was only interested in its own strategic interests in the region.
US Tactics and the Geopolitical Imperative in Yemen
US interest in Yemen is certainly not rooted in altruism or a desire to promote democratic ideals. On the contrary, it is the application of a long-standing geopolitical strategy to control international trade through the Mandab Strait and Suez Canal, access to African raw materials, and most specifically, block the expansion of Chinese economic influence in both the Middle East and Africa. For these reasons, the United States has a keen interest in both Yemen and Somalia, desperate to maintain chaos in those countries so as to prevent stable, nationalist leaders from emerging. In so doing, Washington once again shows itself to be an imperialist aggressor, interested only in maintaining and expanding the empire.
The tactics of this strategy are myriad. First and foremost, the US, in accordance with long-standing policy dating back to the Carter administration, uses the red herring of “Islamic extremism” and terrorism, to justify any actions it deems necessary for the advancement of its own agenda. In places like Afghanistan and Yemen, the enemy is Al-Qaeda which must be fought with US military might, while in Libya and Syria, Al-Qaeda is an ally fighting against the oppressive regimes of Gaddafi and Assad. This duplicity should come as no surprise since Washington’s foreign policy is based on expanding US hegemony rather than promoting any ideals.
The second aspect of America’s imperialist strategy is the fomenting of ethnic, tribal, and other sectarian conflicts. In doing so, Washington is able to prevent the emergence of any form of nationalism that, by definition, would stand in opposition to US imperialism. One must simply look across the Mandab Strait for an example of this strategy: Somalia. A nation of strategic and geographical importance, Somalia has been effectively destroyed by US policy over the last twenty years, having been transformed from a proud nation to a loose collection of tribal groups dominated by repugnant warlords with no regard for national identity.
In Yemen, we’ve seen this strategy employed vis-à-vis the Huthi rebellion, the propagandistic use of tribal groups as proxies of Saudi Arabia, Iran, or whomever the US wants to demonize, and countless other examples of these sorts of divisive tactics. In this way, the imperialists are able to keep Yemen fragmented, using it as a pawn on the geopolitical chessboard.
A Connection Between Yemen and Syria?
With all this talk about Yemen, the question might be, “So, what’s this got to do with Syria?” The answer to this question can be found in an analysis of the social movements of the two countries. In Syria, just as in Yemen, there is a real, pro-democracy opposition that took to the streets in hopes of forcing reforms. Both movements began with high-minded ideals and sought to end what they perceived to be the outdated rule of dictatorial leaders. However, unlike Yemen, Syria has been under assault by West-sponsored, foreign mercenary terrorists who have usurped the title of “opposition”, thereby making the real opposition into a mere irrelevancy on the international stage. The United States and its proxies in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Israel, and elsewhere are responsible for this reprehensible turn of events.
And so, when the Obama administration claims that the Yemeni model is the best course of action in Syria, what they mean is that their tactics of subversion through terrorism are simply a means to an end. Just as in Yemen, the United States seeks to topple Assad and install a puppet government, one that would be comfortable under the thumb of the imperialist ruling class. The US has no interest in protecting the rights of the ethnic and religious minorities or the real opposition (namely the National Coordinating Committee and the Popular front) in Syria, just as they had little interest in furthering the democratic aspirations of the people of Yemen. Rather, Obama and those who control him, seek regime change in Syria in order to use that nation as a geopolitical chess piece against Iran, Russia and any other nation unfortunate enough to be deemed an “enemy” of the United States.
Syrian Foreign Ministry spokesman Jihad Makdisi, Homs Massacre; Real Story. [video]
Friends of Syria
May 27, 2012
Syrian Houla Massacres: Divide & Conquer Strategy Exposed [video]
Syrian Girl
May 28, 2012
The mainstream media is blaming the Houla massacre on the syrian military. However facts on the ground do not match this statement. The massacres in Syria are purposeful, to fuel a civil war in my country and pave the way for foreign interventions.
Links: full RPG video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyuO24V25YE
NATO Imported Al Qaeda to Lead Syrian Opposition [video]
As the “Syrian National Council” Disintegrates, NATO Tries a New Line: Al Qaeda’s Central Role in Syria Makes an Invasion Necessary.
Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D.
PressTV – Tarpley.net
May 27, 2012
PN 