Syria to UN: KSA, Qatar, Turkey Support of Terrorists Hinders Dialogue

Moqowama

Syria sent Thursday two identical letters to the UN Security Council and the General Secretary about that evidence on involvement of foreign countries, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, in supporting and arming the terrorist groups in Syria.

The Ministry declared that "supporting terrorism and arming the terrorists in Syria became overt that went so far as to urge others to get involved in this track which has been clear in the statements of officials in Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey."

"It has been clear to all that those who are behind targeting Syria are the same countries which stress the importance of devising the appropriate international mechanisms to combat terrorism with all possible means," the Ministry added.

It further accused these countries of contributing to hinder dialogue and peaceful solutions and harm the Syrian state at material and humanitarian levels."

In parallel, the ministry said that "these statements were proved to be true for the BBC reporter in Aleppo city who saw weapons shipments - owned by the Saudi army - diverted to the armed terrorist groups in the city, the piece of news was broadcast by the BBC on October 9th."
Moreover, Syria highlighted that "the French President Francois Hollande admitted in a statement to the French TV5Monde and France24 TV Channels on Thursday 11th October 2012 the existence of French terrorists in Syria among the ranks of the so-called "Free Syrian Army"."

"The Turkish government is responsible for harboring and training these terrorists on its territories to send them to Syria across its borders," it added.

Syria also reiterated its call for the UNSC and its relevant committees to start an immediate investigation in the dangerous information, stressing that it will provide the data available to the UNSC committees specialized with combating terrorism.

Sharmine Narwani on Russia Today - Turkey's chest thumping to find backdoor to UNSC

Syrian crisis: polarization of opinion

Voice of Russia
Ilya Kharlamov

Participants of the 67th General Assembly in New York have remained at odds over the situation in Syria. On Thursday, Qatar urged interference in the political standoff between Syrian authorities and rebels, something that was supported by France and Tunisia. Moscow, Tehran and Cairo, for their part, continue to call for a diplomatic solution to the Syrian conflict. Russian President Vladimir Putin took part in the discussion in absentia, warning against taking decisions on Syria that bypass the UN. All those urging the ouster of the Assad regime by outside forces specifically pointed out the UN’s current inability to act. British Prime Minister David Cameron, in turn, said that the blood of children killed during the civil war in Syria was a “terrible stain on the reputation of the United Nations.” He was echoed by French President Francois Hollande who described the UN’s inaction as “shocking.”

The Westerns leaders making similar statements in New York is only natural given their permanent drive to rein in Damascus and Tehran and revise the current system of international relations in circumvention of the UN. Adding fuel to the fire was a statement by Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, the ruling Emir of the State of Qatar, who called for mulling a military intervention in Syria, where he said a no-fly zone should be created. This is a very dangerous tendency, believes Igor Korotchenko, a Moscow-based political analyst.

"Qatar acts as an instigator of sorts," Korotchenko says, referring to Qatar possessing hefty sums and local tribal leaders’ ambitions. "We know that Qatar sponsors a spate of negative changes that are taking place in Northern Africa, and that Qatar lends support to Syrian rebels. I think that the time is ripe for considering slapping sanctions on this gas dwarf," Korotchenko says.

Western elites and their Middle Eastern partners are irked with the position taken by Moscow and Beijing, which have repeatedly blocked the UN Security Council’s resolutions on Syria. In an interview with the Voice of Russia broadcast on Thursday, Fyodor Lukyanov, editor-in-chief of the Russia in Global Affairs magazine, lambasted Western countries’ push for meddling in the Syrian conflict. He attributed this push to the West’s dissatisfaction with its own actions, Lukyanov said.

" The situation in Syria came to a standstill," Lukyanov says, separately referring to the killing of a US Ambassador to Libya that recently hit the international headlines. "Some in the United States have already slammed Washington’s desire to interfere in the Syrian conflict that I think reflects the West’s inability to act," Lukayanov says, singling out the West’ frustration about Bashar Assad still being in power in Syria.

For his part, Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi called the resolution of the Syrian problem one of his key priorities. He added that this would help Syria contain a threat of a foreign military intervention that he stressed is being opposed by Cairo. Morsi was echoed by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov who said on Thursday that the Syrian crisis should only be resolved through a national consensus in a wide-scale inter-Syrian dialogue under the UN’s aegis. Lavrov was speaking during his meeting with UN-Arab League envoy Lakhdar Brahimi on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly

Syria: Turning Back the Clock on the Arab Spring

Global Research
Ahmad Barqawi

Whatever genuine grievances and demands for political reform the Syrian people might have had a year and half ago were trodden underfoot by this stampeding sectarian drive that the Syrian opposition itself worked so hard to foster among its own supporters.

Perhaps one of the most inglorious accomplishments of the western-backed/Gulf-funded Syrian opposition is that it has – and over the course of mere months - managed to inflict such a colossal, irreparable damage to the Syrian people’s future prospects of having a real, homegrown and genuine uprising to bring about positive change in their own country.

Thanks to the devious Syrian National Council and the crazed Free Syrian Army; the term ‘revolution’ has sadly lost its worth and lustre for a sizable portion of the Syrian populace and in the Arab world in general, as it has become marred by abhorrent stigmas of sectarianism, religious fanaticism, succumbing to foreign agendas, subjugation of national integrity and social disintegration. We must concede to the SNC, the FSA and their western patrons their unrivalled ability in transforming what was essentially a flicker of hope into an entire landscape of desolation and ruin.

In the blink of an eye, the home country in which all Syrians coexisted peacefully and harmoniously together for decades became a place they do not even recognize; reciprocal kidnappings between rival tribes, sects, ethnicities and neighbourhoods have become the order of the day; makeshift illegal checkpoints manned by pundits and warring militias have popped up all over Syrian cities; where ID cards could easily get unfortunate passersby killed on the spot, the country’s normally amicable population has been driven headfirst into a horrible cycle of killings and reprisal killings, torture and summary executions, and Mount Kassioun, a once picturesque and vibrant touristic site that overlooks Damascus has become a strategic vantagepoint for rocket launchers and artillery barrage.

Most of those dire consequences trace straight back to the Syrian National Council’s doorstep; by handing the fate of the Syrian uprising lock stock and barrel over to the unreliable hands of Hillary Clinton and her deep-pocketed coterie of Gulf despots; they have nearly completely nullified whatever credibility the rebellion might have enjoyed when it was born on the streets of Dera’a. It ceased to be a matter of local dissent against a brute dictatorship any more; it quickly morphed into this disastrous foreign-induced coup d'état – complete with mad covert and overt military operations and intelligence work.

Not only did the Syrian opposition manage to effectively kill the Syrian revolution in the womb by alienating vast sectors of the public from joining the uprising; but they have willingly chosen to systematically sectarianise Syrian society by sowing the seeds of intolerance and confessional discord. Right from the word go; the entire Alawite population was criminalized outright and deemed guilty by “sectarian association” to president Bashar Al-Assad. Mass branding them as “Shabiha” (pro government guns-for-hire) was nothing more than a cheap albeit racist ploy to justify the prosecution of entire Alawite communities and soften the sting of any possible criticism that might arise in response to the FSA’s criminal practices against innocent civilians.

Al Jazeera (especially the more vulgar Arabic branch of the Qatari-funded news network) was - and still is - a major instrument in furthering this deadly stereotype; the channel that once championed (or so it seemed anyway) pan-Arab national causes such as the Palestinian struggle against the Israeli occupation and the Iraqi resistance to the Coalition invasion, is now openly and notoriously championing what amounts to prima facie ethnic cleansing of Alawites in Syria. This was glaringly evident in the channel’s knee-jerk attempts at justifying the latest mass murder of several members of the Berri family in Aleppo; insisting that the victims were plain-clothed paramilitary thugs “armed to the teeth” fighting alongside government forces prior to their capture and swift execution by the “good guys”. This multi million-dollar media mammoth has been reduced to nothing more than a mere sleazy PR office for the crooked Free Syrian Army.

Of course this blatant bigotry was not limited to the Alawites but extended to the Shiites as well. In a bizarre reshuffle of political cards; Syria has become a safe haven for a slew of CIA, MI6 and even Mossad operatives to roam in and out of rebel-held areas to their hearts’ content, but not for Lebanese Shiite families and Iranian civilians - who have become the target of a vicious witch-hunting spree as various gangs and factions of the Free Syrian Army compete for the honour of “hosting” (a callous euphemism for “kidnapping”, used by the kidnappers and repeated shamelessly by Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya news channels) and humiliating these people on live television.

Case in point; on May 22, 2012, a busload of Shiite pilgrims (including women) was intercepted at gunpoint by gangs of the FSA near Aleppo while they were returning home to Lebanon from a religious trip to Iran. Later, the women were released but till this very day the fate of the remaining 11 male hostages remains uncertain (despite a handful of badly choreographed, self-promotional televised theatrical appearances of the kidnapper on Lebanese channels).

Syria at the Mercy of the West's "Ministers of Terrorism"

Global Research
Finian Cunningham

Murder, sabotage, bribery, contract killings -- and that’s just the behavior of Western political leaders and their Arab allies. Forget the fancy titles, manners and clothes -- ongoing violence in Syria shows that the foreign policy of these powers is being conducted by terrorists and thugs in high offices. Which let’s one glimpse what level of barbarity is being perpetrated by the Western terror army, running amok in the streets and villages of Syria.

British Foreign Secretary William Hague (L)
and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

The latest display of criminality in high office is the call by French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius for the “smashing” of Syria and the killing of its president, Bashar al-Assad. The words may have been spoken with an eloquent French accent, but their practical meaning has all the savagery of cold-blooded bludgeoning.

What we are seeing is a descent into barbarism and an open embrace of international lawlessness -- by the same governments that appoint themselves to lecture the rest of the world on the principles of democracy and human rights.

Reports and videos, showing that the Western-backed mercenaries of the so-called Free Syrian Army are bolstered by al-Qaeda brigades and other terrorists, have been greeted with barely veiled glee in Washington and European capitals.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice have pointedly refused to condemn the surge in bombing atrocities across Syria that have accompanied the influx of terrorists into the country over recent months. Indeed, Washington officials have effectively condoned such barbarities by their studied silence. Rice has even made statements, suggesting that more such atrocities will follow until the Syrian president does what her government demands and surrenders office. In mafia terminology, it’s called “making an offer he can’t refuse.”

The “terror” that Washington and other Western governments have promoted as the defining existential threat to democratic civilization over the past 10 years, has suddenly and seamlessly morphed into “war with terror” when it comes to Syria. And Western media that are intoxicated with hubris over supposed “free, independent thinking” do not even raise a timid question about this glaring contradiction. Indeed, these organs compound their intellectual bankruptcy with moral bankruptcy by concealing their government’s outrageous duplicity.

However, for those with eyes, when it comes to Syria, the mask of Western pretence at defending international law and human rights has now been ripped off. The face revealed is a grotesque, salivating monster, whose motives are evidently selfish elite power and domination in the strategic Middle East region. And this objective is to be achieved by any means necessary -- foremost by the collusion with bloodthirsty killers.

In asserting their geopolitical objective over Syria, the Western governments are openly deploying terrorists and killers who supposedly were the reason, why Western governments spent trillions of dollars fighting foreign wars, invading and occupying sovereign countries, destroying millions of innocent lives, incarcerating and torturing thousands, and turning over democratic societies into draconian police states.

US President Barack Obama has time and again lauded American military veterans for their sacrifices in Iraq and Afghanistan. More than 4,500 US forces were killed in Iraq, thousands more maimed and psychologically destroyed, with record numbers committing suicide once back home in Civvy Street. In Afghanistan, the death toll continues to rise -- with a spate of ‘green on blue’ attacks, in which Afghan security personnel turn their guns on American troops.

How must the families in the Iraqi city of Haditha feel where, in 2005, US marines shot dead 25 inhabitants, including women and children? -- Just one of countless other such massacres and war crimes. Why were they killed in the putative “war on terror” that has now become a US “war with terror”? Or how about the family of the 14-year-old Iraqi girl, who was gang-raped by an American platoon, which then butchered her broken body to cover up their crime? Or the families in Iraq’s Fallujah city, whose loved ones where incinerated with the Pentagon white phosphorus bombs during 2004-2005? What was that holocaust all about in the pursuit of a supposed war against terrorists, the same terrorists, who are now armed, trained, and directed by Washington, London, and Paris to overthrow the legal government of Syria?

Or how about the thousands of unnamed villagers, killed in remote areas of Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia in continuing American drone attacks?

Fabius recently told reporters in Turkey, “The Syrian regime must be smashed fast.” He also called for Assad’s death.

Elsewhere, it is reported that Qatar, the West’s Arab ally in the sabotage of Syria, has resorted to bribery to destabilize the government in Damascus. Apparently, the Al Thani royal rulers of the Persian Gulf emirate offered USD 1 million to the Syrian ambassador in Mauritania to defect, thereby attempting to tarnish Assad’s government. The Syrian Ambassador, targeted by the honey-trap, Hamad Albni, denounced the bribe as “blatant interference” in his country’s affairs.

It was just the latest in a barrage of dirty tricks that Qatar and the royal rulers of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have engaged in against Syria, including bribing the nation’s Army ranks to dessert, fabricating news stories on Arab media channels, Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, and jamming the satellite signals for the Syrian national broadcaster. The latter is a war crime, but don’t expect the Western crime bosses in office to bat an eyelid over that.

This is on top of these billionaire rulers funneling USD 100 million from their own impoverished, downtrodden countries to pay for American and Israeli weapons and explosives that are being used by the Western terrorist army to kill and maim women and children across Syria.

Meanwhile, Oxbridge-educated British Foreign Secretary William Hague announces with his ever-so-polite plumy accent that “Her Majesty’s” government is to supply an extra USD eight million to Syria. Not to help refugees or victims of Western-orchestrated violence, but to help the terrorists escalate their campaign of tearing that country apart and no doubt creating more refugees.

Clinton, Fabius, Hague and their royal Arab friends may dress in fine clothes, speak with polished accents, and have manicured, scented hands. But make no mistake. They may not pull the triggers, slit throats, or switch the detonators. That’s for the goons on the ground to do and to keep the blood from appearing on those scented, lily-white hands of their bosses.

In the Orwellian world of Western governments, these politicians are called “Foreign Ministers.” In the world of normative reasoning and language, they are known simply as “Ministers of Terrorism.”


Please support Global Research
Global Research relies on the financial support of its readers.

Arab monarchies of Persian Gulf: Relics of barbarism, handwriting on the wall

Press TV

Webster Tarpley

Anti-regime protesters stage rally in Saudi Arabia’s coastal town of Qatif on July 8, 2012

Recent months have provided the world with a grotesque spectacle of Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the other reactionary Arab monarchies of the Persian Gulf pretending to take the lead in the struggle for democracy and human rights in a number of countries, most recently Syria.

Now, there are numerous signs that a revolutionary upsurge may soon be on the agenda in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, with Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Oman possibly not far behind. The successful overthrow of the oppressive monarchies of these nations would be an event of world historical significance, and would represent a victory for world peace and a grievous defeat for the imperialist world domination of Washington and London.

The reactionary monarchies of the Arabian Peninsula on the shores of the Persian Gulf are all members of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the [Persian] Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), which was formed to support Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war. Jordan and Morocco, the two Arab monarchies outside of the Persian Gulf, have been invited to join the GCC, which would make it a kind of self-defense league for endangered royals. The GCC has also talked of making a transition from regional bloc to confederation; Saudi Arabia advocates this idea, while the other monarchies fear being swallowed up.

The Arab monarchies that emerged under British auspices from the wreckage of the Ottoman Empire have always represented an anachronism, in sharp contradiction to the whole direction of modern history and human progress elsewhere in the world.

The last hundred years have seen a nearly uninterrupted catalog of monarchies which have become extinct. The Chinese Empire ended in 1911. At the end of World War I, monarchies were falling like bowling pins. This included the Habsburg Emperors of Austria-Hungary, the Romanoff Czars of Russia, and the Hohenzollern Emperors of Germany and Kings of Prussia. The Sultan or Caliph of the Ottoman Empire was also deposed. These were soon followed by the Spanish monarchy. The Japanese tried to create a new empire in Manchuria, but they were unsuccessful. At the end of World War II, additional monarchies became extinct in Italy, Romania, Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia. In July, 1952, King Farouk of Egypt was overthrown by Colonel Nasser and the Free Officers movement. The British had installed King Idris as Libyan ruler in 1951, but he was ousted by a military coup led by Colonel Qaddafi. The Hashemite rulers of Iraq were ousted in 1958 by the coup led by General Kasem. In the 1970s, Spain swam against the tide by restoring its royal house. But around the same time the Greek monarchy came to an end. The Islamic Revolution in Iran overthrew Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi in February 1979.

Only in the Arab territories of the former Ottoman Empire could monarchy make a comeback, due largely to the influence of the British Empire, and then increasingly to the support of the United States. The current monarchy of the House of Saud emerged during World War I under the sponsorship of the British, who through Lawrence of Arabia had incited the Arabs of Hijaz to rebel against the Turkish Sultan. After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the British tried to put Syria and Iraq under a monarchy of the House of Hashem, and the Hashemites hold the Jordanian Crown today.

Saudi Arabia is still an absolute monarchy. Few people in the West have any comprehension of what this means. Under the House of Saud, there are no guaranteed rights, no separation of powers, no checks and balances, no guarantee of due process. There is no written constitution. The monarch is considered to be the owner of the entire country and of all the people in it, over whom he exercises a theoretical - and sometimes grimly practical - power of life and death. Representative bodies are sometimes chosen or nominated, but they are purely consultative: they can offer advice the crown, but they have no power to block or implement any policy.

Absolute monarchy also prevails under the Thani family in Qatar, the home of the Al Jazeera propaganda channel. After World War II, Qatar was one of the poorest countries in the region, with a pearl industry in decline. The Thanis, like the Sauds, are members of the militant Wahhabite sect, and for a time they were in danger of being absorbed into the Saudi kingdom. The Thani royals were saved by the discovery of oil, and by their Exclusive Agreement with Great Britain. There is a tradition of coup d’état by disgruntled factions inside the royal family, and there may have been an attempt of this type in the spring of 2012.

Another absolute monarchy is that of the Sultanate of Oman, which is subjected to the rule of Sultan Qaboos bin Said al Said, who overthrow his own father in a palace coup in July 1973 and sent him to live out his days in Claridges Hotel in London. The Saids have been in power since 1744.

Bahrain, since 1783 under the rule of the Khalifa family, claims to be a constitutional monarchy, but the events of the last 18 months have shown that the monarchical power is practically totalitarian. Bahrain was a British protectorate until 1971. The Khalifas are Sunni Muslims in a majority Shiite country, and nevertheless they monopolize the most important posts in the government. Oil was discovered in Bahrain in 1932, before any of the other Arab states of the Persian Gulf, and oil production has been in decline. As a result, the standard of living here is lower than in the neighboring countries. The monarchy was saved from possible overthrow by a mass upsurge on March 14, 2011 thanks to the Peninsula Shield Force of Saudi and Emirati personnel which crushed the protest demonstrations. Demonstrators have been subjected to draconian jail sentences, while censorship and electronic surveillance remain the order of the day.

The United Arab Emirates, the old Trucial States, are a confederation of seven absolute mini-monarchies, of which the most important are Abu Dhabi under the Nahyans and Dubai under the Maktoum family. These were under British rule until 1971. Along with Qatar, the UAE has been at the forefront of attempts to destabilize Syria. The UAE also took the lead during the attack on Libya, and now hopes to play a prominent role in the looting of Libya’s oil wealth under the new regime.

Kuwait is ruled by the Sabah family, who were restored by US in the first Persian Gulf War. During that conflict, it was revealed that the Sabahs, like their monarchical colleagues, still practice household slavery, which the US under George H. W. Bush, was thus supporting. During the Iraq war, Kuwait was turned into a US garrison state. Kuwait has a parliament, but the government is appointed by the Sabahs. The opposition is pressing for full parliamentary democracy, while the Sabahs are trying to hold on to power by changing the voting law.

All of these monarchies fear their own populations. They therefore rely on the support of the United States and the British. In addition, they also cooperate closely with the Israeli Mossad.

The hedonistic Persian Gulf monarchs need to contemplate the sad fate of Louis Philippe II, the Duke of Orleans, in the French Revolution. Descended from the younger branch of the French royal House of Bourbon, he thought he could ride the tiger of revolutionary agitation and gain more power for himself. He called himself Philippe Egalité, and organized the 1789 storming of the Bastille which set off the revolution. He voted for the death sentence for his relative, Louis XVI. But in the end, the forces Philippe Egalité had unleashed turned against him, and he died on the guillotine in November 1793 at the height of the reign of terror which he had helped to unleash. The Persian Gulf monarchs pretending to support revolutions should take note.

To qualify as a real revolution, a political upheaval needs to create an important and lasting institutional change. This can be the overthrow of the monarchy, the ouster of a foreign colonial power, a land reform capable of breaking the power of latifundists, the abolition of slavery, or other achievements of the same magnitude. By this measure, the French, American, Russian, Chinese, Egyptian, and Iranian revolutions fulfill the necessary criteria.

By contrast, the events of the Arab Spring have so far fallen short. In Egypt in particular, it was clear that the seizure of power by the Army in the wake of Mubarak’s departure meant that a second revolution would be needed - just as the Russian Revolution of February 1917 was followed by the October Revolution of the same year. Whether Egypt gets a second revolution remains to be seen.

But the overthrow of the House of Saud, likely followed by the toppling of its satellites in Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates, would send positive shockwaves around the world. In addition to lifting an oppressive yoke from the populations involved, it would accelerate the transition from the unipolar world domination exercised by the Anglo-Americans after 1992, and would speed the transition towards world normalization on a multi-polar basis. Because imperialism would be significantly weakened by the fall of these kings, the future of national states would become brighter all over the planet.

UK Sends £5 Million to Listed Terrorists in Syria

Land Destroyer

US-UK listed terror organization Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) fighters and commanders are clearly amongst militants underwritten by latest UK funding. 
by Tony Cartalucci 

UPDATE August 12, 2012 - It was recently pointed out that the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) currently arming, funding, and commanding entire brigades of the so-called "Free Syrian Army" (FSA) is designated an Al Qaeda affiliate by the United Nations pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1989 (2011), in addition to being listed by both the US State Department and the UK Home Office (page 5, .pdf) as a foreign terrorist organization and a proscribed terrorist organization respectively.

This means that the United States, the UK, NATO, and the Gulf State despots of Saudi Arabia and Qatar are knowingly and willfully funding designated affiliates of Al Qaeda contrary not only to US and British anti-terror legislation, but contrary to UN resolutions as well. Western and Gulf State support of the FSA constitutes state sponsorship of terrorism. Should the UN fail to enforce its own resolutions, while playing host to further sanctions and considerations for military intervention against the Syrian government, it will have entirely resigned its legitimacy and authority as nothing more than a tool of Western corporate-financier interests.

August 10, 2012 - In direct violation of both American and British anti-terrorism legislation, particularly provisions regarding providing material support for listed or proscribed terrorist organizations, the United Kingdom has just announced that it will provide armed militants that include listed terror organizations with a £5 million tranche of what it calls "non-lethal practical assistance."

Image: Little else could accentuate the hypocrisy and unhinged madness of US and British foreign policy more than  Foreign Secretary William Hague announcing his government's decision to fund genocidal sectarian extremists murdering under the flag of Al Qaeda in Syria.

....

Both British and American journalists have clearly identified and documented the presence of foreign fighters with militant extremist ties pouring over the Turkish-Syrian border, most recently in an attempt to overrun the northern Syrian city of Aleppo. CNN, whose Ivan Watson accompanied FSA terrorists over the Turkish-Syrian border and into Aleppo revealed that indeed foreign fighters were amongst the militants. It was admitted that:

Meanwhile, residents of the village where the Syrian Falcons were headquartered said there were fighters of several North African nationalities also serving with the brigade's ranks.

A volunteer Libyan fighter has also told CNN he intends to travel from Turkey to Syria within days to add a "platoon" of Libyan fighters to armed movement.

 CNN also added:

On Wednesday, CNN’s crew met a Libyan fighter who had crossed into Syria from Turkey with four other Libyans. The fighter wore full camouflage and was carrying a Kalashnikov rifle. He said more Libyan fighters were on the way.

The foreign fighters, some of them are clearly drawn because they see this as … a jihad. So this is a magnet for jihadists who see this as a fight for Sunni Muslims.

Foreign Policy magazine in an article titled, "The Syrian Rebels' Libyan Weapon," has gone as far as writing a two page profile on Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) commander Mahdi al-Harati and his role in leading the so-called "Free Syrian Army." Also recently, the Council on Foreign Relations, a premier Fortune 500-funded US think-tank, wrote in their article, "Al-Qaeda's Specter in Syria," that:

"The Syrian rebels would be immeasurably weaker today without al-Qaeda in their ranks. By and large, Free Syrian Army (FSA) battalions are tired, divided, chaotic, and ineffective. Feeling abandoned by the West, rebel forces are increasingly demoralized as they square off with the Assad regime's superior weaponry and professional army. Al-Qaeda fighters, however, may help improve morale. The influx of jihadis brings discipline, religious fervor, battle experience from Iraq, funding from Sunni sympathizers in the Gulf, and most importantly, deadly results. In short, the FSA needs al-Qaeda now."

Clearly then, British aid is being sent to the FSA whose ranks are admittedly filled by Al Qaeda.

Also, to be clear, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) is in fact an affiliate of Al Qaeda with its commanders having occupied the highest echelons of Al Qaeda's command structure and having participated in every combat engagement Al Qaeda has conducted since its inception via US-Saudi cash and arms in the mountains of Afghanistan in the 1980's. This was documented meticulously in the US Army's West Point Combating Terrorism Center report, "Al-Qa'ida's Foreign Fighters in Iraq."

LIFG is also listed by both the US State Department and the UK Home Office (page 5, .pdf) as a foreign terrorist organization and a proscribed terrorist organization respectively.

Foreign Policy's admission of al-Harati's role in organizing and leading the FSA in Syria, and the inclusion of Libyan terrorists in his brigade are by no means the only role LIFG is playing in the Syrian violence. LIFG commander Abdul Hakim Belhaj had visited the Turkish-Syrian border in late 2011 pledging Libyan arms, cash, and fighters to the FSA - with the nation of Libya itself having already become a NATO-created terrorist safe-haven.

It is clear that LIFG, and by implication Al Qaeda, is playing a significant role in the violence in Syria, not only undermining the narrative of the unrest being an "indigenous" "pro-democracy uprising," but also implicating foreign nations who are funding and arming militants as state sponsors of terrorism.

Included amongst these state sponsors of international terrorism are Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the Hariri faction in northern Lebanon, as well as the NATO-installed government of Libya. This also includes both the United States, who is admittedly providing cash and equipment for the FSA as well as coordinating efforts to arm militants, and now the UK once again with their latest announcement.

With an increasing number of overt atrocities being carried out by the FSA and its ranks of extremist sectarian militants, including kidnappings, abuses, and massacres observed recently in Aleppo, it is unconscionable for the West to even rhetorically back what is clearly a sectarian-driven conflict, let alone provide equipment, cash, and arms. However, British Foreign Secretary William Hague calls it, "the right thing to do."



Image: The Western media is covering - or more accurately, "spinning" - an unfolding sectarian genocide in Syria's largest city Aleppo. In the alleys of seized streets, FSA terrorists are detaining, torturing, and killing anyone suspected of supporting the government. Such suspicions coincidentally run along sectarian divisions. By using the label "Shabiha" for all of FSA's victims, the Western press has given a carte blanche to genocidal sectarian extremists and by doing so, has become complicit in war crimes themselves. For the British, or any other nation for that matter, to provide the FSA with even rhetorical, let alone material support, is an egregious act of international terrorism. 

UN Vote on Syria Reflects Changing Battlefield

UN Syria Resolution Signals Ebbing Western Legitimacy, Growing Western Aggression 
Land Destroyer

by Tony Cartalucci

August 4, 2012 - Friday's UN vote will no doubt be declared by the Western media as a resounding condemnation of Syria and a "universal" call for a "political transition" to install the US State Department's stable of hand-picked and groomed administrative proxies. However, aside from CNN, BBC, and Qatari Al Jazeera's ever-shrinking audiences, few on the planet will be convinced of these headlines.

133 nations did indeed vote for the resolution tabled by the despotic absolute monarchs of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, both of whom are ironically conducting their own campaigns of brutal repression both at home, and in neighboring Bahrain - this not counting the overt weapons and militants they have sent into Syria to destabilize Syria in the first place. The hypocritical nature of the resolution's sponsors is only outmatched by the feeble support it received. Should one actually analyze how many people were represented by the 133 nations that voted for the resolution, versus the 43 nations that did not support it, they would see a different story.

UN Vote is a Shift Away From Wall Street and London

31 nations abstained, a muted protest to the resolution, with 12 nations voting firmly "no." The combined population represented by these votes consists of the majority of humanity, and had Western representatives actually reflected with their vote their own population's sentiments toward what is becoming yet another overt case of military aggression built on false pretenses- just as the notoriously reviled Iraq War was - the majority standing in opposition to this resolution would have been greater still.

But the West's UN representatives did not reflect the sentiments of their respective populations. Instead, they represented a minority sect of corporate-financiers whose vast ill-gotten fortunes and the unwarranted influence it grants them, has driven the political destabilization and violence sweeping the Arab World since the so-called "Arab Spring" began.

Nations who didn't support the resolution included China, Russia, Iran, Cuba, Pakistan, South Africa, India, Brazil, Bolivia, Venezuela, Iraq, North Korea, Belarus, Nicaragua, Myanmar, and Zimbabwe. It is an incomplete list that is already far too long, and already includes nearly half of the world's population to be labeled as an "Axis of Evil." It represents a shift from a Wall Street and London centric global hegemony, toward a balance of power amongst a multipolar world.

That such a resolution could be tabled by despotic regimes like Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and then subsequently passed, exposes the shortcomings of "global governance" and the so-called "international community." What little sense the UN General Assembly's "one nation, one vote" arrangement makes is further undermined by the fact that representatives of their respective nations rarely vote according to the will and aspirations of their own people in the first place. The UN has become a tool entirely of corporate-financier interests, articulated by UN representatives detached from their own populations, who have hijacked their collective voice and use it to ram through their own narrow, self-serving agendas.

The UN, if it ever even had a realistic constructive role on Earth, has proven itself a menace  - a variable ultimately undermining, not promoting world peace, justice, freedom, progress or any of the other pretenses its dominating members hide their true agendas behind. The UN has become a medium within which grand crimes against world peace can unfold, rather than a bulwark against them.

UN Vote Signals West's Shift Toward Naked Military Aggression

The UN General Assembly vote signals yet another shift - one from feigned diplomacy by the West to achieve long planned hegemonic-driven regime change in Syria, to one of naked military aggression. Kofi Annan's retreat from his self-mutilated peace plan follows the collapse of NATO's "Operation Damascus Volcano" and the subsequent UN General Assembly vote.

His retreat allows for the West to clear the table of "diplomatic options" leaving only military aggression. This was forewarned in March 2012's "UN's Kofi Annan: An Agent of Wall Street," where Annan's ties to the very corporate-financier interests driving Syria's destabilization were exposed. The peace plan was an admitted gambit aimed at satisfying public expectations that "diplomacy" would be tried before a more aggressive military campaign was launched.

UN's Last Chance

With the court of global public opinion clearly turning against the machinations of Wall Street and London, now would be a good opportunity for a resolution to be leveled not against Syria, but against the regimes of Saudi Arabia and Qatar who openly admit to funneling weapons and even foreign fighters into Syria. Libya could also be added to that list, with the United States, France, and Britain also cited under the resolution for undermining world peace and pursing an agenda that demonstratively supports international terrorism.

Surely the West could cobble together a majority based on its vast collection of neo-fiefdoms in the General Assembly, but it would yank the last bit of moral high-ground out from under them, forcing them, their policy makers, and the corporate-financier backers to proceed with their Hitlerian campaign in full light as the aggressors - as the villains.

Dismembering the Arab World

Salem News

The Qataris and Saudis give financial support to the ‘rebels’ for weapons, payments to fighters and mercenaries, and logistical oversight of attacks on Syria.

Special thanks to Gilad Atzmon

Dr Makram Khoury-
Machool is a Palestinian
scholar in Cambridge, UK

(CAMBRIDGE, UK) - The behaviour of the NATO-aligned, anti-Syrian bloc is now blatant enough for us to better understand what is happening in Syria. On the one hand, we find political operators such the ad-hoc group ‘Friends of Syria’, and on the other, two Arab personalities, both ministers of two Gulf sheikhdoms.

The first group includes NATO-led heads of states, with a barely disguised Israeli master-plan conceived by the likes of Bernard-Henri Lévy. Rather than being the friends of Syria, these personalities are arguably working to secure their own financial interests in, around, and via Syria. The two Arab politicians are the two foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. They have declared that those forces acting violently against the Syrian state should be armed and financially supported. In short, these conventions of the so-called ‘Friends of Syria’ are probably no more than a ‘modern’ version of those meetings conducted by Viceroy Lord Curzon, who, in 1903, addressed the ‘Chiefs of the Arab Coast’ on HMS Argonaut in Sharjah (UAE).

The Qataris and Saudis give financial support to the ‘rebels’ for weapons, payments to fighters and mercenaries, and logistical oversight of attacks on Syria. All of this is in addition to their support with telecommunication services, combat tactics, and strategic military advice. Unsurprisingly, the Western military advisors, who operate for the armed groups behind the scenes, do not feature in any media outlets. Neighbouring states also provide geographical assistance to the armed groups, with Jordan providing a passage for mercenaries from Libya, and Turkey acting as the northern military base for operations.

Turkey is involved because of its wish to align itself with the Saudi-Sunni, NATO-backed line and also its fear that a dismembered Syria would lead to the promotion of Kurdish autonomy. In their eyes, this could bring about the eventual union of the Kurds with Iraqi and Syrian Kurds and then lead to civil war with Turkey and the eventual separation of Kurdistan from Turkey and the creation of a Kurdish state.

For its part, Israel has for decades planned, as part of its strategy to dominate the Middle East and the Mediterranean, to weaken Syria in order to continue its occupation of the Syrian Golan Heights and to dominate water sources. Essentially, Israel wants to be the main economic and military power in the region and indeed, Israel may well emerge from the weakening ofSyria as the main winner, if only in the short-term.

Through its orchestrated media campaigns transmitted over the decades to its own public,Israel has constructed a concept of Syria as the major threat to its existence in the Arab world. Arguably, the governmental vacuum that might be created in Syria could be filled by al-Qaeda-like groups giving sufficient justification for Israel’s actions (against Syria and/or Iran) and would also promote the idea of a conflict between ‘civilized-democratic’ Israel and ‘savage’ Islamists.

Despite huge differences between Syria and Libya, Syria’s fate could be similar to that of Libya in terms of direct foreign intervention, were not Russia and China firmly opposed such actions at the UN, where there has been consistent cooperation between the two. Although the origins of Sino-Soviet relations go back to the early days of the 1917 Communist Revolution, it seems that, even two decades after the dismantlement of the Eastern Bloc, the Russian Federation and the Republic of China are, more than ever, following what Mao Tse-tung advised in his ‘Be a True Revolutionary’ address on 23 June 1950. Here, Tse-tung said that ‘in the international sphere we must firmly unite with the Soviet Union’ (see Selected Works of Mao Tsetung, vol. V. p. 39). Shared ideology, world vision, economic interests, and objectives in the field of energy have brought Russia and China ever closer together over the Syrian conflict.

World oil production is headed by Saudi Arabia, with Russia second, the USA third, Iran fourth and China fifth. In terms of oil reserves, we find that the top ten states are:1) Venezuela, 2) Saudi Arabia, 3) Canada, 4) Iran, 5) Iraq, 6) Kuwait, 7) UAE, 8) Russia, 9) Kazakhstan and 10) Libya. Russia is the largest gas producer in the world, with Europe dependent on its gas sourcing. In world gas production, if, because of their geographical distance, we exclude the USA and Canada, Iran comes second and Qatar third. In terms of gas reserves, Russia is number one, with Iran and Qatar in fourth place and Saudi Arabia in sixth. With neighbouring Saudi Arabia as one of the ten leading producers of gas in the world, it is clear why the export interests of Qatar and Saudi Arabia are particularly important and this ranking should give us a clear idea of the alliances that have formed in light of the Syrian conflict.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar (which in different circumstances could have been one state and might yet experience a geographical reshuffle) are both Arab-Muslim-Sunni and both have economic interests. Qatar’s greedy pursuit of marketing contracts for Libyan gas and oil supplies explains its agreement with NATO to attack Libya, its symbolic participation in the air strikes and its support for the rebels to establish a media capability.

Qatar’s aim is to export its gas toEurope, compete with the Russians and gain important political bargaining chips. In order for the export of Qatari gas to Europe to be feasible and competitive, a gas pipe must be laid through Syria. As Russia’s long-standing ally and with the precedents of numerous joint deals dating back to the USSR era, Syria is unlikely to allow anything to threaten the destabilization of Russia’s interests in their last strategic stronghold in the Arab world. This is the main reason why Qatar and Saudi Arabia are supporting the opposition’s struggle to topple the Syrian government.

Syria is fast becoming a Pandora’s box from which all the historical crises of the last 120 years are re-emerging. These begin with the Russo-Turkish war in 1877-8, the Russo-Japanese war in 1904, WWI and WWII and the Cold War. Normally, it takes a superpower 2-3 decades to emerge. It took the USA nearly 25 years to emerge as a superpower from 1890 to the end of WWI. After the death of Lenin in 1924, the USSR was the sick man of Europe. In 1945, after WWII and under Stalin, it emerged as a superpower. After Gorbachev, Russia ceased to be a superpower and seemingly, the Cold War ended. In just over two decades, Putin has ended the unipolar system and a new bipolar world is emerging – as if the Cold War had never ended.

Close examination of the Syrian political system reveals that Syrian president Bashar al-Assad is, indeed, a reformist. However, in Syria, as in any other state, factions are intertwined in power-struggles and these and the necessary processes of socialization will take some time to work through. Whilst, as Assad said, it takes just a couple of minutes to sign a new law, it takes much longer to educate people to absorb and participate in the implementation of the new values those laws enshrine. Western ruling elites’ portrayal of these new norms as seemingly growing on trees is an act of disutility and definitely immoral.

Syria was the last secular, socially-cohesive Arab state based on a top-down secular ideology. Despite its volatile, geopolitical surroundings (Lebanon, Turkey, Israel, Jordan and Iraq), Syrian citizens lived securely under this Arab secularism. Syria encompasses a particular type of pluralism and multiculturalism, embedded with religious tolerance and a pluralist existence. This is demonstrated by the toleration of a church, a mosque, a bar and the equal coexistence of both secular and veiled women. In fact, the reform process begun in Syria is more advanced than any similar process in any other Arab state. It includes the removal of emergency laws, the implementation of party laws, election laws, a key media law, and the approval of a new constitution including the removal of the article on the sole leadership of the al-Ba’ath party. Such reforms are part of a genuine political process that will take time. 

However, this reform process has been totally and intentionally undermined by forces, including Western governments acting against the Syrian state. In the last decades, and particularly since 9/11, the West has continually propagated the notion that Islamist terrorists have been threatening the secular way of life. However, Sunnis, technically the religious majority in Syria, contain large segments, and are no less secular than any other Western society.

So, despite Syrians’ clear right to defend the secularity of their way of life, the aim of the West is to dismantle the Syrian state, alter the power structure, and create new demo-geographic entities such as a confederation of the Syrian and Iraqi Kurds, which at present, is Turkey’s nightmare. Specific areas might also be depopulated, which might then be used, as has been done with the Druze, to repopulate with Syrian Christians and perhaps with Christians from Lebanon. Other Christians would leave the Levant altogether. The Alawites would then have another state, linked perhaps, with Iran.

The plan is to destroy the modern Arab state of Syria that emerged after WWI and in the 1940s, and, where possible, to establish new religious states (similar to the Jewish state of Israel). In this way, Arab power and along with it, the Pan-Arab ideology of Michel Aflaq and Antun Sa’ade (both Arab Christians) and Nasser of Egypt, would disappear. This process began when, in 1978-9 under Sadat, Egypt signed its peace treaty with Israel, and was followed by the destruction of Lebanon in 1982, the second Intifada in 1987, and the economic takeover of Iraq in 2003. It was then followed in Libya with the seizing of oil and gas in 2011. Therefore, in order to keep the US-Rael (US-Israel) hegemony, the West needs to align states along sectarian lines (Sunni-Shiite) rather than on Pan-Arabism. Indeed, this process was boosted after the occupation of Iraq and the toppling of the Ba’ath party.

In practice, what is now happening in the Arab world is a ‘correction’ of the 1916 Sykes-Picot agreement, when the main colonial powers, Britain and France, carved out the boundaries of the current Arab states and installed their own Arab agents. These ongoing, neo-colonial plans include provision for any two or more Arab parties to fight the Syrian regime and to keep them fighting until such time as each state is dismembered and fractured into 2-3 states, based on sectarian lines. Then colonial elites can continue to scoop up the wealth because, after all, the imperial mentality has hardly changed.

Since Western powers cannot achieve this on their own, they need agents such as Qatar in Libya and Saudi Arabia, Qatar and others in Syria. These agents, preferably self-serving, undemocratic Arab-Muslim-Sunni monarchies, will use Sunni-Islam to promote fanaticism against other Arabs, Muslims and non-Muslims (e.g., Arab Christians, Shiites and Druze). Those Arabs with access to the (economic) global elite (for example, the Royal Saudi family and the Qataris with the Americans and other European elites) are, by and large, the ruling elites in the Arab Gulf or their protégés. It is they who are driving a wedge between the various sects and magnifying and exploiting the playing of the Sunni card with non-Arab Muslim Sunni Turkey against Syria. It would hardly be a surprise either if they were in cahoots with Israel-serving Western powers. Otherwise, it would remain fairly difficult to explain why the most authoritarian regime on earth, Saudi Arabia, is acting against Syria and trying to teach it lessons in democracy, something that Saudi Arabia is not very keen to know much about.

Feckless Erdogan Stakes Future of Turkey on Fake Promises from Con Artist Obama; Davutoglu Goes from Zero Problems to Countless Problems with Meddling In Syria

Tarpley

PressTV has conducted an interview with author and historian Webster Griffin Tarpley from Washington to further discuss the issue. What follows is a rough transcription of the interview.

Press TV: Looking at Turkey’s role…. I will just bring you a quote here now from Turkey’s Foreign Minister, Ahmed Davutoglu, I am quoting him; he says, “we will not allow the formation of terrorist structuring near our borders, no matter if it is al-Qaeda or PKK”.

Now that was when he was speaking about the threat from the Kurdish rebels, but is Turkey now practically hosting and assisting al-Qaeda when it comes to the fight against Syria, because as our guest in London [Charles Shoebridge] was also saying that al-Qaeda is also now getting involved in that fight?

Tarpley: Well, al-Qaeda was an integrated part of this from the very beginning and they have been there because they have been brought in by NATO.

Think of al-Qaeda as the NATO irregular infantry, a guerilla force if you will, that works for NATO and this structure is already existing on the Turkish territory.

Just some examples, the New York Times tells us that the CIA is present in southern Turkey as a traffic cop to direct weapons flows, paid for by Saudi Arabia and the other feudal monarchies of the Persian Gulf to direct those weapons toward certain groups inside Syria.

We had reports previously of a large airlift and sealift of terrorists, I would say, from Libya, the people who overthrew Gaddafi, who had been shipped into Libya by NATO.

They were then shipped into southern Turkey, Iskenderun is the place that was mentioned, and then they were moved into northern Syria.

We even had examples of guests in tourist hotels, along the Turkish Mediterranean coast complaining that al-Qaeda terrorists had moved into the same hotels and were showing the al-Qaeda flags.

And then most recently the Reuters dispatch that shows connection with the incirlik NATO air force base, US air force base, that there is a kind of logistical hub there, which is in the place called Adana which is directing these weapons flow.

So it is too late to make these statements, I think you have to look, though, behind this. Turkey has obviously been conned, they have been manipulated, the ambition and the vanity of Erdogan and Davutoglu, it seems to me has been played on systematically by Obama.

The word here in Washington for the last year or so, has been that Obama’s favorite telephone partner, the person in the world that he calls more than any other is Erdogan.

And he is promising to make Erdogan great, he is saying, ‘play my game and you will become the dominant satrap of the US empire in the Middle East and I am sure that Erdogan is also getting assurances from Saudi Arabia, ‘become the base for the attack on Syria and you will reap all kinds of benefits’ and of course he is not reaping benefits. He is putting his country at tremendous risk.

Press TV: Mr. Tarpley would you say that Turkey is not seriously considering any kind of military intervention in Syria? We know of course that there has been a lot of news of its deploying missiles, troops, armored vehicles along the border [with Syria].

What is it preparing for, through these deployments?

Tarpley: Well, most observers would have regarded the current state of Turkish policy as impossible.

People have been told two or three years ago that Turkey would abandon the ‘Zero Problems’ foreign policy, ‘Good Neighbor’ [foreign] policy and now engage in flagrant intervention and interference in internal affairs of Syria for the purpose of stoking a civil war on their own doorstep. That would have been considered crazy.

So I do not know what the limit is. This is something that is inherent in Hubris and megalomania. The idea that you are going to become a regional hegemon; seems to be the idea.

I would also say that they are disregarding the lessons of history, if you look back to Ataturk, at the end of the first world war, Ataturk’s basic idea was valid and he said we can not survive here as the Ottoman empire, we can, however, survive as a Turkish national state in the Anatolian peninsula and in that form we can thrive, we can do very well; and Turkey was doing very well, in terms of development and progress, until this current troubles began.

I had a chance to talk to General Auon, Michel Auon of Lebanon, who last November, in his little fortress above the Mediterranean, said, ‘Turkey is the last country that should become involved in these adventures, because they are split, they have got secularists and Islamists, they have got a Kurdish minority’ and by meddling in this way, they are getting themselves into big troubles.’

Let us look at this PKK, Erdogan has brought this up. Erdogan is complaining, he says that the PKK has taken over certain parts of northern Syria and they are going to operate into Turkey and he wants the right of hot pursuit back into Syria.

Well, Erdogan you should have thought of that, right? The great principal of international relations is reciprocity.

If you foment troubles in Syria, then you are going to sow the wind and reap the whirlwind, when that comes back to hurt you.

And the hot pursuit doctrine would work both ways, but by doing this, Erdogan has really created his own greatest nightmare which is the general uprising of the Kurds, which I think, under these circumstances would certainly have tragic aspects for many people in the region.

Press TV: Mr. Tarpley, if you could quickly also tell us. Would you say there is a connection between the sudden surge in violence as Syria says, with for instance, Kofi Annan’s visit in any effort for a peaceful resolution or political resolution to the crisis?

Tarpley: Well, we have two waves of foreign fighters being brought in. one wave was brought in during this past winter into the spring and that is what has been active over this past months and then more recently, for July, for ‘Operation Damascus Volcano’, which was the attempt to …the Syrian state.

As Hillary Clinton said, the ‘catastrophic assault’, they brought in another wave of foreign fighters from all over north Africa, and the Mediterranean and the Middle East.

Now Turkey claims that they sealed their borders, they did not. It would be good if they did; but they are still allowing illegal border crossings to function.

My advice to Turkey would be, pull back from this while you still can, seal your border; if Turkey cuts off access to foreign fighters, if they just take refugees but not allow weapon ships to go in, the rebellion in northern Syria will die down in short order.

Turkey says they want to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, they will never get in the SCO [Shanghai Cooperation Organization] at this rate.

Syria defeats NATO’s swarming terrorists

PressTV
Webster G. Tarpley

NATO created a multi-layered strategy to subvert and destroy the Syrian state using covert action below the threshold of bombing and invasion, although including out special forces and espionage."
Last week, the NATO powers launched their long-awaited summer offensive against Syria. This was a multi-pronged effort designed not just to overthrow the government of President Assad, but also to totally disintegrate the existing structures of the Syrian state, dissolving the entire country into chaos, confusion, secession, attempted coups d’état, and a likely massacre of Assad backers, Alawites, Christians, Kurds, and other minority groups.

This assault peaked between July 18 and July 21. Almost a week later, all indications suggest that Assad, the Baath party, and the Syrian state have proven to be much stronger than the NATO planners had imagined, and that the imperialist attack has been defeated for the time being.

The easiest way for NATO to destroy independent Syria would be to obtain a UN Security Council resolution authorizing a no-fly zone, a bombing campaign, and incursions by special forces, many of them sent by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the other reactionary Gulf monarchies. But this path has been blocked by the courageous resistance of Russia and China. Another method would be to form a coalition of the willing outside of the United Nations and proceed to the attack, as was done in the cases of Serbia and Iraq. But, with Russian President Vladimir Putin reasserting Russia’s support for Syria, this method poses the risk of Russian and Chinese retaliation in ways which the Anglo-Americans might find extremely painful. Therefore, NATO created a multi-layered strategy to subvert and destroy the Syrian state using covert action below the threshold of bombing and invasion, although including out special forces and espionage.

The signal to activate the assembled capabilities was given by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on July 8, when she warned Damascus that little time remained to avoid a “catastrophic assault” capable of destroying the Syrian state. This is exactly what was attempted last week.

First, NATO attempted to isolate Syria by interrupting communications with its traditional ally, Iran. According to the Wall Street Journal of July 23, the United States in particular has exerted pressure on the government of Iraq to deny overflight permission for flights between Syria and Iran through Iraqi airspace. An official US diplomatic demarche delivered in Baghdad demanded that such flights be banned. At the same time, pressure was exerted on the government of Egypt to violate the international status of the Suez Canal by preventing the transit of Iranian ships allegedly headed for Syrian ports. But these efforts have yielded only mixed results, according to this account.

The main diplomatic thrust of the destabilization effort was yet another UN Security Council resolution opening the door to Chapter Seven economic sanctions and military attack on Syria. This transparent bid for a general war in the Middle East was duly vetoed by Russia and China, while Pakistan and South Africa abstained despite US pressure. United States Ambassador to the UN Susan E. Rice became hysterical, raving that the Russian Federation was “pitiful,” “dangerous,” and “deplorable” after she lost the vote. Hillary Clinton had previously branded Russia as “despicable” and “intolerable.” One imagines these charming ladies chewing the carpet as Hitler reportedly did during the run-up to the Munich conference of September 1938.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov correctly described the US diplomatic posture as “justifying terrorism.” According to Lavrov, the US stance amounted to, “We will continue to support terrorist attacks until the Security Council does what we want.” It would now be in order for Russia and China to propose a Security Council resolution condemning the United States and its allies for giving material support to terrorism.

German intel.: Qaeda behind terror in Syria

PressTV

The German Federal Intelligence Service (BND) has revealed that al-Qaeda is responsible for numerous terrorist attacks in Syria, including the Houla massacre.

The BND estimates that al-Qaeda has carried out “about 90 terrorist attacks” in Syria between late last December and early July, German daily Die Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung wrote in an article on July 16.

The revelation was made public by the German government in response to a parliamentary question.

The German government also confirmed that it had received numerous reports from the BND on al-Qaeda’s involvement in the May 25 massacre in the Syrian town of Houla in the central province of Homs, in which 108 people, including dozens of children and women, were killed execution-style.

However, the German government stated that the reports were supposed to remain classified "by reason of national interest."

The West and the Syrian opposition blamed the Syrian government for the carnage, but a Syrian government-appointed fact-finding mission had said that armed groups had carried out the massacre to frame the government and foment sectarian strife.

The intelligence reports raise several questions about the terrorist nature of the self-proclaimed Free Syrian Army, and even more so about the fact that many of the armed terrorists, killed in clashes with Syrian security forces, carried foreign passports.

On Thursday, The New York Times published an article, stating that “the evidence is mounting that Syria has become a magnet for Sunni extremists, including those operating under the banner of al-Qaeda.”

Syria has been the scene of violence by armed groups since March 2011. The violence has claimed the lives of hundreds of people, including many security forces.

Damascus blames “outlaws, saboteurs, and armed terrorist groups” for the unrest, asserting that it is being orchestrated from abroad. The West and the Syrian opposition accuse the government of killing the protesters.

Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and most western countries have supported and funded the violence in Syria by providing logistics, arms, and intelligence to anti-government elements.

MHB/HN

Propaganda War: Syrian media warn of staged videos, rebels dressed as soldiers

Stratrisks

Editor’s Note: Recently the mainstream media has been using unverified, anonymous videos via youtube to show what is going on in Syria. The BBC at one point had hired some Syrians to film the civil war going on. Honestly unless you are in Syria, you have no idea what is going on there. Well unless you are the NSA, CIA, NRO or other respective international agencies you have no idea. Which is why it is so difficult to post articles on Syria. We are not interested in being cheerleaders for either side but bringing you the who, what, where, when, and why like a news outlet should. –Michael Vail

As fighting rages on in the heart of Damascus, still reeling from a stunning attack on Syria’s military leadership Wednesday, Syrian state media called the bombing a failure and alleged that a Qatari company was staging fake videos using models of the capital and another city, Aleppo, to mislead the world.

The claims are the latest salvo in the propaganda battle over the 16-month Syrian uprising. With scant access for foreign journalists, Syrian state media and opposition activists have competed to control the story, offering radically different accounts of what is happening inside the battered country.

To the chagrin of the government, amateur videos shared online by opposition activists showing shelling, bloodied corpses and gunfire have become a crucial current of information for the outside world, often appearing on Arab and Western television. And with the United Nations forced to crimp its monitoring mission because of escalating violence, death tolls are often supplied by activists instead.

“In the short term at least, journalists have little choice but to continue to rely on activists for much of their information,” journalist Jess Hill wrote earlier this year in the Global Mail, expressing the unease that she and other correspondents feel in using activists for so much of their information.

Syrian officials have often cast doubt on online videos and disputed accounts from opposition activists, blaming killings on “terrorists” –- the government term for the rebels -– rather than the army or its allies. State media frequently claim that Syria is the victim of an international conspiracy.

Stepping up the allegations that the violence is not what it appears, the official Syrian Arab News Agency reported Thursday that “special sources” said a Qatari security company had manufactured models mimicking official buildings in Syrian cities and gathered people to pose as military personnel “to film fake videos and fabricated photos about the situation in Syria.”

The allegations echo similar claims made during the Libyan uprising against Moammar Kadafi that fake attacks were being staged in Qatar.

In an even more alarming claim, Syrian state television warned citizens Thursday that gunmen were planning to attack in Damascus disguised in military uniforms as a way of “exploiting the trust of citizens in our courageous armed forces,” Reuters reported.

In the wake of the Wednesday bombing, Syrian state television also sought to combat rumors that President Bashar Assad had been harmed, airing footage of him at the swearing-in of the new defense minister, whose predecessor was killed in the attack. But it was unclear where the ceremony took place.

State television dubbed the attack a failure and portrayed it as part of a U.S.- and Israeli-backed conspiracy against the country. Television commentators scoffed at the idea that the bombing would hurt the state; Western analysts have widely seen the strike as a major blow to the government.

The bombing “will not shake our determination and the determination of the army, but will strengthen it,” one Syrian man told Al-Ikhbariyah on Thursday, according to the BBC media monitoring service.

US dirty hands behind cold-blooded killings of top Syrian officials

PressTV

In Las Vegas, the house seldom loses. Rarely are dirty Washington schemes foiled. It's playing hardball against Syria.

Its dirty hands are all over months of violence. In a July 18 press briefing , State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell refused to condemn Wednesday's cold-blooded killings.

Syrian Defense Minister Dawood Rajiha, his deputy General Asef Shawkat, and Assistant Vice President General Hassan Turkmani died.

A terrorist bombing killed them at Damascus National Security headquarters. At the time, a ministerial, military, and security meeting was in progress. Others attending were injured.

Pressed for an answer on whether the Obama administration believes killing high-level Syrian officials is good or bad, he stressed only that Washington is: "focused on ending the bloodshed. It is the Assad regime that, in slaughtering its own people, has created these chaotic conditions....(W)e want a peaceful, orderly transition."

In other words, cold-blooded murder is OK as long as it advances America's imperium. Uncooperative countries will be ravaged. Body counts don't matter. Top officials are fair game. So are all imaginable lawless tactics.

Washington's dirty hands are all over Wednesday's attack. Death squad diplomacy is prioritized. Hillary Clinton warned about a price to be paid.

Unexplained was that it's far beyond murdering officials. Turning Syria into a charnel house is planned. Daily death squad killings increase body counts. Western and perhaps Qatari special forces as well as intelligence operatives direct them.

Satellite and other communications aid them. Taking the battle to Damascus streets ups the stakes. Scurrilous propaganda conveys the impression that the Assad's government is collapsing. Insurgent attacks alone can't defeat him.

Only body counts increase. Civilians and security forces suffer most.

All sorts of spurious reports circulate. Fake videos are used. Al Jazeera uses footage produced on a Qatar sound stage. Isolated images distort the larger picture. Disreputable sources are cited.

Al Jazeera claimed "the latest developments" reflect a "turning point" in the conflict. "The prestige of the regime has been shattered. Losing control of Damascus (means) the regime is slowly losing its grip over the country."

Nonsense!

Washington and/or NATO countries designated Syria's capital fighting "Operation Damascus Volcano." They call it a full-scale offensive. Insurgent commander Qassem Saadeddine said "(t)here is no going back. The Damascus battle has priority for us. We have started the operation to liberate Damascus."

Without elaborating, he said "expect surprises."

Washington's longstanding plans involve destroying, not liberating, Syria. Claimed end game operations in Damascus is propaganda. Media scoundrels repeat it. At issue is winning the information war, intensifying death squad attacks, and sustaining conflict on the ground.

After defecting, Syria's former Iraq ambassador, Nawaf Fares, made spurious accusations. He's in the tank for Washington.

He claimed Syrian officials told him to enlist "Jihadi units" to fight US forces in Iraq. Most recently he suggests Assad used chemical weapons in Homs.

He admits he can't confirm it, but believes Assad will use them if threatened.

Security Council Showdown

On July 19, Britain, America, France, Germany, Portugal, and Ireland tabled a resolution for consideration. Eleven nations voted aye. Others besides sponsoring countries included Azerbaijan, Colombia, Guatemala, India, Morocco, and Togo. South Africa and Pakistan abstained.

Russia and China vetoed it. Invoking UN Chapter VII, it effectively declared war.

Moscow and Beijing acted responsibly. They did so for the third time. They want conflict resolution not bombs away. They need to go further. Hopefully they'll get more assertive.

At issue is forthrightly denouncing Washington's war on Syria. Drawing a line in the sand is crucial. Raging conflict can't be tolerated. Arming and otherwise supporting their Syrian ally is vital.
The entire region's up for grabs. Both countries have vital interests at stake. Only they can protect them. Months of diplomacy failed. Realpolitik dictates assertive action. Washington understands it. It won't risk war at this time with either country.

The resolution's text in part said "the situation constitutes a threat to international peace and security."

UN Charter Chapter VII was invoked. It authorizes measures ranging from economic sanctions to blockades or direct military intervention if other measures fail.

It endorsed the June 30 Geneva agreement text. It called for ending armed conflict, implementing Annan's peace plan, adhering to provisions of Security Council Resolutions 2042 and 2043, releasing detainees, permitting humanitarian access to areas needing help, and other steps to be taken.

It called for Syrian-led political transition. Its guidelines included establishing a firm timeline. It urged avoiding further bloodshed and violence.

It ignored what Assad already accomplished. In February, Syrians overwhelmingly supported new constitutional provisions by national referendum. Despite opposition boycotts and violence, 89.4% of eligible voters approved it. Another 9% opposed, and 1.2% of ballots were declared invalid.

Among other reforms, political pluralism was established for the first time. So were presidential term limits and press freedom.

Washington wants regime change and won't tolerate peaceful resolution

Freedom's Phoenix
Stephen Lendman

Washington-backed so-called "Friends" won't tolerate resolving Syrian violence peacefully. How can they when America, rogue NATO partners, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and other regional despots incited it, fund it, arm it, and continue it.

The name of the game is regime change, not peace. Former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan and current UN head Ban Ki-moon are active players.

Annan's sham peace plan is cover to mask it. Both support imperial dominance. For a decade as Secretary-General, Annan violated his own charter mandate.

Global wars raged throughout his tenure. He did nothing to stop them. He served imperial aggressors, not victims.

His successor Ban's no different. Like Annan, his record reflects failure and betrayal. He's complicit in Western war crimes. So was Annan. Ban picked up on Syria where he left off after leaving office on December 31, 2006.

He didn't miss a beat. He and Annan are part of the problem, not the solution. Since January 1, 2007, he's been a reliable imperial tool. He supported NATO and killer gangs in Libya. He ignored grievous crimes of war and against humanity. He blames Assad for Western generated violence in Syria.

On April 6, he did again. A UN statement in his name said:

"The Secretary-General strongly condemns the latest escalation of violence. He deplores the assault by the Syrian authorities against innocent civilians, including women and children, despite the commitments by the Government of Syria to cease all use of heavy weapons in population centres."

"The 10 April timeline to fulfill the Government's implementation of its commitments, as endorsed by the Security Council, is not an excuse for continued killing."