US UN flag

JEREMY SALT ON ANTI SYRIA PROPAGANDA ESCALATION

9th February 2016

Comment from geopolitical analyst Jeremy Salt on the appalling propaganda piece in the Guardian entitled: UN report: Syrian Government actions amount to extermination
[note holocaust association already introduced by Samantha Powers in relation to #Madaya propaganda storm]
Samantha Powers words
“I have looked through the report, it has all the characteristics of previous UN Human Rights reports on Syria. The timing is extremely suspect – released just as the Syrian army closes in on Aleppo.
We have seen a great spike in propaganda in the past few days, against Russian air strikes and over the number of civilians building up on the Syrian border, said to be 35,000, but 70,000 are said to be coming and yesterday the Turkish deputy PM spoke of 600,000 on the way.  All this can be seen as the possible prelude to establishing a buffer zone – we can’t look after any more in Turkey, so the only answer is to look after them inside Syria ….
 
The UN Human Rights Council speaks of 500 interviews. There is no mention of who these people are, how the UN HRC got their names and where they were interviewed. The HRC’s answer is that names cannot be released but at the same time we cannot accept as credible any report that does not/will not provide such information.
There is absolutely no means of verifying it and given the HRC’s previous record,  its word cannot be trusted. You might remember Navi Pillai’s hysterical statements about Syria when she was head of this council . I had a run-in with one of the committee members when i criticised a report on Syria for the same reasons I am giving here. It made many lurid accusations without providing a skerrick of reliable information. In a very heated discussion she admitted what was not in the report, that most of the people interviewed were in Turkey or Jordan, and, I would imagine,  in the refugee camps.
 
I have no doubt that being in a Syrian prison is very unpleasant experience, perhaps as unpleasant as being in prison at Abu Ghraib, but extermination is an extremely powerful word and to make an accusation of a policy of extermination without providing the evidence anyone would need to know to back it up, exposes, I think, the true agenda of this group of people.  
Watch how its now going to be used by governments and groups like HRW. ” ~ Jeremy Salt
End
Malcolm X
Muhaysini 2

Saudi Troop Deployment to Syria Illegal under Intl. Law: British Analyst

9th February 2016

My short interview with Tasnim News:

 

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – A British political commentator said Saudi Arabia’s plan for deployment of ground troops to Syria is illegal under international law.

“Riyadh sending ground troops to Syria, with the support of US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, is illegal under international law but the flaunting of such laws is no longer shocking,” Vanessa Beeley, with Syrian Solidarity Movement, told Tasnim on Sunday.

Following is the full text of the interview.

Q: As you know the latest round of Geneva peace talks between the Syrian government and opposition groups has been suspended until the end of February following the recent major advances by the Syrian troops against Takfiri groups on the ground. The blame game has already started over the suspension of the talks with fingers pointed at the Syrian government and Russia. Earlier, the French foreign minister said that Moscow and Damascus are scuttling the talks with their airstrikes and ground operations. What is your take on this? Do you believe the Syrian crisis would finally come to an end through a political approach?

A: Let us be clear that it was Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey who scuttled the “peace” talks not the Syrian Government. In a clear demonstration that these three countries hold greatest sway over the terrorist factions waging the war on Syria, the Syrian Ambassador, Dr Al Jaafari, stated that they “instructed” the opposition factions to withdraw from the talks. This withdrawal was covered up by De Mistura who officially announced the postponement of the talks until February 25th without commenting on the influences dictating this decision. Once again, Saudi Arabia is being allowed to direct proceedings at the UN and to protect its assets on the ground in Syria.

That Syria should be expected to support a ceasefire with terrorists who adhere to no international law and are funded, armed and created by a despotic nation such as Saudi Arabia that is systematically ensuring the wholesale slaughter and starvation of the Yemeni people, is insane and another demonstration of the NATO, US collusion in this war on Syria via proxy armies and branded terror gangs. Syria is fighting terrorists on the ground in Syria, if they cease doing so, their people will be massacred. That the UN or NATO officials consider this to be “irresponsible” and harmful to the Peace talks, reflects more on their intentions towards Syria and cynical disregard of the suffering of the Syrian people at the hands of these murdering terrorist thugs.

What we are seeing is a reaction against Syrian, Russian, and Iranian and Hezbollah gains on the ground in Syria. The recent liberation of Nubbul and al-Zahra will cut off terrorists supply lines to Aleppo and is indicative of the Syrian Arab Army strategy to both drive terrorists out into open ground where they are easy targets for the Russian and Syrian airforce, and to sever their connections to their Turkish supply channels. This is hurting the “regime change” alliance, NATO, US, [P]GCC and Israel, who are seeing their agenda being dismantled piece by piece. Russia’s intervention has dramatically highlighted the falsehood of US claims to be combating ISIS, in reality the US aided and abetted the expansion of ISIS in Syria. Put very simply, the Axis of Resistance is proving itself a formidable force to be reckoned with and the Axis of Interventionism is fumbling around trying to find ways to derail it, very unsuccessfully.

Under such conditions, it is very difficult to envisage the Syrian crisis coming to an end through political process when that process is de-legitimizing itself by its association with what should be considered illegal terror factions who can in no way represent the Syrian opposition when they are proxies of hostile nations such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar & Turkey.

Q: Riyadh on Thursday announced it plans to send ground troops to Syria to allegedly fight against the Daesh terrorists. Soon after the announcement, US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter hailed the Saudi offer to contribute to the US-led coalition and said, “That kind of news is very welcome”. You know that the so-called US-led coalition against Daesh has been carrying out airstrikes in Iraq and Syria since 2014, but it is accused of lacking seriousness in its campaign. What is behind this Saudi decision? Is the monarchy truly after fighting Daesh?

A: Riyadh sending ground troops to Syria, with the support of US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, is illegal under international law but the flaunting of such laws is no longer shocking. Western governments operate in a lawless vacuum where Syria is concerned, and not only Syria It is also ridiculous, Riyadh is already operating inside Syria, Riyadh already has proxy ground troops on Syrian soil. Sheikh Abdullah Muhaysini is the Riyadh educated and funded “General Judge” of the Jaish al Fatah coalition, comprising Jabhat al Nusra and Ahrar al Sham, both derivatives of Al Qaeda. He is chief head chopper, child fighter trainer, suicide bomber blesser and all round mass murderer with his headquarters in Riyadh.

Again, this posturing from Riyadh is in response to the damage being done to their assets and ambitions in Syria by the SAA (Syrian Arab Army) and their allies. There is a huge amount at stake here. The oil revenue for Turkey and Israel, the supply lines to the terrorists, Israel’s “security” in the region and of course the ultimate goal to partition Syria into sectarian states that will include Sunnistan in an attempt to prevent a unified Kurdish canton on the Turkish border with Syria, currently known as the “safe zone”.

Q: And what would be Iran and Russia’s reactions if Saudi boots find their ways on Syrian soil?

A: Should Turkey and Saudi Arabia be stupid enough to militarily step foot inside Syria, the response from Syria and its allies would be swift and lethal and rightfully so under international law. Would the US and NATO then use this as an excuse for all-out war with Russia on Syrian soil? Would Israel see it as an opportunity to finally engage with its arch enemy, Iran? Only the next few days and weeks will reveal if this is the ultimate goal.

END

baby kafarya

Watch: Kafarya & Foua the ignored suffering of the Syrian people

7th February 2016

Yesterday tiny baby Zahra succumbed to starvation in Kafarya and Foua.

There will be no outrage from Western or Gulf media.  There will be no crocodile tears.  There will be no outpouring of venom against the Saudi wahhabi terrorist gangs that have ensured her death.  There will be no investigation.  There will be no Avaaz petitions.  There will be no Ken Roth tweets.  Robert Ford will barely raise an eyebrow.

Zahra will die unnoticed and ignored except by her extended family in Kafarya & Foua who have watched her wither away,  helplessly, unable to alleviate her suffering.

This video has been made in memory of Zahra and all the other suffering villagers still inside Kafarya and Foua and under terrorist siege so they know they are not forgotten.

Rest in Peace little one, you have gone to a far happier place than here on Earth.

Photos: Facebook Page

 

Avaaz: manufacturing consent for wars since 2011

wall of controversy

Four years ago I received an email from the internet campaign group Avaaz which read:

“Together, we’ve sent 450,000 emails to the UN Security Council, “overwhelming” the Council President and helping to win targeted sanctions and a justice process for the Libyan people. Now, to stop the bloodshed, we need a massive outcry for a no-fly zone.” [Bold as in the original.]

Of course, that no-fly zone was Nato’s justification for a war – “no-fly zone” means war. So the bloodshed wasn’t about to be stopped, it was about to begin in earnest:

The foreign media has largely ceased to cover Libya because it rightly believes it is too dangerous for journalists to go there. Yet I remember a moment in the early summer of 2011 in the frontline south of Benghazi when there were more reporters and camera crews present than there were rebel militiamen. Cameramen used to…

View original post 5,640 more words

astroturfing for regime change: frontline in the (newest) war on the antiwar movement

Earlier I outlined what you will find if you type “Syria Solidarity UK” into google. But what if instead you type “Syria Solidarity Movement” – that other name for the same organisation? The top link then turns out not to be the campaign group co-founded by Abdulaziz Almashi and Mark Boothroyd, but a totally different and unrelated “Syria Solidarity Movement”. An organisation that adopted the domain name syriasolidaritymovement.org long before Almashi and Boothroyd decided to create their alternative.

So the immediate and most obvious question is this: why adopt the name of a pre-existing campaign organisation? An odd decision made odder since it automatically denies you ownership of a matching domain name. Indeed, can there be any rational explanation other than here is a case of deliberate identity theft? A new campaign group, with an outlook diametrically opposed to its rival, set up deliberately to overwrite it. Not conduct befitting a benign human rights organisation.

wall of controversy

A lot of good work for charity…

On Thursday [Feb 4th], David Cameron, Angela Merkel joined with lesser lights Erna Solberg, the Norwegian Prime Minister, and the Emir of Kuwait, Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah in London to host the “Supporting Syria & the Region 2016” conference.

Alongside many other luminaries including Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu, French foreign minister Laurent Fabius, European Council president, Donald Tusk, China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, the US secretary of state, John Kerry, and UN secretary general Ban Ki-Moon, they were gathered – according to the “about” page of the official website – “to rise to the challenge of raising the money needed to help millions of people whose lives have been torn apart by the devastating civil war” by lending support to an “event built on 3 previous conferences that have been generously hosted in Kuwait.”

This hypertext link…

View original post 11,102 more words

George Soros, founder of Soros Fund Management LLC, poses for a photograph following a Bloomberg Television interview in Budapest, Hungary, on Thursday, Sept. 13, 2012. Soros said he expects Spain to request a Òvery limitedÓ bailout from the European Union, with Prime Minister  Mariano Rajoy seeking to avoid damaging political fallout at home. Photographer: Akos Stiller/Bloomberg *** Local Caption *** George Soros

European Council on Foreign Relations funded by George Soros

6th February 2016

Over the next few weeks/months I will be collating all organisations involved in the Refugee Crisis from every perspective, connected to or funded by George Soros.

“ECFR is an award-winning international think-tank that aims to conduct cutting-edge independent research; provide a safe meeting space for policy-makers, activists and intellectuals to share ideas; offer a media platform to get Europeans talking about their role in the world. It was established in 2007 by a council of fifty founding members, chaired by Martti Ahtisaari, Joschka Fischer, and Mabel van Oranje, with initial funding from George Soros’s Open Society Foundations, the Communitas Foundation, Sigrid Rausing, Unicredit and Fride.

Inspired by the role American think-tanks played in helping the US move from isolationism to global leadership, ECFR’s founders set about creating a pan-European institution that could combine establishment credibility with intellectual insurgency. Today, it has over 50 staff from more than 20 countries, and receives funding from a wide range of charitable foundations, national governments, companies and private individuals.” ~ ECFR

One doesnt have to delve very deeply into their publications to see where their allegiances lie and which direction their propaganda will take:

What Russia Thinks of Europe:

By early 2015 a public opinion poll showed that 70 percent of Russians took a negative view of Europe with just 20 percent still positive about it. The perception is even more negative of the US, but both the US and EU share the same dramatic shift in recent years.

This dynamic is, of course, related to the aggressive anti-Western propaganda campaign that has accompanied the crisis in Ukraine, the annexation of Crimea, and the bloody war in Donbas. Among Russians, state-controlled television rapidly and effectively inculcated a sense that their country was a fortress under siege – with enemies all around. ~ Article here

The Kremlin’s conservative shift was reinforced by a series of new laws aimed at restricting ties that linked Russians to the West. Before too long the propaganda effort created an image of an “indivisible evil” in which the West is merged together with its domestic “agents” – liberals, westernisers, recipients of foreign grants, gays, contemporary art and its fans – and those who would not treat the Russian Orthodox Church with due respect or would not see Russia’s historical record as  unblemished.

The anti-western campaign gained huge momentum after the annexation of Crimea was followed by western sanctions. The West’s retribution for a “misdeed” (the annexation of Crimea) that an overwhelming majority of Russians regarded as their nations unambiguous triumph and a reinstatement of historical justice gave a huge boost to the anti-western sentiments. In March 2014, despite the steadily deteriorating economy, Putin’s approval rating exceeded 80 percent.