SYRIA: CIA-MI6 Intel Ops and Sabotage
By Felicity Arbuthnot
Global Research
February 7, 2012
“In order to facilitate the action of liberative (sic) forces, …a special effort should be made to eliminate certain key individuals. …[to] be accomplished early in the course of the uprising and intervention, …
Once a political decision has been reached to proceed with internal disturbances in Syria, CIA is prepared, and SIS (MI6) will attempt to mount minor sabotage and coup de main (sic) incidents within Syria, working through contacts with individuals. …Incidents should not be concentrated in Damascus …
Further : a “necessary degree of fear .. frontier incidents and (staged) border clashes”, would “provide a pretext for intervention… the CIA and SIS [MI6 should use … capabilitites in both psychological and action fields to augment tension.” (Joint US-UK leaked Intelligence Document, London and Washington, 1957)
“’The very concept of objective truth is fading out of the world. Lies will pass into history.” (George Orwell (Eric Arthur Blair, 1903-1950.)
For anyone in two minds about what is really going on in Syria, and whether President Assad, hailed a decade ago as “A Modern Day Attaturk”, has become the latest megalomaniacal despot, to whose people a US-led posse of nations, must deliver “freedom”, with weapons of mass, home, people, nation and livelihood destruction, here is a salutary tale from modern history.
Have the more recent sabre rattlings against Syria* been based on US-UK government papers, only discovered in 2003 – and since air brushed (or erroneously omitted) from even BBC timelines, on that country?(i)
In late 2003, the year of the Iraq invasion, Matthew Jones, a Reader in International History, at London’s Royal Holloway College, discovered “frighteningly frank” documents:1957 plans between then UK Prime Minister, Harold Macmillan, and then President, Dwight Eisenhower, endorsing: “a CIA-MI6 plan to stage fake border incidents as an excuse for an invasion (of Syria) by Syria’s pro-western neighbours.” (ii)
At the heart of the plan was the assassination of the perceived power behind then President Shukri al-Quwatli. Those targeted were: Abd al-Hamid Sarraj, Head of Military Intelligence; Afif al-Bizri, Chief of Syrian General Staff: and Khalid Bakdash, who headed the Syrian Communist Party.
The document was drawn up in Washington in the September of 1957:
“In order to facilitate the action of liberative (sic) forces, reduce the capabilities of the regime to organize and direct its military actions … to bring about the desired results in the shortest possible time, a special effort should be made to eliminate certain key individuals.
“Their removal should be accomplished early in the course of the uprising and intervention, and in the light of circumstances existing at the time.”
In the light of President Assad’s current allegations of foreign forces and interventions, cross border incursions (as Colonel Qadafi’s before him, so sneered at by Western governments and media – and, of course, ultimately proved so resoundingly correct.) there are some fascinating, salutary phrases:
“Once a political decision has been reached to proceed with internal disturbances in Syria, CIA is prepared, and SIS (MI6) will attempt to mount minor sabotage and coup de main (sic) incidents within Syria, working through contacts with individuals.
“Incidents should not be concentrated in Damascus … care should be taken to avoid causing key leaders of the Syrian regime to take additional personal protection measures.”
Further : a “necessary degree of fear .. frontier incidents and (staged) border clashes”, would “provide a pretext for intervention”, by Iraq and Jordan – then still under British mandate.
Syria was to be: “made to appear as sponsor of plots, sabotage and violence directed against neighbouring governments … the CIA and SIS [Her Majesty’s Secret International Serivce, MI6] should use … capabilities in both psychological and action fields to augment tension.”
Incursions in to Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon, would involve: “sabotage, national conspiracies, and various strong arms activities”, were, advised the document, to be blamed on Damascus.
In late December 2011 an opposition “Syria National Council” was announced, to “liberate the country”, representatives met with Hilary Clinton. There now seems to be a US – endorsed “Syrian Revolutionary Council.”
The Eisenhower-Macmillan plan was for funding of the: “Free Syria Committee” and “arming of political factions with paramilitary or other actionist capabilities”, within Syria.
CIA-MI6, planned fomenting internal uprisings and replacing the Ba’ath-Communist-leaning government, with a Western, user-friendly one. Expecting this to be met by public hostility, they planned to: “probably need to rely first on repressive measures and arbitrary exercise of power.”
The document was signed off in both London and Washington. It was, wrote Macmillan in his diary: “a most formidable report.” A Report which was: “withheld even from British Chiefs of Staff …”
Washington and Whitehall had become concerned at Syria’s increasingly pro-Soviet, rather than pro-Western sympathies – and the Ba’ath (Pan Arab) and Communist party alliance, also largely allied within the Syrian army.
However, even political concerns, were trumped by Syria then controlling a main pipeline from the Western bonanza of Iraq’s oil fields, in those pre-Saddam Hussein days.
Briefly put: in 1957, Syria allied with Moscow (which included an agreement for military and economic aid) also recognized China – and then as now, the then Soviet Union warned the West against intervening in Syria.
Syria, is unchanged as an independent minded country, and the loyalties remain. It broadly remains the cradle of the Pan Arab ideal of Ba’athism, standing alone, since the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime.
In 1957, this independent mindedness caused Loy Henderson, a Senior State Department official, to say that:“the present regime in Syria had to go …”
Ultimately, the plan was not used, since, British mandate or not, neighbouring countries refused to play. However, the project, overtly, bears striking similarity to the reality of events over the last decade, in Syria – and the region.
In a near 1957 re-run, Britain’s Foreign Minister, William Hague has said President Assad “will feel emboldened” by the UN Russia-China vote in Syria’s favour.
Hilary (“We came, we saw, he died”) Clinton, has called for: “friends of a democratic Syria”, to unite and rally against the Assad government:
“We need to work together to send them a clear message: you cannot hold back the future at the point of a gun”, said the women filmed purportedly watching the extrajudicial, illegal assassination of may be, or may be not, Osma Bin Laden and others – but certainly people were murdered – by US illegal invaders – at the point of lots of guns.
Supremely ironically, she was speaking in Munich (5th February) historically: “The birth place of the Nazi party.”
The Russia-China veto at the UN on actions against Syria, has been condemned by the US, varyingly, as: “Disgusting”, ‘shameful”, “deplorable”, “a travesty.”
Eye opening, is the list of US vetoes to be found at (iii). Jaw dropping double standards can only be wondered at (again.).
Perhaps the bottom line is: in 1957, Iraq’s oil was at the top of the agenda, of which Syria held an important key. Today, it is Iran’s – and as Michel Chossudovsky notes so succinctly: “The road to Tehran is through Damascus.”(iv)
Notes
i. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14703995
ii. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2003/sep/27/uk.syria1
iii. http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/4237/us-on-un-veto_disgusting-shameful-deplorable-a-tra
iv. http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25955
Felicity Arbuthnot is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Felicity Arbuthnot
Echoes of Libya: al Qaeda backs Syrian rebels, Arab League vows increased support for uprising
By Madison Ruppert
Editor of End the Lie
February 12, 2012
Ayman al-Zawahiri, widely regarded as al Qaeda’s current number one figure, has called upon the rebels in Syria – who already have strong ties to the West – to continue their campaign against one of the few people on earth continuing to oppose Western hegemony.
A common misconception amongst the Western public is that if you seek to expose the corruption and highly duplicitous nature of the West’s approach to these so-called revolutions, you somehow agree with or are defending the target of the uprising.
This couldn’t be further from the truth, and I do not think that foreign nations should be meddling in the domestic affairs of other countries, especially when such involvement is focused on regime change but this kind of flawed logic allows individuals in the West to be demonized for questioning “popular” uprisings abroad.
The West, especially the United States, has been taking a prominent role in supporting the Syrian opposition for months now – even going as far as to pump propaganda into the country in order to foment unrest – something which has lead Syria to (rightly, I might add) complain about America’s role in the uprising.
Obviously this was exactly the same in the case of Libya where one of the most prominent rebel groups was the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). The LIFG is not only a terrorist organization listed by the United States Department of State, but also implicated by a 2007 West Point Combating Terrorism Center report.
The West Point Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) report found that the most fighters per capita among those who traveled to Iraq to fight American troops were from eastern Libya, specifically the cities of Benghazi and Darnah.
These cities became the breeding ground for the Libyan uprising and at one point in last October, there was an al Qaeda flag flying over the courthouse in Benghazi.
In Libya it was even reported in the establishment news that the rebels not only had ties to terrorist groups like al Qaeda but indeed al Qaeda itself was actually sending fighters directly into the country to help topple Gaddafi.
Of course somehow the Western media is still able to – or at least gives the impression that they are able to – walk away with this information thinking that the uprising is a legitimate and organic movement which should be supported and defended, even though it has the backing of terrorist organizations with intimate ties to Western intelligence.
These al Qaeda stooges always couch their statements in hollow anti-Western rhetoric, but all one must do is look at their actions to see what they are truly after: sustaining a war in the Middle East which is now growing around the world while getting countless Muslims killed, helping strip the American people of our most essential liberties, all while reaping untold profits for the war profiteers.
“Don’t depend on the West and Turkey, which had deals, mutual understanding and sharing with this regime for decades and only began to abandon it after they saw it faltering,” said Ayman al-Zawahiri.
This is completely ridiculous because he is actually telling the Syrian people to carry out the exact operation the West is seeking while trying to seem anti-Western. It would be laughable if it was not taken seriously by so many individuals abroad.
It is also somewhat ridiculous for Zawahiri to be claiming that the Syrian opposition shouldn’t be depending on Turkey after Turkey was accused of helping run armed incursions into Syria, one of which was allegedly thwarted by the Syrian military.
Meanwhile, the Arab League has stepped up their game against Syria, with Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal saying that the League has to “give all forms of support” to the Syrian opposition, which very well might be a hint at either military intervention or military aid.
Officials from the Arab League also called for complete stoppage of “all forms of diplomatic cooperation” with the Syrian government along with “tighter economic sanctions” according to Press TV.
France and the United States have also proposed to set up a meeting of the “Friends of Syria” anti-government group in Tunisia in late February, which would just be an extension of the close relationship the West has had with the Syrian opposition for some time now.
Just like in the case of Libya, some American politicians have been quick to jump behind the Syrian rebels, including Republican Senator John McCain who has been a proponent of arming the rebels, just as he was with the Libyan opposition.
Months ago McCain was even calling the Libyan rebels heroes, when these are the same “heroes” that are now torturing people to death and committing atrocities just as bad as or worse than Gaddafi.
The situation in Syria is far from simple, and if you want to truly get a sense of what is going on there you’re going to need to do a lot of reading. I might suggest you start with the following:
Recommended related reading (in chronological order, oldest to latest):
-
Is Syria the next target for Globalist intervention?
-
Propaganda Regarding Syria Intensifies to Justify Yet Another “Humanitarian Intervention”
-
Libya redux? France and UK call for UN action against Syrian government
-
Syria: Lybia 2.0? It looks more likely by the day
-
Western funded groups continue to destabilize Syria, Germany calls for urgent UN Security Council meet among al Qaeda praise for the American-led “revolution”
-
United Nations Security Council issues statement condemning Syrian violence, media still glossing over armed opposition
-
Hypocritical insanity: U.S. demands China explain need for aircraft carrier
-
Russia and China block UN resolution on Syria amidst fears it could mean another Libya-style intervention
-
Is Syria the next target for Western Libya-style “humanitarian” intervention?
U.S.-Syrian relations devolve further as Ambassadors are pulled out
-
Syrian government decries America’s ‘blatant interference’ in uprising
-
Russian warships entering Syrian waters to inhibit foreign invasion as opposition calls for no-fly zone
-
Violence continues in Syria as Condoleezza Rice promotes unilateral U.S. action
-
As predicted, Arab League and Turkey reportedly plan no-fly zone over Syria with U.S. logistical support
-
Reports say Russian ships in Syrian waters delivered advanced anti-aircraft missile system and technicians
-
Facebook page removed after uploading video exposing obviously skewed Barbara Walters interview with Assad
-
US-NATO troops reportedly gathering on Jordan-Syria border
-
Syrian state media reports Russian naval flotilla arrival in Tartus
-
Foreign Syrian intervention and the Russian-Chinese opposition
-
The Syria debacle – part I
-
The Syria debacle – part II
-
Syrian troops stop attempted Turkish armed infiltration according to state media
-
Could NATO get pulled into Syrian intervention by Turkey under the collective defense initiative?
Related posts:
- Al Qaeda Backs US Regime Change in Syria
- Al-Qaeda joins ranks of Syrian revolt backers
- UN gets involved: Arab League gives up on Syrian crisis?
- Arab League calls for joint UN-Arab peacekeeping mission in Syria
- Arab League Seeks Joint Arab-UN Peacekeeping Mission In Syria
Short URL: http://EndtheLie.com/?p=37701
SYRIA: Arab League Observer Mission Refutes Mainstream Media Narrative
Global Research
February 1, 2012
http://blogs.taz.de/netizenblog
The Arab League Observer Mission succeeded in providing a different perspective from that of the mainstream western media about what has been happening on the ground in Syria. After a resolution by the Arab League which was worked out in an agreement with the Syrian government, Observers from the League went to Syria and provided a means of investigating what was happening.
The report of the Observers mission that was concluded on January 19, noted several important observations.(1)
1. The mission noted that there were false reports being made of explosions or violence and when the observers went to the location, they found that the reports were unfounded.
2. The mission found that media accounts were exaggerated about the nature of incidents or numbers of people killed in incidents and protests.
3. There were discrepancies in the lists the Mission received of people in detention. Names were repeated, or information was missing or inaccurate about detainees.
4. The Mission observed armed groups committing acts of violence against Government forces, resulting in the death and injury of the forces being attacked. Some of the armed groups were using flares and armour-piercing projectiles.
5. A French journalist who was killed and a Belgium journalist who was injured were the victims of opposition mortar shells.
6. The mission was the target of a hostile media campaign with media publishing untrue statements, distorting the truth, and attributing statements to the head of the mission which were never made.
7. Such accounts by the media undermined the work of the observer mission and seemed to be aimed toward making the mission fail.
8. The Observer mission was able to fulfill its mandate.
The most important observation was as the Report stated, that it had “determined that there is an armed entity” that had not been mentioned in the protocol setting up the mission.
This armed opposition entity was a force that needed to be taken into account in structuring the mission. The report listed a number of violent incidents, some of which were carried out by the Free Syrian Army and some of the other armed opposition groups, stating that such incidents would widen the gap and increase the bitterness in the situation.
The observers requested the continuation of the mission, but with proper equipment and numbers, for another month. The committee in charge approved the request. The mission was to be extended. But suddenly, a different agenda was put into action, an agenda calling for regime change in Syria. Similarly, armed attacks against the government were stepped up and government forces sought to stem these attacks.
What had been a promising beginning for a contribution to a peaceful settlement of the conflict, was hijacked by forces intent on imposing a military solution of regime change on Syria.
Subsequently, pressure was put on the UN Security Council, pressure from both inside and outside the Council to authorize a proposal for regime change in Syria and for foreign intervention against Syria.The scenario is to play out with a high level meeting at the Security Council on Tuesday, January 31, of Foreign Ministers of some of the nations on the Council.
Also there was a report at Voltaire Network that on Sunday night, January 29, the Secretary General of the Gulf Cooperation Council, Abdul Al-Zayani, went to Brussels to meet with the Secretary General of NATO, Anders Fogh Rasmussen. (2)
Recent information is that the Arab League Secretary-General decided to freeze the Observer Mission which had been renewed for another month by the League’s Ad Hoc Ministerial Council. The Committee, according to an article at Voltaire Network is “an Arab Plan follow-up organism consisting of 5 States out of 22 (Algeria, Egypt, Oman , Qatar, Sudan). (3) This Ad Hoc Ministerial Committee adopted the observer’s report by a vote of 4 votes in favor (Algeria, Egypt, Oman and Sudan), 1 against(Qatar). Little media coverage was given to this vote.
Voltaire Network also reported that the Secretary General of the Arab League, Nabil Al-Arabi took the view that the observers were jeopardized after “the spiritual leader of the Syrian Salafists, Sheikh Adnan Al-Arouri announced over Al-Arabiya airwaves that it was lawful to kill the Arab observers.” (4)
The decision to support the regime change plan by the Arab League was also made by a vote of the Ad Hoc Ministerial Council. According to the Voltaire Network, this vote was 3 in favor (Egypt, Oman and Qatar), 1 against (Sudan) and 1 abstention (Algeria). On the basis of this vote of 3 members of the Arab League, the Prime Minister of Qatar and the Secretary General of the Arab League were going to the UN to ask the Security Council to back their plan for regime change in Syria.(5)
On Friday, January 27, a new resolution drawn up by some of the members of the council and presented by Morocco, was introduced to the Security Council diverting the discussion from focusing on the positive results of the Arab League Observer Mission and how to support its continuation.
The hijacking of the Security Council Agenda from a discussion on continuing the process begun by the Observer Mission to a regime change resolution against Syria was a process that received little media attention, but much media hype reminiscent of the media pressure on the Security Council which resulted in its resolutions against Libya.
While there has been the claim of great media concern over unverified reports of 5000 casualties in Syria over an 8 month period, there was comparatively no media attention to the estimated 60,000 or more casualties of the NATO bombing and armed rebels attacks in Libya over a comparable period.
The buildup of pressure on the United Nations to undertake support for using the Security Council to provide legitimacy for military and political action against Syria is a challenge to the obligation of the UN Charter to support peaceful solutions to conflict situations and to respect the sovereignty of nations.
Notes:
1. “League of Arab States Observer Mission to Syria: Report of the Head of the League of Arab States Observer Mission to Syria for the period from 24 December 2011 to 18 January 2012″
http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/Report_of_Arab_League_Observer_Mission.pdf
(2)“The GCC and Turkey Turn to NATO”, Voltaire Network, 29 January 2012,
http:// www.voltairenet.org/a172551
(3)“Media confusion around the Arab League meeting”, Voltaire Network, 23 January 2012,
http://www.voltairenet.org/a172476
(4)“The GCC and Turkey Turn to NATO”, Voltaire Network, 29 January 2012,
http://www.voltairenet.org/a172551
(5)“Media confusion around the Arab League meeting”, Voltaire Network, 23 January 2012,
http://www.voltairenet.org/a172476
Ronda Hauben is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Ronda Hauben
CrossTalk: Syrian Series [video]
Russia Today
February 10, 2012
Why is the Arab League so concerned about the protests in Syria? How far will the Turks go? Should the international community help the rebels, and what options does it have? Is there any way to stop violence in the country without turning it into a new Libya or Iraq? CrossTalking with James Carafano, Nick Ottens and James Morris.
CT on FB: http://www.facebook.com/crosstalkrulez
Good Guns, Bad Guns? US Arms in Reach of Syria Rebels [video]
Russia Today
February 10, 2012
The US is setting up an international coalition aimed at supporting rebels in their struggle. The so-called “Friends of Democratic Syria” will involve countries willing to prop up the opposition, and pile more pressure on the regime. Direct military action is ruled out, but reports suggest British and Qatari special forces are already in the conflict zone. And while the US and its allies criticize Russia for supplying military hardware to Damascus, there are now calls from American lawmakers to arm the opposition. As RT’s Marina Portnaya reports, the region’s already been flooded with firepower made in the USA.
RT on Twitter http://twitter.com/RT_com
RT on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/RTnews
[hat tip: Activist Post]
Russia Blocking UNSC Resolution on Syria
By Tony Cartalucci
Land Destroyer Report
February 3, 2012
“…the UN is debating how to stop a conflict that it says has killed more than 5,400 people and is evolving into a civil war,” reports Businessweek. What Businessweek fails to mention is that the casualty reports continuously cited by both the UN and the corporate-media, come from an overtly compromised UN human rights report made up of “witness testimony” recorded not in Syria, or even in neighboring countries, but in Geneva by witnesses supplied by Syria’s foreign-funded opposition movement.
Additionally, the UN report was compiled not by objective third-parties, but by Karen Koning AbuZayd, a director of the US Washington-based corporate think-tank, Middle East Policy Council, that includes Exxon men, CIA agents, US military and government representatives, and even the president of the US-Qatar Business Council, which includes amongst its membership, AlJazeera, Chevron, Exxon, munitions manufacturer Raytheon (who supplied the opening salvos during NATO’s operations against Libya), and Boeing.
Clearly then, one can understand why Russia, China, and other nations are hesitant to sign onto what seems to be more of a plot of foreign-destabilization aimed at long planned regime change in Syria, than any legitimate concerns about the government’s alleged transgressions against an overtly armed, violent, and foreign-backed insurrection.
Businessweek notes that Russia’s hesitation may be well-founded with Libya in hindsight. Of course in Libya, a UN no-fly zone designed to allow NATO forces to “protect” Libyan civilians from government atrocities later determined to be fabricated, immediately turned into close-air support for foreign armed Libyan Islamic Fighting Group terrorists who committed a documented array of atrocities as they starved out and destroyed entire Libyan cities. One such city, Tawarga, saw its entire population of 30,000 purged by NATO-backed rebels, leaving what the London Telegraph described as a “ghost town.”
With this in mind, and even literally the same NATO-backed Libyan rebels now operating on Syria’s borders, it would be morally abhorrent for Russia, China, Brazil, India, South Africa, and others to allow what is clearly a repeat performance of NATO’s genocide in Libya, on behalf of Wall Street and London’s corporate-financier elite through the US, UK, EU governments, NATO and the UN.
It should be noted that America’s calls for regime change in Syria are not simply a result of spontaneous uprisings inside of Syria and the government’s response, but the culmination of decades of policy aimed toward replacing Syria’s government with a more pliant proxy regime. The latest unrest was in fact funded by the US, with open admissions coming from the US State Department itself.
Syria has been slated for regime change since as early as 1991. In 2002, then US Under Secretary of State John Bolton added Syria to the growing “Axis of Evil.” It would be later revealed that Bolton’s threats against Syria manifested themselves as covert funding and support for opposition groups inside of Syria spanning both the Bush and Obama administrations.
In an April 2011 CNN article, acting State Department spokesman Mark Toner stated, “We’re not working to undermine that [Syrian] government. What we are trying to do in Syria, through our civil society support, is to build the kind of democratic institutions, frankly, that we’re trying to do in countries around the globe. What’s different, I think, in this situation is that the Syrian government perceives this kind of assistance as a threat to its control over the Syrian people.”
Toner’s remarks came after the Washington Post released cables indicating the US has been funding Syrian opposition groups since at least 2005 and continued until today.
In an April AFP report, Michael Posner, the assistant US Secretary of State for Human Rights and Labor, stated 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 explain 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.” That ripple effect of course is the “Arab Spring,” and in Syria’s case, the impetus for the current unrest threatening to unhinge the nation and invite in foreign intervention.”
As the UN debates “how to stop a conflict that it says has killed more than 5,400 people” they may wish to turn toward the regimes bent to the will of Wall Street and London and kindly ask them to stop arming and backing terrorist death squads on Syria’s borders. They may consider drafting a resolution against the use of “NGOs” like the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the International Republican Institute (IRI), and the National Democratic Institute (NDI) to manipulate the political landscape of a foreign, sovereign nation-state.
While this is all wishful thinking, as these “international institutions” are nothing more than functionaries of Wall Street and London’s global ambitions, we must recognize that nations are increasingly reluctant to intervene in Syria, not because they are apathetic to the violence, but because it will only embolden the campaign of destabilization and terror demonstratively carried out by the West over the last year, built on similar campaigns carried out since the conclusion of World War II.
[hat tip: Activist Post]
SYRIA. TEXT OF LEAKED ARAB LEAGUE MISSION REPORT Report Reveals Media Lies Regarding Syria
Global Research Editor’s Note
We bring to the attention of our readers the Observers’ Mission Report of the League of Arab States to Syria.
The report acknowledges the existence of “an armed entity” involved in the killings of civilians and police as well as the conduct of terrorist acts, which in turn have contributed to triggering actions by government forces.
The Report refers to “armed opposition groups” as well as to the “Free Syrian Army”, both of which, according to the AL Mission, are involved in the deliberate killing of innocent civilians:
“In some zones, this armed entity reacted by attacking Syrian security forces and citizens, causing the Government to respond with further violence. In the end, innocent citizens pay the price for those actions with life and limb.
“In Homs, Idlib and Hama, the Observer Mission witnessed acts of violence being committed against Government forces and civilians that resulted in several deaths and injuries. Examples of those acts include the bombing of a civilian bus, killing eight persons and injuring others, including women and children, and the bombing of a train carrying diesel oil. In another incident in Homs, a police bus was blown up, killing two police officers. A fuel pipeline and some small bridges were also bombed. ”
“Such incidents include the bombing of buildings, trains carrying fuel, vehicles carrying diesel oil and explosions targeting the police, members of the media and fuel pipelines. Some of those attacks have been carried out by the Free Syrian Army and some by other armed opposition groups.”
The Mission also underscored to role of media distortion in the coverage of events in Syria as well as the campaign to discredit ithe Mission’s findings:
“The Mission noted that many parties falsely reported that explosions or violence had occurred in several locations. When the observers went to those locations, they found that those reports were unfounded.
The Mission also noted that, according to its teams in the field, the media exaggerated the nature of the incidents and the number of persons killed in incidents and protests in certain towns.”
The Report also underscored attempts to discredit the Mission and dismiss its findings:
Arab and foreign audiences of certain media organizations have questioned the Mission’s credibility because those organizations use the media to distort the facts. It will be difficult to overcome this problem unless there is political and media support for the Mission and its mandate. It is only natural that some negative incidents should occur as it conducts its activities because such incidents occur as a matter of course in similar missions.
Also of significace were attempts by officials of AL governments to pressure several of the observers into providing “exaggerated accounts of events”.
Some observers reneged on their duties and broke the oath they had taken. They made contact with officials from their countries and gave them exaggerated accounts of events. Those officials consequently developed a bleak and unfounded picture of the situation.
Also of significance is the fact that the Mission acknowledged that peaceful protests by unarmed civilians against the government were not the object of government crackdowns:
group team leaders [of the Observation mission] witnessed peaceful demonstrations by both Government supporters and the opposition in several places. None of those demonstrations were disrupted, except for some minor clashes with the Mission and between loyalists and opposition. These have not resulted in fatalities since the last presentation before the Arab Ministerial Committee on the Situation in Syria at its meeting of 8 January 2012.
While the Mission does not identify the foreign powers behind “the armed entity”, the report dispels the mainstream media lies and fabrications. It largely confirms independent media reports including Global Research’s coverage of the armed insurrection since April 2011. See Global Research’s Syria Dossier
Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, February 1, 2012
SELECTED EXCERPTS OF OBSERVERS’ MISSION REPORT
Report of the Head of the League of Arab States Observer Mission to Syria. December 24, 2011 to January 18, 2012
Relevant Excerpts of the Report are indicated below: bold added, Scroll down for Complete Text of Observers’ Mission Report):
The complete leaked report of the Arab League Observers Mission with annexes (pdf)
“The Mission determined that there is an armed entity that is not mentioned in the protocol. This development on the ground can undoubtedly be attributed to the excessive use of force by Syrian Government forces in response to protests that occurred before the deployment of the Mission demanding the fall of the regime. In some zones, this armed entity reacted by attacking Syrian security forces and citizens, causing the Government to respond with further violence. In the end, innocent citizens pay the price for those actions with life and limb.
…
In Homs, Idlib and Hama, the Observer Mission witnessed acts of violence being committed against Government forces and civilians that resulted in several deaths and injuries. Examples of those acts include the bombing of a civilian bus, killing eight persons and injuring others, including women and children, and the bombing of a train carrying diesel oil. In another incident in Homs, a police bus was blown up, killing two police officers. A fuel pipeline and some small bridges were also bombed.
…
28. The Mission noted that many parties falsely reported that explosions or violence had occurred in several locations. When the observers went to those locations, they found that those reports were unfounded.
29. The Mission also noted that, according to its teams in the field, the media exaggerated the nature of the incidents and the number of persons killed in incidents and protests in certain towns.
According to their latest reports and their briefings to the Head of the Mission on 17 January 2012 in preparation for this report, group team leaders witnessed peaceful demonstrations by both Government supporters and the opposition in several places. None of those demonstrations were disrupted, except for some minor clashes with the Mission and between loyalists and opposition. These have not resulted in fatalities since the last presentation before the Arab Ministerial Committee on the Situation in Syria at its meeting of 8 January 2012.
…
Some observers reneged on their duties and broke the oath they had taken. They made contact with officials from their countries and gave them exaggerated accounts of events. Those officials consequently developed a bleak and unfounded picture of the situation.
Arab and foreign audiences of certain media organizations have questioned the Mission’s credibility because those organizations use the media to distort the facts. It will be difficult to overcome this problem unless there is political and media support for the Mission and its mandate. It is only natural that some negative incidents should occur as it conducts its activities because such incidents occur as a matter of course in similar missions.
…
75. Recently, there have been incidents that could widen the gap and increase bitterness between the parties. These incidents can have grave consequences and lead to the loss of life and property. Such incidents include the bombing of buildings, trains carrying fuel, vehicles carrying diesel oil and explosions targeting the police, members of the media and fuel pipelines. Some of those attacks have been carried out by the Free Syrian Army and some by other armed opposition groups.
…
Since its establishment, attitudes towards the Mission have been characterized by insincerity or, more broadly speaking, a lack of seriousness. Before it began carrying out its mandate and even before its members had arrived, the Mission was the target of a vicious campaign directed against the League of Arab States and the Head of the Mission, a campaign that increased in intensity after the observers’ deployment. The Mission still lack the political and media support it needs in order to fulfil its mandate. Should its mandate be extended, the goals set out in the Protocol will not be achieved unless such support is provided and the Mission receives the backing it needs to ensure the success of the Arab solution.”
COMPLETE TEXT (WITHOUT ANNEXES)
The complete leaked report of the Arab League Observers Mission to Syria (pdf)
