America’s War against Syria’s Artistic Creations, Film, Media and Cultural Heritage . SYRIAN DRAMA OF ANOTHER ORDER

By BN Aziz
Global Research, July 30, 2013

The blockade on Syria -on Syrian life not weaponry- reaches into the heart of social, historical and cultural life.

This policy is integral to the US-led assault against the country and against Arab national integrity.

No-fly zone, poison gas, foreign guerrillas, sectarian massacres. These frightening yet alluring, ambitious yet wearying thoughts define Syria today. More reason to take time for other dramas—Syrian TV serials and their politics.

Apart from an opportune ‘Ramadan’ reference, this topic may seem inconsequential or out of place for a nation engulfed in conflict. Yet the subject isn’t too slight a target for US policies.

Extending its aggression against Syria into every corner of the economy, the United States has seen TV productions by its longstanding enemy dumped from international satellites, a move that essentially severs global access. This move followed withdrawal of supporting infrastructure for widely popular Syrian programs by US-Gulf state allies, erstwhile co-sponsors, customers and distributors of TV dramas originating in Damascus.

Now, why would anyone censor Syrian TV? Are we not led to believe that Syrian media’s sole purpose is to mislead rather than inform? How could anything of value originate from that ‘brutal dictatorship’? Anyway, how can ‘mindless’ TV soaps warrant an international embargo?

People familiar with the range of public issues which Syrian producers address through popular drama will understand.

Over the past decade the Damascus-based industry rose to become a major center of high quality TV drama. Its productions won admiration across the Arab-speaking world, rivaling once dominant Egyptian dramas.

What Syrian dramas, most of which are made by private companies, offer is best illustrated by two productions:– ‘Bab al-Hara’ (www.istikana.com/en/episodes/bab-el-hara-1-1), first released during Ramadan month in 2006, and a hugely successful 2010 production, ‘Ma Malakat Aymanukum’ ().

‘Bab al-Hara’ is a colonial period drama typical of the historical productions Syria excels in. This and dramatizations of early epochs hold special significance throughout the Arab world through portrayals and reflections of Arab civilization’s accomplishments and historical events.

By contrast with ‘Bab al-Hara’, ‘Ma Malakat’ explores contemporary social concerns: –religious fanaticism, homosexuality, abuse of women. Written by Syrian author Halla Diyab (), ‘Ma-Malakat’ was directed by her accomplished compatriot Najdat Ansour (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Najdat_Anzour).

The work of these and other brilliant Syrian artists is renowned.

Yes, armed conflict itself thwarts artistic production. Hundreds of Syria’s most talented and liberal-thinking people– actors, designers, musicians, writers, technicians– are jobless today. Many flee in search of outside employment, like those featured in a token CNN Ramadan story By contrast view your yourself the Syrian Ramadan 2013 series broadcast over lbc TV. Theater is one of many institutions devastated by war. But the destruction of this industry is not collateral damage. It’s deliberate. The sale of Syrian series came to a standstill when networks in Saudi Arabia and UAE (where major distributors are located) cancelled orders for Syrian productions.

Next, in June 2012 the Arab League itself ordered satellite transmitters Hotbird, Nilesat and Arabsat to cease carrying Syrian media including Syrian TV and Syrian Drama TV. Whereas Syria exported 25 new TV series in 2010, the following year producers were able to sell only one—a direct effect of the US-designed embargo.

Of course this blockade has significant economic consequences for Syria. But its real target is Syria’s cultural and ideological position in the region.

The Arab public and specialists recognize that Syrian productions are unrivaled in their authenticity and ideology. Syria is known to have the highest standards in historical research (applied to the arts) and in Arabic language. Besides the technical, literary and entertainment value of specific stories, Syria’s dramatic productions represent a struggling political consciousness–the Arab nationalist ideal. (This includes celebration of Palestinian resistance.)

Syrian dramas invoke regional pride and values largely absent in productions from neighboring countries. The industry’s collapse was targeted because these productions embody and espouse values which the West seeks to eliminate. Nothing is overlooked, it seems, in the US design against Syria. Meanwhile Turkish TV serials, translated into Arabic, heir focus limited to romance and family conflict, keep people distracted. A coincidence?

<strong>Follow us

Syria, Iraq and Depleted Uranium

By John Bart Gerald
Global Research, July 25, 2013

Syria, Iraq and Depleted Uranium

As the U.S.considers expanding its war on Syria to overt military aggression, Iraq provides some warning of the human cost of accepting the policies of madmen. In Iraq military action starting with “Desert Storm” in 1991, caused the near total destruction of Iraq’s society, culture, environment and eventual losses of millions of innocent people. Health and mortality information risks heavy suppression and manipulation since it provides evidence concerning a crime. In Spain, the Brussells Tribunal‘s cogent case attempting to prosecute George Bush, Tony Blair and others for genocide inIraq was rejected by the court. Lack of legal recourse for the people of Iraq before a non-partisan international court marks the International Criminal Court’s failure to bend the major powers from illegal wars of aggression.

Primary alleged crimes of the U.S. and NATO coalition’s war on Iraq remain unaddressed:

1. aggression and the betrayal ofIraq’s sovereignty.

2. massive military bombardment of civilian areas.

3. intentional destruction of the civilian infrastructure and water supply.

4. use of depleted uranium weaponry to cause the slow death of civilian populations and render portions of the land unable to sustain health and life in the future.

While these points are neglected by the media, current information concerning use of depleted uranium is so notably missing there may be an attempt to remove the issue from the public’s awareness (1 and 2). While depleted uranium is a lethal radiological weapon, relevant public information is suppressed, excised, falsely countered and ignored.

Serbian sources claim that a UNEP 1999 Environmental Law report revealing the permanent damage to Yugoslavia was entirely suppressed, but with a portion leaked to an American journalist. In North America where the weapons are made, it’s not a welcome issue. Depleted uranium use indicates the intention of genocide against a people, their ability to reproduce, the health of their children, and continuation as a people.

A year after its slated release date, a report by the United Nations World Health Organization on congenital birth defects in areas ofIraqsubjected to depleted uranium

weaponry, hasn’t appeared though it was completed in October 2012. This oversight is brought to the public’s attention in articles by Mozhgan Savabieasfahani in Aljazeera, and Sudeshna Chowdhury in Inter Press Service. The withholding of the WHO report suggests extreme pressure on the World Health Organization by nations which have something terrible to hide. It would be difficult for the report to sidestep epidemic rates of cancer in Iraq regions where depleted uranium was used. Chowdhury’s article, “WHO’s Iraq Birth Defect Study Omits Causation,” indicates the WHO report purposefully avoids considering the causes of the overwhelming birth defects, disease, and death rates. The report relies in part on Iraq’s Ministry of Health for information. The Health Ministry is part of a government set up under occupation by the United States. If the WHO report is allowed to appear, it may cover, dissimulate, mask, and avoid blaming the major powers.

The issue of depleted uranium’s effects however, will exist as long as there are Iraqis, Yugoslavs or Afghans, – and U.S. and Coalition veterans. And because of their knowledge, victim peoples are further endangered. The proof of the damage resulting from unjust wars of aggression stays in the memories of the victim parents, the lives of the children who survive despite deformities, in the statistics for deaths by cancer which don’t begin to translate the burden of suffering for entire families.

Not only in Iraq, but Yugoslavia,Kosovo,Afghanistan,Libya, the people are finding they do not have the value of sparrows, and their lives and their children’s lives are taken from them without cause, by policies and military planners who have set themselves apart from humanity. At its inception the Convention on Genocide foresaw complicity of those in power to cover each other’s crimes and so is applicable without statute of limitations. To hide crimes of power, the present is hidden from us. For the future then, whatever the WHO report reveals or hides about the deformed children of Fallujah for example, there are studies (several are alluded to in Ms. Chowdhury’s article) that address effects of depleted uranium from the perspective of people who care about people more than politics:

“Depleted Uranium Radioactive Contamination In Iraq: An Overview,” Prof. Souad N. Al-Azzawi, Aug. 2006, Brussells Tribunal.

“The perpetual death from America,” Mohammed Daud Miraki, 2002, reprinted, nightslantern.ca.

“The silent genocide from America,” Miraki, 2003, reprinted nightslantern.ca.

“In a state of uncertainty,” IKV Pax Christi, January 2013, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

“Crimes of the Century: Occupation & Contaminating Iraq with Depleted Uranium,” Al-Azzawi, June 24, 2005, Brussells Tribunal.

“Innocent New Lives are Still Dying and Suffering,” Fact Finding Mission on congenital birth defects in Fallujah Iraqin 2013, April 2013, Human Rights Now.

“Uranium and other contaminants in hair from the parents of children with congenital anomalies in Fallujah, Iraq,” Samira Alaani, Muhammed Tafash, Christopher Busby, Malak Hamdan, Eleanore Blaurock-Busch, Sept. 2, 2011, Cell & Bioscience.

The people of Syria are already plunged into disaster with UN assessment of the number of refugees the largest since the Rwandan genocide. AsU.S.and NATO threats of direct military action against Syria continue, North Americans proceed with their lives as if there’s nothing wrong. As if the big lies reflect the common good. As if the murder of hundreds of thousands of distant people for the profits of a few, is somehow moral, legal, necessary, or safe to cooperate with the obvious terrible crimes of imperialism. It isn’t.

Related topic:

IT IS OFFICIAL My analysis of the nuke in Syria is now proven to be 100 percent accurate.

Partial sources online: “What’s delaying the WHO report on Iraqi birth defects?” Dr. Mozhgan Savabieasfahani, June 6, 2013, Aljazeera; “UN health agency, Iraq studying birth defects,” AFP, Oct. 5, 2010, Google News; “Serbia: NATO’s Uranium Embrace,” Anna Filimonova, Jan. 29, 2013, Strategic Culture Foundation; “Depleted uranium ‘threatens Balkan cancer epidemic’ ,” Alex Kirby, July 30, 1999, BBC News; “The Responsibility of the US in Contaminating Iraq with Depleted Uranium,” Prof. Souad N. Al-Azzawi, Nov. 9, 2009 (presented at the Kuala Lumpur International Conference to Criminalise War, October 2009), uruknet.info; “WHO’s Iraq Birth Defect Study Omits Causation,” Sudeshna Chowdhury, July 17, 2013, IPS; “Iraqi cities ‘hot’ with depleted uranium,” Sara Flounders, August 2003, International Action Center; “‘Merciful angel’ still killing,” March 6, 2013, International Radio Serbia; “‘Fallujan Babies’ and Depleted Uranium — America’s Toxic Legacy in Iraq,” Dahr Jamail, March 18, 2013, Al Jazeera; “The Balkan DU Cover-up: Washington is Pressuring NATO and the UN to Keep the Lid on Investigations,” Robert James Parsons, March 22, 2001, The Nation.

“Opposition” Mercenaries Massacre Civilians in Aleppo: Media Report

By Global Research News
Global Research, July 27, 2013

A media source said that the death toll from the massacre that armed terrorist groups committed in Khan al-Assal in Aleppo countryside reached 123 martyrs, with many others still missing.

The majority of the victims are unarmed civilians, the source pointed out.

Medical tests helped identify 6 of the martyrs, the source said, vowing that the perpetrators will pay a heavy price for their barbarity and affirming that ”the Syrian people and army are on high alert.”

The armed terrorist groups committed a genocide against a number of civilians and military personnel in Khan al-Assal town in the countryside of Aleppo.

Gang of the so-called Ansar al-Khilafa Brigade admitted committing the terrorist massacre in Khan al-Assal, mutilating the bodies of the martyrs and throwing them in a big hole on the outskirts of the town, in addition to incinerating a number of the martyrs’ bodies.

Khan al-Assal area was last March the target of a chemical weapons attack when terrorists launched a rocket containing chemical materials, killing 25 citizens and injuring 110 others.

The new massacre, which came in light of the continued international silence and open Western support for the armed terrorist groups, stirred all the Syrians in resentment calling for quick and firm response towards the murderers who have been allowed access to enter Syria across the border.

Syrian establishments, organizations and parties condemn Khan al-Assal massacre

Head of the Syrian Human Rights Network, Ahmad Khazem, stressed that the massacre, during which the terrorists set the martyrs’ bodies on fire, is “a blatant violation of the UN Convention against Torture and a crime against humanity”.

Khazem added that this crime also constitutes a flagrant violation of the UN Security Council Resolution 1373 and Article 25 of Rome Statute, clarifying that both the resolution and the article stress on the prevention of providing material and logistic support to the armed terrorist groups.

This form of support, in addition to providing weapons, funds and shelter, has continued to be offered to the terrorist groups in Syria by the governments of Turkey and Gulf states, on top is Saudi Arabia.

For his part, Head of the Lawyers Syndicate, Nizar Skeif, demanded sending an urgent letter to the Security Council on this massacre so as to refer its perpetrators and their backers to the International Criminal Court.

Spokesman for the presidency of the Popular Front for Change and Liberation, Adel Nei’seh, condemned the calls and efforts to supply the terrorists in Syria with qualitative weapons from the Gulf states.

Those efforts, Nei’she said, “have caused the Syrians to fall victim to criminals whose heads are filled with devilish fatwas.”

In turn, Head of the National Initiative for Syrian Kurds, Omar Aussi, highlighted that the new massacre in Khan al-Assal aims at escalation by the terrorists, a step they usually resort to “before any chance for political solution” as the coincides with the arrival of a UN team to investigate the crime of chemical weapons use in the town.

In the same context, the branch of the National Union of Syrian Students condemned in the strongest terms the massacre in Khan al-Assal, denouncing the “rude silence” on this crime of all the opposition parties that claim moderation.

The Union pointed out that the massacre reflects the barbarity and savageness of the takfiri terrorist groups that are implementing the agendas of Al Saud monarchy.

In turn, Ministry of Justice condemned the massacre committed against civilians and soldiers in Khan al-Assal in Aleppo countryside.

In a statement, the Ministry stressed that justice will reach all criminals.

On a relevant note, the Arab Democratic Solidarity Party issued a statement condemning the massacre, saying that its perpetrators are inhuman and unrelated to any religion, while the Syrian National Youth Party said that such an act can only by committed by those who have lost their humanity.

Likewise, the National Democratic Bloc opposition movement denounced the massacre, saying that this heinous crime will hinder reaching a political solution.

In a similar statement, the Popular Front for Change and Liberation denounced the massacre, saying that this crime which adds up to the black record of Jabhat al-Nusra will only make Syrians more determined to achieve a political solution.

For their part, the Syrian students and community in Cuba condemned in the strongest terms the massacre in Khan al-Assal.

In a statement, members of the Syrian community and students called for immediate retaliation, demanding the international community to exert pressure on the countries which are supporting terrorism in Syria.

Similarly, Syrian students and community members in India strongly denounced the massacre in a joint telegram with members of the Syrian diplomatic corps, in which they held some neighboring countries and their gangs responsible for what is happening in Syria.

The telegram demanded to strike firmly against terrorist groups and bring the perpetrators of the massacre to justice and prosecute them to the full extent of the law.

Russia and China Prepare for Global War

By Stephen Lendman
Global Research, July 26, 2013

Both countries want peace, not war. America threatens them. Defensive readiness is prioritized. Forewarned is forearmed.

NATO’s a global alliance. Washington heads it. It’s a geopolitical threat. It menaces humanity. It’s expanding worldwide. It’s allied for offense, not defense. It plans war, not peace.

It’s comprised of 28 member states, 22 partner ones, seven Mediterranean Dialogue allies, four Istanbul (Gulf) Cooperation Council Initiative states, and eight other global Partners.

It works cooperatively with the UN, EU, and Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. South American and African expansion is planned.

Stop Nato’s Rick Rozoff told Progressive Radio News Hour listeners it’s a “global missile.” It’s aimed at humanity’s heart. It threatens potential armageddon. Stopping its rogue agenda matters most.

It threatens world peace. It’s expanding to Russian and Chinese borders. Encroaching US bases surround them. Moscow and Beijing are mindful. They’re allied defensively. They’re preparing for scenarios they hope to avoid. They’re readying for possible global war.

On December 7, 2011, the EU Times headlined “China Joins Russia, Orders Military to Prepare for World War III.

A Beijing Ministry of Defense bulletin said then President Hu “agreed in principle” that deterring US-led Western aggression’s only possible by “direct and immediate military action” or threat thereof.

He ordered his naval forces to “prepare for war.” BBC reported the same story. He wants stepped up preparation and readiness.

He told military officials that China’s navy should “accelerate its transformation and modernisation in a sturdy way, and make extended preparations for warfare in order to make greater contributions to safeguard national security.”

Chinese Rear Admiral Zhang Zhaozhong warned unequivocally. “China will not hesitate to protect Iran even with a Third World War,” he said.

Hopefully he means it. Hopefully Washington and Israel take heed. Hopefully it deters their planned aggression. Hopefully a nightmarish scenario’s avoided.

Russian General Nikolai Makarov said:

“I do not rule out local and regional armed conflicts developing into a large-scale war, including using nuclear weapons.”

Beijing’s bulletin discussed a US-planned “ultimate (Middle East) solution.” It’s readied in case of regional nuclear war. It said Washington will attack Syria and Iran with lethal biological weapons. They’re “intended to kill tens of millions of innocent civilians.”

Dutch virologist Ron Fouchier revealed it. He discovered that five avian flu virus mutations spread far more easily. Doing so makes them the “most lethal killer(s) of mankind ever invented.”

US capabilities were based on Russian intelligence examination of Lockheed Martin’s RQ-170 Sentinel Drone. It was downed over Iranian territory.

“Russian made Avtobaza ground-based electronic intelligence and jamming system was used. Evidence showed it was equipped with a sophisticated aerosol delivery system.”

America’s nuclear, chemical, and biowarfare agenda is longstanding. Post-9/11, stepped up development was prioritized. Nuclear disarmament was spurned. So were Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) provisions.

The 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM) was abandoned. It expressly forbids development, testing and deployment of missile defenses. Doing so interferes with Washington’s offensive plans.

It refuses to adopt a proposed Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT). It prohibits further weapons-grade uranium and plutonium production. It forbids adding new nuclear weapons to present stockpiles.

America spends more on military readiness than all other countries combined. Funding includes enormous congressional appropriations, outsized black budgets, others off the books, secret programs, huge amounts for intelligence, and other unknown initiatives.

Longstanding US policy calls for preventive, preemptive, and/or proactive wars. Global targets are involved. First-strike chemical, biological and nuclear weapons are planned. Anticipatory self-defense justifies doing so.

Washington rescinded the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention. Subverting its provisions preceded doing it.

Enhancing America’s offensive capability matters most. Doing so prepares for global war. At issue is unchallenged dominance. Anything goes is policy. Achieving it’s prioritized.

Potentially destroying life on earth is risked. Advancing Washington’s imperium matters more. America has hugely destructive chemical, biological, nuclear and other arsenals.

Secret research and development programs upgrade them. Enormous amounts are spent doing so. Classified budgets conceal how much.

Hundreds of private biolabs operate nationwide. Fort Detrick, Lawrence Livermore, and other government facilities operate secretly. Research prioritizes offense, not defense.

Germ warfare once was science fiction fantasy. Today it’s a grim reality. So is chemical and/or mushroom shaped cloud annihilation.

America plays hardball. It does so for keeps. Nuclear/chemical/biological trigger readiness is prioritized. Francis Boyle calls catastrophic biowarfare/bioterrorist incidents or accidents a “statistical certainty.”

It’s just a matter of time. Permanent war is official US policy. Total war risks annihilation. All weapons in America’s arsenal will be used. They’re planned to be as needed. Humanity’s more than ever threatened.

Russia and China represent our last line of defense. Hopefully they’re up to the challenge.

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

His new book is titled “Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs Fridays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

Syria’s Permanent Representative to the UN Al-Jaafari: Israel’s Occupation of Arab Lands Reached Dangerous Stages

By Global Research News
Global Research, July 24, 2013

Syria’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Bashar al-Jaafari warned that the Israeli occupation of the Arab territories has reached dangerous stages in light of the international inability to force Israel to end its occupation in implementation of the relevant international legitimacy resolutions.

During an open UN Security Council session held Tuesday to discuss the item titled “The Situation in the Middle East”, al-Jaafari criticized the attempts by some delegations to divert the deliberations from the main aim for which this item was made to try to marginalize the issue of the Israeli occupation and focus on other irrelevant issues like the situation in Syria, Egypt, Lebanon…etc.

He wondered at the UN Secretary General’s representative’s attempt to drop the accurate legal designation of Golan recognized by the UN as “the occupied Syrian Golan” and say only the “Golan”, slamming him for ignoring any mention of the need to bring the Israeli occupation of the Golan to an end.

He also lashed out at the allegations brought forth against Syria by the delegations of the very same countries which have been providing support, shelter and arms to the terrorists and thriving to foil any peaceful solution to the crisis, citing Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and some Western countries.

“The Israeli occupation of the Arab territories and its repercussions on the overall security and stability of the region has reached very dangerous stages in light of the international inability to compel Israel to end its occupation,” said al-Jaafari.

He denounced the international community’s incapability to put an end to Israel’s grave violations of the international charters, on top being Geneva Convention of 1949, and force it to stop its settlement activities and expulsion of Arab inhabitants form their lands.

He also warned of the gravity of the current Israeli effort to approve the so-called Prawer Law which practically aims to confiscate 800,000 dunams of lands and destroy 36 villages in Negev to be replaced by settlements, in addition to displacing 45,000 Palestinian inhabitants.

Al-Jaafari highlighted the continuous suffering of the Syrian citizens under the Israeli occupation in the occupied Syrian Golan in light of the absence of an international will to end this occupation according to the relevant UN resolutions, particularly the Security Council resolution no. 497 for 1981.

He wondered at the fake zeal of some countries regarding the rights of peoples and the preservation of the civilian’s lives, while such zeal is absent when it comes to the Israeli violations of the rights of the Arab people in occupied Palestine and the occupied Syrian Golan and the barbaric practices against them.

“It has been 46 years since Israel occupied the Golan…yet we haven’t heard anybody calling for holding meetings to defend the Syrians under the occupation and those displaced… or for organizing conferences to collect humanitarian donations to help them,” said al-Jaafari.

“Moreover, some sides’ zeal to send fact-finding committees has vanished when it comes to the occupied Syrian Golan,” he added.

The Syrian Representative stressed that the international silence on the Israeli practices led Israel to launch an aggression on the Syrian territories on May 5th, 2013 and to continue making threats of carrying out other offensives.

“Israel’s continued aggressive practices have raised tension in the region to unprecedented levels portending a large-scale regional war that would definitely endanger the international peace and security,” al-Jaafari warned.

He slammed the UN Secretary General’s representative for ignoring the ongoing cooperation taking place between Israel on the one hand and the armed terrorist groups on the other at the Disengagement Zone.

Al-Jaafari clarified that the Israeli occupation forces have been providing aid to the armed terrorist groups in the Disengagement Zone in the Golan through admitting the injured terrorists to the Israeli hospitals to be treated and then allowing them back into Syria to resume their terrorist acts.

He condemned the Israeli assistance to the terrorists in Syria as not only being a flagrant violation of the Disengagement Agreement and the mandate of the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) and the international law, but also in that it endangers the lives of the UN forces working there and undermines their work.

What’s Next for Syria? The “Washington Consensus” for All Out War

By Stephen Lendman
Global Research, July 21, 2013

Conflict drags on interminably. Dozens or more die daily. Syrian forces outmatch Western-backed death squad terrorists. They’re not rebels. They’re lawless invaders.

They’re US proxy fighters. They’re imported from dozens of countries. They’re waging war against sovereign Syrian independence.

Assad’s military outguns and outflanks Washington’s shock troops. Reinforcements keep coming. Libya 2.0 looks possible. Perhaps likely.

Russia hopes for a September international peace conference. Originally a June one was planned. Why bother when Washington prioritizes war. It spurns peace. Last year’s conference failed.

Expect nothing different this time. Peace remains elusive. Advocates have no partners.

According to European Council president Herman Van Rompuy:

“A military solution to the crisis is impossible. (T)he solution is only diplomatic.”

Conflict can end soon. It can happen if Washington calls off its dogs. It shouldn’t have unleashed them in the first place.

Syria is Obama’s war. He began it. He can end it. Not according to some reports. On July 18, London’s Guardian headlined “Obama considering military power in Syria, top general tells Senate.”

Joint Chiefs Chairman Martin Dempsey said he provided Obama with “options for the use of force.” He declined to explain more.

“(I)t would be inappropriate for me to try to influence the decision with me rendering an opinion in public about what kind of force we should use.”

John McCain’s super-hawkish. He’s not alone. He asked the wrong question. He asked Dempsey what carries greater risk: continued limited Washington intervention or more robust tactics.

He favors more heavily arming terrorist fighters. They’re getting plenty of weapons already. He wants no-fly zone protection implemented.

Doing so’s an act of war. It’s illegal without Security Council authorization. So is meddling in Syria’s internal affairs politically, economically, and/or militarily (directly or indirectly).

McCain’s dismissive of international law. So are other congressional hawks. Dempsey said he favors “building a moderate opposition and supporting it.”

“The question whether to support it with direct kinetic strikes¦is a decision for our elected officials, not for the senior military leader of the nation.”

Kinetic strikes refer to missiles, bombs, drone attacks, and other military initiatives. According to Dempsey, they’re “under deliberation inside of our agencies of government.”

Asked about Dempsey’s comments, White House spokesman Jay Carney said Obama always asks military commanders for options. It’s “true in an arena like Syria” and elsewhere.

Obama’s reviewing them, he added. According to Vice Joint Chiefs Chairman Admiral James Winnefeld:

“There are a whole range of options that are out there. We are ready to act if we’re called on to act.”

These type comments aren’t new. Whether direct US intervention follows remains to be seen.

Senator Carl Levin wants it. He wants Syria bombed. He urged Obama to attack “airfields, airplanes and massed artillery.” He supports terrorist insurgent invaders. He does so shamelessly. More on him below.

Armed Services Committee members are considering whether to renominate Dempsey and Winnefield for second terms. McCain’s opposed.

Democrats have majority say. Expect both top commanders to be approved.

At the same time, anti-Assad forces are fighting each other. Extremist Al Nusra insurgents are clashing with Free Syria Army elements. Unity remains elusive.

Things escalated dramatically. Whether full-scale internecine conflict follows remains to be seen. If so, maybe each side will annihilate the other. That’s one way to wind things down.

On July 19, Russia Today headlined “Al Qaeda’s planned emirate in Syria is West’s own doing.” Syrians want a secular state.

Al Qaeda wants its own. Syrian unity is threatened. So far insurgent extremists lack enough strength to prevail.

Assad forces consistently rout them. Without US intervention, they don’t have a chance. They can prolong conflict.

They can cause many more deaths, injuries and displacements. They can’t prevail without Libya 2.0 help.

On July 17, London’s Telegraph headlined “Army chief: We risk war with Syria.”

General David Richards is UK outgoing armed forces chief. Britain must be prepared to “go to war” with Syria, he said. “(I)f you want to have the material impact on the Syrian regime’s calculations that some people seek…ground targets” must be “hit.”

“There is a lack of international consensus on how to take this forward,” he said.

“We are trying to cohere the opposition groups, but they are difficult to cohere because there are many different dimensions to them.”

“So it is work in progress. So I am very clear in my military advice to the government that we need to understand what the political objective is before we can sensibly recommend what military effort and forces should be applied to it.”

“That is something we debate a lot, from the Prime Minister downwards. We also need to do this with our allies.”

“Allies have different views on the way ahead. Understandably there is a great reluctance to see Western boots on the ground in a place like Syria.”

“If you wanted to have the material impact on the Syrian regime’s calculations that some people seek, a no fly zone per se is insufficient.”

“You have to be able, as we did successfully in Libya, to hit ground targets.”

“You have to establish a ground control zone. You have to take out their air defences.”

“You also have to make sure they can’t manoeuvre – which means you have to take out their tanks, and their armoured personnel carriers and all the other things that are actually doing the damage.”

“If you want to have the material effect that people seek you have to be able to hit ground targets and so you would be going to war if that is what you want to do.’

“That is rightly a huge and important decision. There are many arguments for doing it, but there are many arguments for not doing so too.”

Syria’s situation is “highly complex,” he stressed. Escalated war risks cross-border conflict. It’s happening in Lebanon.

It could affect all Syria’s neighbors. Perhaps other regional states. The entire region could become embroiled. Global conflict could follow.

Richards knows the risks. So do other high-level military commanders. They’re warriors, not peacemakers.

Richards called himself a “moral soldier.” His remark is offensive. It’s oxymoronic on its face. He said Afghanistan’s a “good war.”

Others know better. Benjamin Franklin said “(t)here is no such thing as a good war or a bad peace.”

Russia said it won’t let Assad be toppled militarily. It has strategic interests at stake. Perhaps it wants Syria to be Obama’s regional Waterloo.

Halting his imperial rampaging’s important. If Russia and China aren’t committed, who will be? United they stand the best chance. It’s time they stepped up to the plate and acted.

America wages wars on small nations. It prefers weaker ones it can roll over. It abstains from challenging more equal rivals militarily. Bullies operate that way.

Jimmy Carter believes “America does not at the moment have a functioning democracy.” It never had one. Carter didn’t explain.

He’s pessimistic. He’s got good reason to be. He called Snowden’s leaks “beneficial.”

He thinks NSA spying undermines US credibility worldwide. It constitutes “the invasion of human rights and American privacy.” It’s “gone too far.”

“I think that the secrecy that has been surrounding this invasion of privacy has been excessive,” he said.

“So I think that the bringing of it to the public notice has probably been, in the long term, beneficial.”

He criticized Obama’s policies earlier. He condemned his drone attacks. He called targeted assassinations lawless.

Imperial policies undermine America’s “role as the global champion of human rights,” he said.

“America’s violation of international human rights abets our enemies and alienates our friends.”

America lacks moral authority. It lost it multiple ways. Carter’s no saint. Compared to Obama, he looks that way.

A Final Comment

On July 18, Senators Carl Levin (D. MI) and Angus King (I. ME) headlined “For Syria, lessons from the Balkan war.”

Levin chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee. King serves on it with him. Both express hawkish views. They visited the region. They did so for propaganda purposes.

They deplore peace. They support escalated war. They may get what they wish for. They’ll be accountable for lots more blood on their hands.

“We believe the United States should join with its partners and allies in the region and elsewhere to pursue an end to the bloodshed,” they said.

“An international coalition that strengthens the military and political capabilities of thoroughly vetted anti-Assad forces should supply equipment and training.”

“That coalition should also plan for steps that would place even greater military pressure on the Assad regime, including possible strikes against the missiles, aircraft and other heavy weapons that are the instruments of Assad’s campaign of terror.”

Both senators know Washington directly aids Al Qaeda and other extremist groups. They’re supplied weapons, funding, training and direction. It’s been ongoing since conflict began. CIA and US special forces are involved. It’s an open secret.

Levin and King believe the best way to end war is wage more of it. They believe war is peace. They stop short of recommending US boots on the ground. Perhaps they will later. Who knows?

No matter the risks involved, they said, “the costs of inaction are equally high. Assad’s survival, with support from Iran and Hezbollah, would surely strengthen them, to our great detriment.”

They barely stopped short of urging regional war against nonexistent threats.

They blame Assad for Washington’s crimes. It’s standard imperial duplicity. Obama bears full responsibility. Don’t expect them to explain.

“US national interests are at stake,” they claim. So are neighboring countries “Israel, Turkey and Jordan.”

They propose international action against Assad. They want “a comprehensive strategy” agreed on as soon as possible.

They want all-out war. They want it against an independent, nonbelligerent sovereign state. They ignore inviolable international law principles.

They turned truth on its head, saying:

A “widespread insurgency has strong popular support.”

False! The vast majority of Syrians support Assad. Independent polls show it. The longer conflict persists, the more his support grows.

Syrians depend on him for whatever protection he can provide. When Syrian forces liberate insurgent held areas, residents express gratitute openly.

Levin and King want America to “help the Syrian people end the senseless slaughter they are suffering” by inflicting more of it.

They, likeminded congressional members, Obama, and complicit administration officials reflect diabolical forces of evil. They’re unmatched in human history.

They’re waging war on humanity. Perhaps they believe the best way to save it is destroy it.

They support permanent war. They want unchallenged US global dominance. They’ll stop at nothing to achieve it.

Imagine the worst ahead. They endorse what’s likely coming. Survival’s up for grabs.

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

His new book is titled “Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs Fridays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour

http://www.dailycensored.com/whats-next-for-syria/

Follow us

US, Britain Push for Military Intervention in Syria

By Chris Marsden
Global Research, July 20, 2013

The Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, has told the Senate that the Obama administration is actively considering the use of military force in Syria.

Dempsey said Thursday that he had provided President Barack Obama with options for military strikes in Syria. Responding to hostile questioning from Republican Senator John McCain, a leading advocate of US military intervention, he said the use of “kinetic” strikes—i.e., missiles and bombs—“is under deliberation inside of our agencies of government.”

He said that if not, then President Bashar al-Assad would still hold power in a year because “[C]urrently the tide seems to have shifted in his favour.” Given how much Washington has invested in Assad’s removal, this is a powerful indication that the US is moving to a military solution sooner rather than later.

Senator Carl Levin even asked Dempsey to provide the Senate panel with an unclassified list of options by next week. That same day, it was announced that the military commander of the opposition Free Syrian Army, General Salim Idriss, would visit the US next week for meetings at the UN and possibly the White House.

Also speaking to the Senate, Samantha Power, Obama’s nominee for ambassador to the UN, described “the failure of the UN Security Council to respond to the slaughter in Syria” as “a disgrace that history will judge harshly.”

She cautioned against placing too much emphasis on breaking Russia and China from their alliance with Assad, indicating that Washington is contemplating action without UN authorisation.

Dempsey spoke after the outgoing head of the British armed forces, General Sir David Richards, spoke to The Daily Telegraph and Rupert Murdoch’s The Sun, indicating that a joint military intervention with the US was under active discussion. Richards said “there is a great reluctance to see Western boots on the ground in a place like Syria,” and that a no-fly zone “is insufficient… You have to be able, as we did successfully in Libya, to hit ground targets.”

He told The Sun that the UK “would have to act” if the Assad regime collapsed, to stop the proliferation of chemical weapons to Islamist insurgents. “The risk of terrorism is becoming more and more dominant in our strategic vision for what we might do in Syria,” he said. “If that risk develops, we would almost certainly have to act to mitigate it and we are ready to do so… Some could characterise that, even though it might be for a limited period, as a war.”

Advocates of war from across the political establishment, from Power to McCain, invoke the humanitarian disaster in Syria as providing a supposed moral imperative.

This week the media was filled with chilling depictions of the situation in Syria, emanating from the UN or from pro-opposition groups. The UN’s refugee chief Antonio Guterres told the Security Council that the Syrian conflict has caused the worst refugee crisis for 20 years, with 6,000 people fleeing the country every day. In addition, 5,000 people are being killed each month, bringing total casualties to over 93,000 and refugees to over five million.

Leila Zerrougui, the UN’s special representative for children and armed conflict, visiting refugee camps, spoke of “serious human rights abuses, war crimes and crimes against humanity” in Syria as “the rule.” The conflict was producing “a generation of children who lost their childhood, have a lot of hate and are illiterate.”

The media dutifully reported the visit by US Secretary of State John Kerry to a refugee camp in Jordan. A carefully choreographed appeal was made by six “refugees”—supporters of the opposition—for the US to immediately set up a no-fly zone and buffer zones.

“Where is the international community? What are you waiting for?” asked an unnamed woman.

This is contemptible propaganda. The devastation of Syria, the refugee crisis, the growing list of casualties, and its descent into sectarian warfare, are wholly the responsibility of the imperialist powers.

In the aftermath of the downfall of Zine el-Abedine Ben Ali in Tunisia and Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, the US moved to dictate events—first in Libya and now Syria—by force of arms and through various compliant proxy forces.

The Baathist regime of al-Assad is reactionary to the core, but the opposition movement that developed against him is wholly the creature of the US. It is made up of an alliance of CIA assets, ex-regime figures and Islamists entrusted with the creation of a pro-western regime to ensure that the oil riches of the Middle East continue to flood into the coffers of US-based transnationals and banks.

In the process, brutal sectarian crimes have been committed, threatening to plunge the entire region into a bloody, communal struggle. This week alone, the BBC reported on how Syria’s Christian minority is being targeted by jihadis. Also, mortar shells struck near a major Shiite shrine of Sayida Zeinab, the Prophet Muhammad’s granddaughter, outside Damascus; it has become a rallying point for Hezbollah fighters supporting Assad, now that the Syrian conflict has already spread to Lebanon.

The argument presently unfolding in ruling circles in the US and Europe is over whether Syria should be bled dry through an ongoing campaign of destabilisation funded by the Gulf States and Turkey, or whether to model Syria policy more directly on the war in Libya—which ended in the deposing and murder of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.

This campaign is provided with political cover by pseudo-left tendencies such as the International Socialist Organisation in the US, the Socialist Workers Party in Britain and the New Anticapitalist Party in France, who line up to hail the supposed “revolutionary forces” represented by the Syrian opposition.

Speaking in London last weekend, the political representative of the SWP in Syria, Ghayath Naisse, supported the arming of the opposition by Washington declaring, “We want to arm the people,” but “with no conditions.”

Simon Assaf of the SWP was more cynical still, stating, “We support the uprising of the people, to give them arms,” adding that “There is no such thing as a weapons fairy.”

The overthrow of Assad by the imperialist powers and their flunkeys would be a bloody step in the consolidation of US hegemony in the Middle East and towards war against Iran. It would escalate conflict with Russia and China, bringing with it the danger of a far bloodier global war.

Follow us

Syrian Opposition in Disarray

By Stephen Lendman

Global Research, July 10, 2013

After 28 months of conflict, Assad defeated Washington’s best laid plans. Its Syrian National Coalition (SNC) opposition lacks effective leadership. It lacks legitimacy.

It’s an artificial construct. It operates extrajudicially. It resembles a gang that can’t shoot straight. On July 8, another leader resigned.

After four months, self-styled prime minister Ghassan Hitto announced he won’t “continue in (his) capacity as prime minister tasked with leading the interim government, though (he) emphasize(s he’ll) ‘continue working for the interests of the revolution and towards achieving its objectives.”

Washington’s war on Syria’s no “revolution.” There’s nothing civil about it. It’s US proxy aggression. Foreign death squad invaders want Islamofacism replacing Syrian sovereignty.

Hitto’s resignation came two days after SNC members elected Ahmad Asi-al Jarba president.

The post’s been vacant since Mouaz al-Khatib resigned in April. He cited frustration over lack of enough international support, internal divisions, and disarray among “rebel” factions.

Washington hoped he’d become Syria’s Hamid Karzai. Maybe Obama has similar aspirations for al-Jarba.

Repeated changing of the guard shows SNC ranks in disarray. Al-Khatib and Hitto couldn’t resolve SNC divisions. Don’t expect al-Jarba to fare better.

Just causes close ranks effectively. Rogue operations feature self-aggrandizing, power-hungry opportunists. They face overwhelming Syrian opposition.

Most Syrians support Assad. They do so for good reason. They alone want to decide who rule them. They deplore outside intervention.

Disorganized “rebel” ranks are no match for Syria’s superior military. It continues making impressive gains.

Regular Syrian National News Agency (SANA) reports repeat what the July 9 one said. It headlined“Army eliminates Jabhat al-Nusra terrorists in several areas.”

Army units inflicted heavy losses on “armed terrorist groups” in and around Homs, Hula and other areas.

“Leader of an armed terrorist group, Obeid Hassan Obeid, nicknamed Abi Allaith, and terrorists Mossa al-Khaled, Mustafa Shamir and Osama Zabateh were identified among the dead.”

On July 8, FARS News Agency headlined “Syrian Army Continues Advance in Aleppo,” saying:

“Syrian Army units inflicted heavy losses on armed rebels in a series of concentrated military operations against their gatherings in Aleppo and took control of several parts of the city.”

Syrian forces continued mopping up operations. Areas have been totally cleared of foreign fighters.

Clashes continued around Aleppo’s central prison. Dozens of insurgents were killed. Many others were eliminated in other parts of the city.

On July 9, Press TV headlined “Syria invites UN officials to discuss claims of chemical weapons use,” saying:

Syria’s UN ambassador Bashar Jaafari said:

“The Syrian authorities have discovered yesterday in the city of Banias 281 barrels filled with dangerous, hazardous chemical materials.”

Amounts found are “capable of destroying a whole city, if not the whole country,” he added.

Toxic substances include 79 barrels of polyethylene glycol (PEG), 67 barrels of mono ethylene glycol, 25 barrels of mono ethanol (or ethanolamine), 68 barrels of diethanolamine (DEA), and 42 barrels of triethanolamine (TEA).

Jaafari said chemicals found were “in a secret storage (area) controlled and monitored by the armed terrorist groups.”

Washington falsely accused Syria of using sarin and other chemical weapons “on a small scale.”

Damascus dismissed US allegations, saying:

“The White House published a statement full of lies about the use of chemical weapons in Syria, based on fabricated information, through which it is trying to hold the Syrian government responsible for such use.”

In mid-June, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said so-called US evidence doesn’t meet longstanding Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) requirements.

Insurgents used chemical weapons multiple times. UN investigators confirmed sarin use. They did so before equivocating under heavy Western pressure.

In late May, Turkish police arrested 12 suspected Al Nusra fighters. They were seized in southern Turkey.

They were caught red-handed with a two gm cylinder of sarin nerve gas. Initial Turkish media reports said four and a half pounds of sarin were seized.

Other reports provided clear evidence. Insurgents used sarin and other chemical weapons multiple times.

On July 9, Russia Today headlined “Russian inquiry to UN: “Rebels, not Army behind Syria Aleppo chemical attack,” saying:

Moscow’s UN ambassador Vladimir Churkin said analysis of samples taken indicate “rebels” bear responsibility.

“I have just passed the analysis of samples taken at the site of the chemical attack to the UN Secretary General,” Churkin said.

“Evidence studied by Russian scientists indicates that a projectile carrying the deadly nerve agent sarin was most likely fired at Khan al-Assal by the rebels.”

More than 30 people died. Damascus straightaway asked for a UN investigation. Insurgents lied. They denied responsibility. They falsely blamed Assad.

Western sources consistently point fingers the wrong way. So do mainstream media. Assad’s falsely blamed for death squad crimes.

Syria’s conflict is far from resolved. Israeli involvement complicates things.

On July 6, Haaretz headlined “Report: Series of blasts heard near Assad arms depot in northern Syria,” saying:

Residents reported seeing “fighter jets near time of blasts.” A Syrian weapons depot was struck near Latakia. Lebanon’s Al Manar said rockets or missiles were fired.

Haaretz called the source of the strike “unclear.” It was Israeli aggression. It was Israel’s third attack on Syria since January.

Richard Silverstein explained what Haaretz omitted, saying:

“A massive explosion last Thursday at a major Syrian weapons depot in Latakia, not far from the main port of Tartus, completely destroyed the facility and munitions stored there.”

The Free Syrian army (FSA) falsely took credit. “(I)t was not the responsible party,” said Silverstein. It was done to divert attention from Israel.

“A confidential Israeli source (told Silverstein) Israeli forces attacked the site.” SA-300 anti-aircraft missile components were targeted.

Russia shipped them to Tartus. They’re stored in Latakia. What Israel destroyed, Russia will replace. Other military help is provided.

Russia has longstanding contractual obligations. It supports its Syrian ally. It does so against Western aggression. It wants Assad supplied with enough firepower to prevail.

Silverstein’s source said “the FSA coordinated with the IDF and launched a rocket attack on nearby government military installations in order to distract loyalist forces from the real target.”

Insurgents had no involvement in attacking Syria’s weapons depot. Israel bore full responsibility. Assad knows it. So does Russia.

Israel’s a key US regional imperial partner. It’s heavily involved in Washington’s war on Syria. It’s allied with Al Qaeda and Al Nusra insurgents.

It supplies arms and munitions. It treats wounded insurgents in Israeli hospitals. It remains to be seen what follows.

In late May, Syria warned Israel. Foreign Minister Walid al-Muallem said Damascus won’t let “any (further) Israeli aggression go unanswered without retaliation.”

“The retaliation will be the same size as the aggression, and the same type of weapons will be used.”

We’ll know before long if he means it.

On July 9, Voice of Russia headlined “Russian, US experts disagree over many aspects of Syrian problem – Morozov.”

Syria and its regional implications were addressed at a bilateral seminar.

The Public Projects Institute (INOP) and Center for the National Interest (CNI) organized it.

Former Senator Gary Hart, General Charles Boyd, and Dmitri Simes represented America.

Parliamentarians and foreign policy experts spoke for Russia.

Discussion focused on Syria. Polar opposite opinions were expressed. According to Morozov:

“Our US partners said that it was possible to discuss Syrian issues and methods of solving them only in the case of the unconditional resignation of Bashar al-Assad.”

“They made themselves clear – ‘al-Assad must go’ before the formation of an interim government and elections of the new authorities are discussed.”

Russia believes otherwise. Syrians alone should decide who’ll rule them. “Counter-questions were asked”, said Morozov.

“We asked why al-Assad, a legitimate president, must go. He enjoys the support of many people in spite of the conflict.”

“He is in command of over 300,000 servicemen. And only one year is left until the next election.”

Russia categorically refuses to buy unacceptable US demands. It defends Syrian sovereignty. It supports rule of law principles

Washington’s ravaging Syria. It’s doing so ruthlessly. It’s doing it with impunity. Its imperial priorities matter most.

A Final Comment

US regional interests extend well beyond Syria and Egypt. Iran’s been unjustly targeted for decades.

On July 9, House Homeland Security’s Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency debated Iran’s alleged Western Hemisphere influence.

The 2012 Countering Iran in the Western Hemisphere Act directs the Secretary of State to assess “threats posed to the United States by Iran’s growing presence and activity in the Western Hemisphere.”

Annual reports must be submitted to Congress. They’re classified. The latest dated June contains a two-page unclassified annex. It states in part:

“As a result of diplomatic outreach, strengthening of allies’ capacity, international nonproliferation efforts, a strong sanctions policy, and Iran’s poor management of its foreign relations, Iranian influence in Latin America and the Caribbean is waning.”

Rep. Jeff Duncan (R. SC) chairs the House Oversight, Investigations and Management Subcommittee. He questioned the State Department report, saying:

It didn’t “reach reach out to even one country in the Western Hemisphere in the crafting of the threat assessment and strategy.”

“It makes no sense for the State Department to send (Congress an Iranian report on its alleged Western Hemisphere influence) without considering the views of our allies in the region.”

He cited Alberto Nisman’s May report. He’s an Argentinian prosecutor. The State Department debunked his findings.

He falsely linked Iran to regional terror attacks. He did so duplicitously. He did with no credible evidence.

His so-called “irrefutable proof” was rubbish. He left unaddressed an Iranian motive or interest in Latin American terrorism. What possible purpose could it serve?

Tehran’s got everything to lose and nothing to gain. Israel and America benefit hugely. Iran’s falsely linked to incidents bearing their fingerprints globally.

Reinventing history doesn’t wash. People like Nisman try anyway. Even the State Department dismissed his deception.

He was invited to testify before Duncan’s committee. Argentina’s Attorney General denied his travel request.

She and President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner want no part of his bogus allegations. They know others about Iran’s nuclear program are false and misleading.

Targeting Iran continues maliciously. Washington wants another independent government deposed. It wants pro-Western puppet regimes throughout the region. It wants them everywhere. Unchallenged imperial dominance matters most.

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

His new book is titled “Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs Fridays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour

http://www.dailycensored.com/syrian-opposition-in-disarray/

 

Follow Us

‘Syria militants in self-destruct mode’

A political commentator says the plots by the US and its allies to destroy Syria through supporting militancy in the Arab country have failed as the foreign-backed terrorists are now “self-destructing,” Press TV reports.

“This so-called democracy-building was aimed to turn Syria into a failed criminal state like what’s been done in Libya,” Randy Short, a human rights activist from Washington, told Press TV on Sunday.

Commenting on the infighting between rival militants in Syria, Short said when guns are given to “criminals and dogs and killers and rapists … that have no conscience and no morality and no ideology, of course they’ll kill each other.” 
Qassem Saadeddine, a spokesman for the so-called Free Syrian Army (FSA) militants, said on July 11 that a splinter Takfiri group had killed their senior commander Kamal Hamami, known by his nom de guerre Abu Bassel al-Ladkani, following a meeting with him to discuss battle plans in the Syrian port city of Latakia.

Over the past months, rivalries and infighting have been on the rise among the highly-divided militants operating inside Syria. 

On June 5, dozens of militants were killed and wounded as violent infighting broke out between several Takfiri groups in Syria’s northwestern province of Idlib, according to locals.
Short further cited the accusations that Damascus had used chemical weapons in the battle against the militants as an example of the desperate measures by the US and its allies to make up for their failed policies in Syria. 

“I’m convinced that they’re going to try something more desperate to prevent being embarrassed that their policy – their effort to destroy Syria – has failed,” the political commentator said. 

Foreign-sponsored militancy in Syria has taken its toll on the lives of many people, including large numbers of Syrian soldiers and security personnel, since March 2011. 

Western powers and their regional allies including the Israeli regime, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar have joined hands in supporting anti-Syria militant groups, including al-Qaeda-linked terrorists, to destabilize Syria and overthrow the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

Source: Press TV

Follow Us

Divisions within the Syrian “Opposition”? The FSA and the Supreme Military Council Support Al Qaeda Terrorists

By Phil Greaves
Global Research, July 13, 2013

Recent reports within mainstream media are pushing the theory that divisions are forming within the various camps of opposition militants in Syria, while also making attempts to highlight the disparity between the supposed “moderate” rebel forces of the “FSA” – which does not exist beyond a small cadre of defectors with no autonomy inside Syria – and the Al Qaeda affiliated militia of Jabhat al Nusra, (JaN) or the Islamic state of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), while also whitewashing the presence of the larger Salafist brigades that fight alongside them, predominantly Ahrar al-Sham (SIF).

To comprehend these alleged divisions, it is fundamental to understand what exactly the “FSA”, or “Supreme Military Council” consists of. In short, these Western-backed outfits and the oft-referenced “spokesmen” that carry them hold no value inside Syria, or any amount of authority among the plethora of militia fighting on the ground. This has been the case since day one of the Syrian crisis. The “FSA” was a retroactive PR stunt implemented by the West and the GCC to uphold a facade of “moderation”, and bolster the false image of militants fighting for “freedom and democracy”. In reality, the FSA represents a branding exercise; enabling foreign powers to rally behind disparate groups of militants – often led by extremists – to undertake their desired use and mask the true identity of what are, by western legal standards, “terrorists”.

When the media refer to the “FSA”, at best it is lazy journalism, at worst it is disingenuous and designed to mislead the reader – otherwise known as propaganda. Yet the “FSA”, or “SMC” seem to have a new lease of life within the media. Furthermore, General Salim Idriss has been at the forefront of recent media campaigns to persuade foreign powers to increase military aid to the rebels (including a photo-op with renowned peace advocate John McCain); rebels that Idriss, nor any other commander in the “SMC” or “FSA” have any control over. I posited the theory in early May that the US and its GCC partners (now minus the deposed Qatari Emir) were attempting to marginalize the very militants they fomented, sponsored and armed in order to build a new “moderate” force under their control that is agreeable to the public, and the many European and American Parliamentarians and Congressman that have expressed concern about the “rising” influence of radicals among the militants they are indirectly supporting.

Recent attempts to purport divisions could be construed as part of this “re-branding” policy. In a Reuters report titled “New front opens in Syria as rebels say Al Qaeda attack means war” we learn that a “Commander” from the Supreme Military Council was assassinated by ISIS’ Emir: Sheikh Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Whether this is even true remains to be seen; several prominent analysts have cast doubt on the report, claiming it may be a psy-op on the FSA’s behalf; presumably in order to marginalize Baghdadi and the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham militants that follow him.

These artificial divisions bear hallmarks to recent reports and recent analysis covering the supposed “split” between the Syrian wing of Al Qaeda, otherwise known as Jabhat al Nusra (JaN), and the Iraqi wing of Al Qaeda, otherwise known as the Islamic state of Iraq (ISI). When Baghdadi, the Emir of ISI retroactively announced the “merger” of these groups and declared the militia should now be addressed as the Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham, a spat broke out between him and Jabhat al-Nusra Emir Abu Mohammed al-Jolani. The following analysis and reports covering the dispute were blown out of all proportion and have continued in this vain ever since. Again, actual divisions on the ground between ISI and JaN were minimal and did not affect either tactical, nor ideological cooperation and kinship.

ISI and JaN are one and the same, in both a tactical and ideological sense, there are slight differences in their outlook for a possible future Syria, but crucially, both the tactical relationship and core ideologies remain untouched and unified. Furthermore, JaN was concieved through ISI funding and logistic cooperation. Journalists and analysts suggesting these groups are separate do not understand their mutual ideology, or they are being purposefully misleading to suit an agenda – that agenda seems to be to highlight ISI as the “bad rebels”, this could be to allow space for the “good rebels” under JaN’s leadership – which are predominantly led by Syrians and not foreigners, therefore more likely to win “hearts and minds” – to join the “moderate” brigades under the SMC command.

The first paragraph of the Reuters report fulfills the false narrative that the “FSA” represents a larger force than that of “Islamists”: (NB: Reuters lazy wording not mine.)

Rivalries have been growing between the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and the Islamists, whose smaller but more effective forces control most of the rebel-held parts of northern Syria more than two years after pro-democracy protests became an uprising.

One has to wonder how the supposed “Islamists” which, according to Reuters are a smaller force than the “FSA” can possibly hold more territory than the Western-backed moderates. Again, Reuters is pushing a false narrative upon its readers to uphold the image that the majority of “rebels” fighting inside Syria are moderate secularists under the command of the “FSA”, or “Supreme Military Council”. The truth of the matter has always been that Jabhat al Nusra – who are one and the same as Al Qaeda in Iraq with slightly different outlooks for their respective homelands – along with the more populist, and larger in number Salafi militia, such as Ahrar al-Sham, who operate under the umbrella group the Syrian Islamic Front (SIF), represent the vast majority of opposition fighters in Syria. These groups have close links, and it is likely that fighters often interchange depending on expertise, experience and geographical requirements. Since the onset they have cooperated closely with logistics and paramilitary operations.

Supposed “secular” opposition forces in Syria simply do not exist; under the “FSA” command or anywhere else. There are many smaller groups that espouse an inclusive, and indeed, moderate outlook for a future Syria. These groups have in the majority been rampant with criminality, infighting, and a lack of funds. Leaving disillusioned fighters with the option of joining the better organised and funded Salafi brigades; which have consistently received funding and arms from both state and non-state actors in the Gulf.

The “FSA” commander quoted in the Reuters piece claims: “we are going to wipe the floor with them”. Presumably this is aimed at Baghdadi and his fellow ideologues, or as Reuters labels them: “Islamists”. Again, we are supposed to buy the theory that the FSA is in a position to strike anyone militarily inside Syria – let alone a commander of one of the strongest opposition groups operating. At this moment in time, the “FSA” as a fighting force could possibly be at its weakest since its artificial inception. Recent reports have suggested there are up to 6,000 foreign militants fighting against the government in Syria. It is likely that the vast majority of foreigners have joined the more radical outfits such as ISIS, for the same reasons as mentioned above, but can also be explained by the public sectarian tone being applied to the conflict, and calls to the regions Sunni community to engage in “Holy War” against the Syrian state from influential clerics such as Yusuf Qaradawi.

Recent political developments also shed light on the “re-branding” of the Syrian opposition. The Emir of Qatar’s unexpected departure from the throne – to be replaced by his son – may have been an indicator as to Qatar’s failures in leading the Syrian insurgency. It is common knowledge that Saudi Arabia have been given the “Syria File”. A fact that is portrayed with no irony by western analysts; who manage to conveniently whitewash exactly which state actor is delegating the “files” – could it be “Mother”? This handing over of the baton was solidified with the departure of SNC Prime Minister Ghassan Hitto – a Muslim Brotherhood member chosen by Qatar in attempts to consolidate the Muslim Brotherhood’s hold on the SNC. Hitto was replaced by Ahmed al-Jarba, an influential tribal figure with close links to the Saudi Monarchy.

Reports on the ground in Syria have also suggested that the rebels weapons flow – including such basics as ammunition – have come to an almost standstill. And several rebel commanders have relayed their frustration at the lack of promised US weapons. Recent developments in the US Congress have also given Obama the back-door he was looking for, at least to buy himself more time until a more suitable fighting force is able to undertake the task at hand – if such force ever materializes. Direct US arms supplies – or, to be precise; the official funding for arms supplies – have been blocked by Congress until the administration can determine exactly which rebel groups it intends to arm, and what exactly the administration intends to achieve from what seem to be futile efforts to validate the now almost two-year covert policy of arming the rebels, and achieving nothing but bloodshed and destruction – of course, it would be ridiculous to suggest that was the plan? US allies in the region will undoubtedly be working under their own terms with regard to their destructive policies in Syria, to some extent.

Contrary to the Saud monarchies renewed efforts to wrest control of the insurgency; recent developments on the ground, along with Russia’s steadfast support and mass public opinion against supporting the extremist dominated rebels; the Syrian Army have kept the insurgency at bay whilst they choose their strategic victories. Homs is about to become the latest “rebel stronghold” to fall, as rebels announced this morning another “tactical retreat”.

One imagines the rebel siege being laid upon 2 million civilians – a war-crime that Western “diplomats” seem reluctant to “intervene” on, or indeed make any mention of – in government controlled Western Aleppo will be the Syrian military’s next priority. The Saudis through their new puppet al-Jarba have promised a huge influx of “game-changing” weapons, but without a massive influx of military hardware, and indeed, trained fighters to use them, it appears the trajectory of the conflict will remain in the Syrian military’s favour. What the various actors supporting the insurgency are willing to do to change that trajectory in the short-term, if anything substantial, remains to be seen. There are at least three interested and powerful parties whose objectives can be served by allowing the Syrian conflict to drag on for years to come; yet none of them necessarily want to see Assad fall.

Phil Greaves is a UK based writer/analyst, focusing on UK/US Foreign Policy and conflict analysis in the Middle East post WWII. http://notthemsmdotcom.wordpress.com

Follow Us