HIGHLY POTENT NEWS THAT MIGHT CHANGE YOUR VIEWS

Syria

The Syria debacle – part I

By Madison Ruppert
Editor of End the Lie
January 18, 2012

I have been writing about Syria and the attempts at pushing a foreign intervention on the nation for months now (see the bottomof the article for a partial list of previous works on the subject).

I believe it has become such a multifaceted and important issue that I must devote a series to covering the developments as I have done with Iran and the global growth of the United States’ and NATO’s hegemony.

As the days go by the tensions between the West and Syria only get more pronounced, especially when it comes to the increasingly vocal opposition from Russia.

Russia’s opposition is far from something new. They were one of the first nations to come to Syria’s defense and protect – or at least attempt to protect them – from foreign meddling.

This has incarnated in many forms, some overt and military in nature – like the delivery of anti-aircraft missile systems and most recently a Russian naval group docking in the Syrian port of Tartus – others political, like the statements of the head of the Russian Security Council, Nikolai Patrushev.

The political rhetoric has become increasingly heated and firm, and today’s news is no different.

The President of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, and the Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin reportedly had a phone conversation in which they “affirmed the need to defend the independence and [sovereignty] of Syria and Iran from the siege and interference in their internal affairs carried out by colonialist countries,” according to Syria’s SANA.

This is just another affirmation of Russia’s staunch opposition to any foreign intervention in Syria and Iran which is indeed a real threat, despite any assurances otherwise coming from the wholly untrustworthy Western establishment.

The Venezuelan Foreign Ministry said that Chavez and Putin also discussed the strategic ties between the two nations in the fields of finance, the economy, commercial and industrial matters and military cooperation as well.

What remains to be seen is how Russia will actually step in on Syria’s behalf if the press to intervene in Syria continues.

Russia and China have both blocked increased sanctions when they were brought to the United Nations Security Council, but it is unclear exactly what they would do if the West ignores the writing on the wall and conducts another intervention like in Libya.

Russia has made their military presence in the region very well-known and their transfer of advanced military equipment underlines their position.

China, on the other hand, is a bit of a more unknown variable in this equation.

They have repeatedly voiced their distaste with the Western attempts at intervening in Syrian domestic affairs and blocked new sanctions, but it is unclear if China would take up arms in defense of Syria if it came down to such a situation.

If Russia were to take action and come under threat from the Arab League, NATO or the West as a whole, I think it is only logical to assume that China very well might come to Russia’s aid.

The Arab League has had a very interesting role in the Syrian conflict, given that most leaders of Arab League states are little more than Western puppets.

The League’s observer mission has been characterized as a failure in some quarters, and I found the entire situation quite ironic given the presence of a general accused of creating the brutal “janjaweed,” which was responsible for some of the worst atrocities during the Darfur genocide, in the Arab League’s observer force.

Yesterday China’s Xinhua reported that the Syrian Foreign Ministry has totally rejected Qatari Emir’s suggestion of dispatching Arab troops into Syria, supposedly to help curb the violence.

This is hardly a stupid move on Syria’s part, given that Qatar is now openly admitting that their forces were running most of the ground operations for the rebels in Libya.

Knowing this, it is only logical to think that the Qatari forces would not, in fact, act to help stop the violence but instead encourage it and run operations for the armed opposition in order to enact regime change.

Ultimately, the whole uprising is about regime change, as the opposition has made it clear time and time again that they will not consider negotiations with President Bashar al-Assad nor any option that does not involve Assad being removed from power completely.

The Syrian Foreign Ministry stated that they absolutely reject any calls like the ones coming from Qatar as it could not only make the situation worse but also set the precedent for a greater foreign intervention in Syria’s domestic affairs.

Of course, al Jazeera, the Qatari state-funded propaganda house which operates under the guise of anti-Western alternative news (laughable though the claim may be, many consider it indeed to be such an outlet) would utilize their position to push for a greater intervention just as they did in Libya.

Pointing to the failure of the Arab League’s observers to stop the violence in Syria, Qatar Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al Thani stated that he was in favor of deploying Arab troops into Syria.

Statements like this are regularly made, usually claiming that such a move would stop or at least decrease the violence.

Based on what we’ve seen in Libya, I think it is hardly an accurate assumption to make. Bringing in armed foreign troops to solve a domestic conflict is hardly conducive to peace.

In making the statement, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al Thani made himself the first Arab leader to openly call for military intervention in Syria, saying, “For such a situation … some troops should go to stop the killing.”

Once again, this is operating on the nonsensical assumption that for some reason bringing armed troops into a conflict would not increase violence but in fact decrease it.

We saw how well that worked in Libya, not to mention Iraq, both of which are still rife with violence and civil strife.

The Syrian Foreign Ministry’s statement was quite strongly worded, saying that Syria “rejects all kinds of foreign intervention in its affairs, under any title, and would confront any attempt to infringe upon Syria’s sovereignty and integrity of its territories.”

What exactly they mean by “confront” isn’t quite clear but I believe it is safe to assume that they mean they would meet military intervention with military confrontation in hopes that Russia and perhaps China would come to their aid.

Syria also stated that while they are agreeing to stick to the Arab League’s plan, they ask for Arab nations and the Arab League as a whole to make an effort “to stop all instigating campaigns and media mobilization that aim to ramp up the situation in Syria.”

I believe this to be a not-so-subtle jab at Qatar which has used its propaganda arm to shape the narrative throughout the so-called Arab Spring since the beginning.

The statement also said that Arab states should assist Syria in blocking the movement of weapons into Syria in order to “reinforce stability and security that would pave the way for a constructive national dialogue that aims to find a political solution to the crisis in Syria.”

Unfortunately, it seems this hope is a bit misguided, as the Syrian opposition – especially the armed insurgent group the Free Syrian Army – have repeatedly stated that they have no interest in “a constructive national dialogue” nor a political solution unless it involves complete regime change.

The Arab League’s monitors began their mission in Syria on December 26, 2011 and they are due to issue an assessment on January 21.

Contrary to the Western narrative, the Syrian government states that the violence in Syria is being incited by terrorists and foreign-backed armed gangs, which is not entirely untrue as the establishment media makes out.

Indeed the United States has been busted funding anti-government propaganda stations which were beamed into Syria via satellite.

The United States’ ambassador to Syria has also openly met with opposition leadership, a move which elicited a violent reaction from the Syrian people.

According to Syrian government reports, over 2,000 army and security personnel have been killed during the uprising.

The Free Syrian Army, for one, has openly bragged about attacking government forces, even blowing up government transport vehicles.

The United Nations has estimated the death toll to be over 5,000 although their numbers are based largely – if not entirely – upon the unverified reports of so-called “activists” and “human rights groups” which have dubious intentions.

While NATO has repeatedly denied that they are working towards a no-fly zone over Syria along with so-called “humanitarian corridors” or “buffer zones” along the borders, Russia today dismissed these claims and insisted that they have information that such tactics are currently being discussed.

“Our partners int he West are in fact discussing a no-fly zone, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told reporters in Moscow, according to Bloomberg.

“There are other ideas being realized, including humanitarian convoys, in the hope they could provoke a response from government forces, border guards,” Lavrov added.

Lavrov also said that Russia would continue to block any attempt at passing a resolution for military intervention in the United Nations Security Council.

He also dismissed the American condemnation of Russian arms shipments to Syria, saying that they were not violating international law by simply supplying Syria with weapons.

Indeed this is true and one must consider the almost laughable hypocrisy displayed by such statements coming from the United States when they are providing the weaponry to Bahrain used to crack down on their own domestic uprising.

Both the European Union and the United States have already put an arms embargo against Syria in place.

The United States’ ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, stated that the U.S. has “very grave concern[s]” about Russian arms being given to the Assad government.

One must wonder if this is because it would allow the government to put up a greater level of resistance to foreign intervention and Western-backed armed insurgent groups currently operating in Syria.

These statements echo ones I reported on previously made by Patrushev which at the time were by far the most heated we had seen.

Patrushev stated that Turkey may play a key role in such an operation and unsurprisingly the same day Turkey along with the United Kingdom and France all denied that such a move was a possibility.

However, the French denial makes very little sense when one remembers that in November Alain Juppe, the French Foreign Minister, suggested that military forces should establish humanitarian corridors to deliver aid in Syria.

Of course the aid would likely only be delivered to anti-Assad groups and insurgents, while pro-government demonstrators and citizens would probably end up getting shafted as they were in Libya.

There is very little we can do at this point to stop another bloody foreign intervention other than spreading the awareness of this campaign.

Please make an effort to share this article and other works by myself and the many others who have been bringing attention to this situation as much as humanly possible.

Only through a greater number of people becoming fully cognizant of the destabilization operation in Syria and other nations which don’t tow the Western line can we hope to stifle these deplorable efforts.

Please, take the less than 30 seconds to share this with your Facebook friends, Twitter followers, or whomever you can on whatever social network/medium you prefer.

Every single person who becomes aware of these issues is another person who can spread the truth and help push back against the wave of disinformation and warmongering.

Recommended related reading (in chronological order, oldest to latest):

Top Search Terms Used to Find This Page:

January 27, 2012 | Categories: co-opting and/or destabilization, news, sovereignty, Syria, tyranny, war | Leave a comment

Foreign Syrian intervention and the Russian-Chinese opposition

Nikolai Patrushev (left) and Vladimir Putin (right) (Photo credit: http://www.kremlin.ru)

By Madison Ruppert
Editor of End the Lie
January 13, 2012

The push for foreign intervention in Syria has been going on for quite a while now and never seems to relent in ferocity. I have been writing about this issue for months now, so if you would like to get a strong background on this topic I highly recommend you scroll down to the end of the article to find a list of related reading materials.

Despite the large conglomeration of Western nations and allied nations in the Arab League’s relentless full-court press, some countries continue to resist this effort.

The most glaring example is, of course, Russia.

Russia has not only been a vocal opponent of sanctions and resolutions in the United Nations Security Council, indeed they have actually backed up their rhetoric with muscle; something which China has yet to do.

I previously reported on Russia moving complete advanced anti-aircraft missile systems and all that is required to operate them into Syria, a move which was likely an attempt to dissuade the West and/or Arab League from moving to establish a no-fly zone over Syria.

Russian warships have also moved into Syrian waters previously, and most recently it was announced that a Russian naval group docked in the Syrian port city of Tartus.

All of these actions make some quite pronounced statements to the United States, NATO and Arab League members who are seeking to topple the Assad regime.

However, it just becomes more heated as the days go by and the statements coming out of Russia just get increasingly unequivocal.

Remarks made by Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev have been some of the strongest to date.

In an interview with Russian newspaper Kommersant, Patrushev stated that NATO member states are planning “direct military intervention” in cooperation with the Arab League, according to RT.

Such an operation would likely be mostly in the blueprint of the foreign intervention in Libya which led to the brutal murder of Qaddafi, the desecration of his corpse, Western puppets being put in power, Western nations reaping the windfall profits of the contracts to rebuild Libya, and of course a massive civilian death toll.

This seems like hardly the course of events anyone would seek to repeat, yet this is exactly what they are apparently planning to do.

However, I must encourage the reader to keep in mind that this is not the first time such a report has been released, but in the previous case no such no-fly zone or so-called “buffer zone” ever emerged.

This operation would likely break from the mold of the Libyan operation in one important way: instead of the United States, France, Italy and the United Kingdom providing most of the firepower and personnel, it very well might be Turkey in this case.

Turkey might turn its back on a former ally due to the Turkish-Iranian rivalry.

Turkey reportedly has “huge ambitions” in the region and the major impediment to the realization of such ambitions is Iran, which continues to maintain close ties with Syria – something which obviously irks the West.

Patrushev has stated that the United States and Turkey are thought to be in the process of negotiating the establishment of a no-fly zone over Syria, which obviously would directly benefit the armed insurgent forces in the nation like the Free Syrian Army.

Recently a foreign journalist was killed in Syria, but not by government forces as many in the controlled establishment media immediately assumed.

This became quite obvious when it came out that the journalist was in fact at a pro-government rally, and a government under siege domestically shooting its own citizens who support them makes so little sense that it is surprising that anyone would say otherwise, even in the chronically nonsensical mainstream media.

Events like this have been occurring since day one, but the mentions of the armed opposition and their actions are usually either omitted, marginalized, or strategically buried in articles.

Obviously this is a concerted effort as the presence of opposition gunmen is hardly an insignificant detail and it thoroughly contradicts the mainstream media’s manufactured narrative.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has continued to point to a foreign conspiracy as the cause of the uprising, statements which are routinely derided by the Western media and governments.

Assad’s statements are usually either ignored or brushed off as the insane rantings of some paranoid lunatic, which is a classic diversionary tactic intended to keep people from actually looking into his claims.

When one does, it becomes quite clear that there is, in fact, a Western conspiracy against Syria, and it is hardly unclear when one takes the time to look past the myopic coverage of the establishment media.

Often a news outlet will actually report on the Western backing of opposition groups, funding of anti-government propaganda, etc. while somehow managing to forget to integrate this knowledge into their future coverage.

This is because it wouldn’t look very good for a news outlet to cover the statements of chronic deceiver Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and then mention how there is evidence that clearly shows all of her statements to be bold faced lies.

The same State Department has been guilty of pumping anti-government propaganda into Syria via satellite while American ambassadors have met with prominent Syrian opposition figures and Syrian opposition non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have had high-level meetings with the British government as well.

Unsurprisingly, instead of even attempting to address the mounds of evidence that show covert foreign involvement in the Syrian uprising – and the greater “Arab Spring” uprisings in general – Clinton just derided the comments as a whole.

Clinton made her typically laughably baseless statements during a joint press-conference with the Prime Minister of Qatar, calling Assad’s speech “chillingly cynical” adding that America “cannot permit President Assad and his regime to have impunity.”

The presence of the Qatari PM is quite ironic given their heavy involvement in the Libyan intervention, including running all of the major ground operations for the NATO-backed rebel forces.

We must keep in mind that al Jazeera is a Qatari state-funded propaganda arm, thus the news they publish must be viewed with the necessary skepticism, like all media but especially the controlled establishment media.

It is also worth noting that the Clinton just stated that the Arab League’s monitoring mission should be brought to an end because they have so far totally failed to “deter the government’s 10-month campaign of violence against dissidents,” according to Bloomberg.

The timing of Clinton’s remarks is quite interesting as well, not only because she had just met with Qatari Foreign Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jabor al Thani, but also because American President Barack Obama also recently met with the Saudi Foreign Minister, Saud al-Faisal at the White House.

Saudi Arabia has been a key partner in the Western growth in the region, especially in the effort to encircle and isolate Syria and Iran.

As I have previously covered, the United States is also arming these allied states in the Persian Gulf, in the case of Saudi Arabia it is with new and renovated fighter jets.

A Middle East analyst at the Academy of Sciences in Moscow, Irina Zvyagelskaya, said that Russia is concerned that if Assad’s government is toppled, Islamic radicals may come to power.

This is hardly a baseless claim given that we have seen the  heavy involvement of Islamic forces throughout the so-called Arab Spring uprisings, especially in Libya and Egypt.

Zvyagelskaya stated that while Russia would continue to block any attempt at approval of a no-fly zone in the United Nations Security Council, Western nations and their allies very well might take an approach similar to that in 2003 in the case of Iraq.

This would be an independent coalition, outside of the United Nations, which could then engage in anything and everything without concern over operating outside of a UN mandate or a UNSC resolution.

“Syria has not become an object of interest for a new coalition of the willing itself,” Patrushev said. “The plan is to punish Damascus not so much for repressing the opposition as for its unwillingness to sever friendly relations with Tehran.”

Then again, as we saw in Libya, the West and others have absolutely no problem with breaching a United States Security Council Resolution if they decide to do so.

“We have seen before what a no-fly zone means, it will be used to overthrow the regime,” Zvyagelskaya said.

This is quite right, as we have seen in Libya where the no-fly zone actually killed civilians instead of protecting them as it was intended to do.

Instead, it was used to advance the NATO-backed and Qatari-controlled rebel ground forces in their effort to kill Qaddafi and enact regime change.

As I have previously reported, the Free Syrian Army – comprised mostly of military defectors – has been pushing for a “buffer zone” (a less intimidating term for a no-fly zone) in the north on the Turkish-Syrian border and the South on the Syrian-Jordanian border.

The Jordanian aspect of this equation becomes more important when one considers the reports of American troop buildups on the Syrian-Jordanian border in the recent past.

There is the real possibility that this force (if it is actually still there, which is unconfirmed as far as I know) could be used to create or assist in the establishment of this so-called buffer zone.

Fyodor Lukyanov, an analyst at the Council on Foreign and Defense policy in Moscow, said that these statements from Russia are likely due to either intelligence regarding Western military plans in Syria or perhaps it may just be an effort to make it clear that they will actively oppose any efforts made by the West or its allies to intervene.

However, I would argue that this has been quite clear with the instances of Russian warship presence and the delivery of advanced missile systems that Russia has always intended to take an active role in opposing any foreign efforts.

“After the Libyan experience, Russia will do everything to stop this scenario from happening,” Lukyanov told Bloomberg, adding, “Syria is much more important than Libya from Russia’s point of view.”

I think that it is quite obvious at this point that Syria is more important to Russia given that Russia never docked naval vessels on the coast of Libya or delivered weapons systems.

All of these statements from the Russians only serve to make it even more obvious that they will not stand for yet another Western intervention under the guise of humanitarianism.

Wu Sike, China’s Special Envoy to the Middle East said that China rejected the internationalization of the Syrian crisis while showing their support for the Arab League’s efforts to resolve the situation, according to Syria’s SANA via Azerbaijani Trend News Agency.

Sike stated that the situation should be addressed within the Arab framework, clearly implying that the Western companies trying to meddle in Syria’s domestic affairs need to mind their own business.

Interestingly, Sike’s statements conflicted with those of Clinton most significantly in that the Chinese Envoy said that the Arab League’s monitors should be assisted by the Syrian government and the other sides involved in hopes that they will succeed.

On the other hand, Clinton seems to believe that it has been a total failure which should be chalked up as a loss, indicating that the next option they will be pursuing will likely involve some kind of military action.

Hopefully the significant opposition from Russia – backed up with the threat of military action – coupled with China’s more diplomatic approach will serve to dissuade the West and the regional allies from engaging in another imperialistic regime change.

Unfortunately the wild brazenness with which the West has been operating as of late does nothing to reassure me that this will not occur.

Recommended related reading (in chronological order, oldest to latest):

Top Search Terms Used to Find This Page:

January 27, 2012 | Categories: co-opting and/or destabilization, news, Syria, tyranny, war | Leave a comment

Friend Turned Foe: Turkey Rounds on Syria in Regional Power Bid [video]

YouTube – GlobalResearchTV
January 19, 2012

Turkey, Syria’s neighbor and long-time ally, is now taking an active role in attempts to dethrone Assad. Ankara is backing Western actions, reportedly providing a base for training Syrian rebels and even discussing a no-fly zone with the US.

­Back in 2002 Turkey, strictly following its newly-designed “zero problems with neighbors” foreign policy, was engaged in building strong economic, political, and social ties with neighboring countries.

Everything was going to plan until the Arab Spring hit the region.

Turkey faced a choice: to maintain its policy of engagement with authoritarian Arab leaders, or to take a different path.

And Syria became the country which felt the full force of Ankara’s policy u-turn when Turkey came out in support of Syria’s opposition and aligned itself with the country’s staunch enemy — the US.

Turkey found itself in the frontline of the Syrian crisis last June when thousands of Syrians poured across its border, fleeing a government crackdown on the town of Jisr-al-Shughour. At the time, the Red Crescent said it was caring for 30,000 refugees in camps just inside Turkish territory.

Threats of the conflict spilling into Turkey caused Ankara to consider sending troops into Syria to create a buffer zone. In the event, it was not deemed necessary, but the tensions did not help relations between the two neighbors.

Turkey claimed that the Syrian crisis could not be resolved through negotiations, that Bashar al-Assad could no longer be trusted, and started to act.

Turkey has suspended energy cooperation with Syria and threatened to stop supplying electricity to the country.

It followed the Arab League and announced a raft of punitive measures targeting President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, provoking Damascus to suspend its free trade pact with Ankara.

As a result, cross border trade ground to a halt; flourishing commercial links between northern Syria and south-eastern Turkey were severed as if they had never existed.

Reports about American and NATO forces training Syrian rebels in the southeastern Turkish city of Hakkari added more fuel to the fire.

And according to PressTV reports quoted in the Turkish daily Milliyet, former FBI employee Sibel Edmonds has said the bureau started a training program in Turkey back in May.

She also mentioned that the US was involved in smuggling arms into Syria from Incirlik military base in Turkey in addition to providing financial support for the Syrian rebels.

Russia’s Kommersant daily also reported in November on operations being managed from Turkish territory.

Meanwhile, rebel groups that attack government forces have frequently fled retribution by crossing the Turkish border.

And finally, the most recent move from Turkey — discussions with the US about a no-fly zone over Syria, in what looks suspiciously like a Libya-style scenario.

Nikolay Patrushev, head of the Security Council of Russia, said on January 13 that the United States and Turkey — both NATO members — were discussing the possibility of a no-fly zone.

­From ‘Zero Problem Policy’ to Regional Leadership

­Back in 2003, Turkey and Syria entered a golden era of bilateral relations, with a free trade agreement, a visa-free regime and several presidential visits. The border areas became especially close — families living on both sides felt they shared a common home.

To switch from “a zero-problem policy” with your neighbors to a “problem-creating position,” you need good reason. And Turkey seems to have few.

Geographically, politically and religiously, Turkey has always been the crossing point of decidedly-different worlds.

Ankara has long harbored ambitions to be the region’s powerful, leading state.

But the influence of Iran, Israel and Egypt complicated Turkey’s path to its goal.

The Arab Spring has significantly shifted the years-long balance of power in the Middle East. Everyone has become weaker — everyone except Turkey which, on the contrary, has significantly increased its influence in the Middle East and North Africa.

“Turkey wants to be leading this movement of changes and reforms in the Middle East,” Dr. Jeremy Salt, a Middle East politics expert, told RT.

“This is a kind of cohabitation between America and Turkey: Turkey helps America in exchange for some stuff. This is how Turkey becomes more and more influential in the region,” echoes political science professor Gokhan Bacik.

The road Turkey is now following may look slippery, but no matter how dangerous its choice may be, there seems to be no way back.

Originally aired on RT, January 18, 2012
http://rt.com/news/turkey-syria-neighbors-policy-077/

January 27, 2012 | Categories: co-opting and/or destabilization, news, sovereignty, Syria, Turkey, tyranny, videos, war | Leave a comment

Syrian social media crossfire kills users

By NewsBot
End the Lie
January 13, 2012

Syria is vowing to investigate the death of a French TV reporter. He was killed along with eight Syrians when a mortar shell hit a crowd gathered for a pro-government rally. But it is not only the media being caught between the conflicting sides.

­Muhammed Mahmud’s son Tamman was an activist who used social networking sites, such as Facebook, to call for peace in Syria. He had phoned his family to tell them to watch him doing an interview on local TV.

“I saw him on TV, and he looked well,” his mother told journalists. But it was to be one of the last times the family saw him alive.

“Soon after that he was kidnapped. He left home and never returned,” his father explained. “We found his body in the morning, and his face was mutilated. It’s too painful for me to remember that moment.”

It remains unclear who killed Tamman. His family thinks it may have been militants who thought he was a working for the security forces after seeing him speak on television. But in reality he worked at a sugar mill and was training to become a computer specialist.

But, like so many other young educated people in Syria right now, he felt a need to be involved in the changing reality in his country. Syria, in fact, has one of the youngest populations in the Arab world.

In schools across Syria younger generations have become better educated than their grandparents’ or parents’ generations. It has meant they are not only more aware of their political rights, but more able to demand them too.

Many young opposition supporters have taken their campaign online, relying heavily on social media like Facebook and Twitter – tools which have helped topple regimes in Egypt and Libya.

“People’s literacy and also media literacy has been enormously enhanced in recent decades by both education and technological change,” says Mark Almond, a history lecturer at Oxford University. “But I think we should remember this can cut both ways. Opposition sides can try to get out their message and can mobilize people, but also even supporters of governments are much less dependent on a single news station or a single state newspaper.”

But between a regime under pressure and an increasingly militarized opposition, many Syrians have been left trapped in the middle.

“I have only one question: what did they kill my son for?” Muhammed Mahmud questions. “My son wasn’t a politician or a public figure. Let various movements, national and local, exist in this country. I don’t understand why my son was killed.”

Speaking before a crowd, many of whom were young supporters, President Assad once again repeated his promises of reforms and gave a precise timetable, but the move was met with skepticism from the opposition.

Meanwhile, on all sides of this conflict young, politically-motivated Syrians remain committed to fighting for the political future of their country, despite the fact that for many like Tamman that fight could end up costing them their lives.

 

Source – http://rt.com/news/educated-syria-youth-vulnerable-671/

Top Search Terms Used to Find This Page:

January 19, 2012 | Categories: co-opting and/or destabilization, news, protests, Syria, tyranny | 1 Comment

Corbett Report Radio 047 – Geopolitics with Madison Ruppert [audio]

Dees Illustration

Corbett Report Radio
January 12, 2012

Madison Ruppert of EndTheLie.com is our guest tonight on the program as we go over the latest news and geopolitical updates from around the world, including the recent car bomb assassination of yet another Iranian nuclear scientist, the growing tensions between NATO and Russia, China’s place on the chessboard, and more.

[CLICK HERE TO LISTEN TO THE SHOW]

Works Cited:

Was Israel behind yet another assassination of a nuclear scientist?
Iran: a quickly evolving geopolitical imbroglio – Part I / Part II / Part III
Leon Panetta admits Iran is not developing a nuclear weapon
Russia strikes back against US-NATO missile system with their own advanced radar
Syrian state media reports Russian naval flotilla arrival in Tartus
US and NATO are on the March Part I / Part II

January 14, 2012 | Categories: audio/podcast/radio, Iran, news, Syria, tyranny, war | Leave a comment

“Free Syrian Army” Unleashes Suicide Bombing in Damascus; Madrid 2004 Bomber Belhadj of Al Qaeda Now Commands “FSA” from Iskanderun, Turkey; NATO Airlifting Libyan Terrorists and Weapons for Salvadoran Death Squad Option vs. Syria [video]

Webster G. Tarpley, Ph. D.
PressTV
January 6, 2012

Press TV talks with Webster Griffin Tarpley, author and lecturer in Washington who shares his in-depth insights of the movements by Western and Arab elements behind the scenes to destabilize Syria and terrorize its people. What follows is an approximate transcript of the interview.

Press TV: What is your reaction to our first speaker and to the US’ broader plan to, let’s put it this way, at a minimum create this unrest in the country?

Webster Tarpley: Let me confirm some things that the first speaker said. I was in Syria myself in the second half of November and I visited Homs and I went to the Zahra neighborhood and in particular the Zahra hospital and the main demand that was raised by ordinary people of all religions was that they don’t want the Syrian army taken out of there; they want the Syrian army to come in.

The main demand that I heard was that they want the Syrian army to post itself on the rooftops of houses and prevent terrorist snipers from killing people. And those snipers are killing everybody – they’re killing if you are pro-Assad, anti-Assad, taking your kid to school it doesn’t matter because they kill you and then al-Jazeera and the BBC and France24 arrive and say, uh huh, another victim of the Assad regime.

This is, regarding the US, this is the Salvadorian option. People may remember about six years ago now at the beginning of 2005 there was a discussion inside the Pentagon on how to start a civil war in Iraq and they decided they would use the death squads that they had used in Latin America and Argentina in Central America and so forth; that they could bring that to Iraq, but part of that plan was already Syria because they regarded Syria as a part of it.

Now, the specific timing of what just happened – the head of the so-called Free Syrian Army, this colonel who is undoubtedly a NATO agent of some kind, made an ultimatum on Wednesday. He said I’m giving the Syrian government four days and they have to stop shooting, they basically have to surrender or else I will carry out some spectacular action. Well… here is the spectacular action.

The other thing I would stress is that the head of the observers, the Sudanese general al-Dabi, he wanted to go to Eskandarun, Turkey because that seems to be the main NATO base from where this is all being organized.

There has been a NATO airlift from Libya with about 600 to 1500 Libyan fighters from the Libyan Islamic Fighting group, in other words al-Qaeda, led by the infamous butcher Belhadj with all kinds of weapons stolen from Gaddaffi’s arms depots; you’ve got French and British Special Forces officers; you’ve got the CIA; you’ve got the US Joint Special Operations Command running communications. I’m sure given all this the Israelis cannot be far behind.

That’s going on in Eskandarun and you notice the vast majority of violence is in these peripheral areas, it’s either the Lebanese, the Turkish, the Iraqi or the Jordanian border because it’s all being brought in from outside.

The real commander of these death squads, because that’s what they are – it’s a cross border invasion – there is no civil war in Syria; there is no uprising in Syria per se. There’s a cross border invasion of these death squads and terrorists.

Belhadj – this is the butcher of Baghdad, he was killing Shiites in Baghdad for the US to start that infamous civil war. He’s the butcher of Tripoli now, he was part of the NATO invasion. The former prime minister of Spain, Aznar, has pointed out that Belhadj is one of the prime movers of the Madrid 2004 train bombing – so he’s also the butcher of Madrid.

So, Belhadj and his gang they would now like to become the butchers of Damascus and I can’t see how anybody in Syria wants this – you’re going to get a NATO bombing and then you’re going to be put under a bunch of Libyan al-Qaeda terrorists led by Belhadj. Not a good future for Syria.

Press TV: In terms of support that Assad does have in the country, we’ve heard varying degrees, but it’s more than half at a minimum up to 70 percent support with some undecided and some opposition, which is natural.

Is the violence and unrest in that country and its reaction maybe to the advantage of the revolutions and uprisings in pro-US governments like Egypt, Yemen and Bahrain for example – countries that the West calls the alliance of moderation?

Webster Tarpley: The goal of US and British NATO foreign policy in 2011 was the destabilization of all Arab and all Middle East governments almost without exception – maybe some monarchies not immediately, but the rest of them. Entrenched satraps like Mubarak or Ben Ali were dumped because these people had become powerful enough to say ‘no’ on certain issues. For example the US wanted Egyptian bases, Egyptian troops for Iraq and he had said no, so eventually they decided that they would get rid of him.

The goal of course is the destruction of the national state, which is what we’re seeing – partition, war lords, chaos, terrorists like Belhadj taking over the division we see in Iraq and so forth.

I would just like to point out that the financing of this in particular with the example of Belhadj, if Belhadj is this guy who’s been taken from Libya, put on a NATO plane and flown to Eskandarun leaving behind, as was mentioned, a civil war in Libya with the Misrata brigade fighting the other brigades; and the army wants money; it’s total chaos.

That’s fine from the US and British point of view, but when you look at Syria, what’s coming at them is Belhadj and his right-hand man is called el-Harrathi, he’s is Eskandarun and then there’s a guy in the background called el-Salibi and Salibi’s job is he delivers the money. For example, the wrecking of Libya cost about two billion dollars specifically from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Qatar.

And I think you have to look at Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE as the people who are financing this. The direction is clearly NATO; the people on the ground are jihadists from Afghanistan from Iraq from all over, they’ve been brought in by NATO intelligence and the money is coming in from these reactionary monarchs.

Press TV: You have Saudi Arabia, you have Qatar that you mentioned and the United Arab Emirates that are helping. What is there to say that the US, ‘the Empire’ as our guest in London called them is not going to turn against them?

Webster Tarpley: There is no guarantee and eventually as the wheels turn every satrap becomes unbearable because every satrap becomes capable of saying no. So there is no security. I would warn the al-Thani family of Qatar. They think they’re sitting pretty; they won’t be for very long. If you sew the wind you will reap the whirlwind.

———————————-
[H/T: TARPLEY.net]

January 13, 2012 | Categories: co-opting and/or destabilization, news, sovereignty, Syria, tyranny, videos, war | Leave a comment

Anti-Assad Conspiracy: Bloody crime or paranoid fantasy? (video)

RT
January 11, 2012

Three people have reportedly been killed by security forces across Syria on Wednesday. Bashar Al-Assad has spoken to supporters in Damascus for the second time in the last 24 hours, reiterating his dismissal of calls to step down. He’s blaming the ten-month-long unrest in the country on foreign-funded terrorists, promising to crush them with extreme prejudice. The UN says Damascus has stepped up its crackdown on protesters, but Assad claims no order was ever given to fire on civilians. The President’s pledged commitment to Democratic reform, promising a referendum on a new constitution by March, and free elections soon after. RT talks to independent news editor James Corbett.

January 12, 2012 | Categories: news, sovereignty, Syria, tyranny, videos, war | Leave a comment

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »