conflict zones, latest, Russia, Syria, United States, USA
Comments 34

US Slams Russia and Syria but not IS

by Tutisicecream

Spot the trucks on this video

Spot the trucks on this video

The WMSM have carried blanket coverage of the UN Aid Convoy attack repeating US accusations blaming Russia and Syrian based solely on the claims of the White Helmets

The attack on the UN aid convoy seems to mark the end of the Syrian ceasefire as the Syrian government announced it will resume attacks on the IS and its various al-Qaida-linked militant factions who failed to comply with the seven-day cease-fire agreement brokered by the US and Russia. So far the only claim of the perpetrators of the attack comes from a video filmed by the White Helmets. The US accusations, backed by no clear independent evidence, comes just days after it admitted on September 18th it killed over 80 and injured more than another 100 Syrian troops in an attack it called a “mistake”. A mistake which allowed IS to go immediately on the offensive and attack the city of Aleppo where not surprisingly the attack on the UN aid convoy has taken place. Churkin said the timing of the US airstrike was “frankly suspicious” as it came two days before the US and Russia were supposed under the ceasefire agreement to begin joint planning for air operations against IS and the former Nusra front, Jabhat Fatah al-Sham, deemed to be terrorist groups by both states.

Further to the US admission of killing Syrian government troops in error during the ceasefire they are now attempting to spread the blame out across all western coalition partners including Britain, Denmark and Australia. This follows a common thread of continued obfuscation by the US of their war on terror in Syria which they seem to be strangely running in reverse i.e. attacking government forces and doing nothing to disable the terrorist IS forces. For months the US has found it impossible to separate its so called moderate opposition from IS terrorists/al-Nusra, al-Qaida-linked militant factions. Using this time period to target IS where possible, something you might think they would do, but instead to allow them to regroup and rearm. Very strange for warriors against terror don’t you think?

The Syrian ceasefire came into effect on September 12, 2016. Under terms of the agreement, the successful completion of seven days of calm and humanitarian aid deliveries would be followed by an ambitious second-stage plan to set up a joint U.S. Russian coordination centre to plan military strikes against IS and their various al-Qaida-linked militant factions. It appears that all this is now in jeopardy. With the sudden accusations made by US state department spokesman John Kirby who said,

The destination of this convoy was known to the Syrian regime [my emphasis] and the Russian federation and yet these aid workers were killed in their attempt to provide relief to the Syrian people.

He went on to say:

The United States will raise this issue directly with Russia. Given the egregious violation of the cessation of hostilities we will reassess the future prospects for cooperation with Russia.

It appears the US is falling back on its time-honoured strategy of shoot first ask questions later which it has utilised on many occasions to manipulate opinion through false media claims.

This story pretty much verbatim has been reproduced across all the WMSM Reuters, BBC, Fox News, Al Jazeera, Guardian etc. If you have not done so watch the White Helmets video and notice we are not shown any Trucks just a few bits of things we are told is aid and a burnt out car. For a more balanced sitrep and altogether different angle see this RT report.

According to Al Jazeera [emphasis added]:

The UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said at least 32 people were killed in dozens of air strikes launched in and around Aleppo after the truce officially came to an end at 1600 GMT. The war monitor said that the aid lorries made a routine delivery to an area west of Aleppo city and were hit near the town of Urm al-Kubra, killing 12 people.

Which appears to go against the statement in the same report by Staffan de Mistura, the UN Special Envoy for Syria, denounced the air raid [emphasis added]:

Our outrage at this attack is enormous…The convoy was the outcome of a long process of permission and preparations to assist isolated civilians,

Either the convoy was the result of long preparations whose movement unfortunately coincided with the ending of the ceasefire or it was a routine delivery. Remember we are told it was the “Syrian regime” not IS who has committed this act. Remember IS are the terrorists who tend to target civilians in pursuit of their objectives.

Who are the White Helmets?

Not surprisingly again this incident which so far has not been attributed conclusively to any of the forces operating in Syria is being framed for the media by the White Helmets. As highlighted above the use by Kirby of the phrase “Syrian regime” is instructive as he is referring to the legitimate government of Syria. It is the same phrase used in the White Helmets video release; remember that the White Helmets claim to be apolitical regarding Syrian claiming not to take sides.

whitehelmetswebsitegrab

According to the White Helmets fund-raising website they are separate from the Syrian Civil Defence but they think the SCD do amazing work. Who are they? Different organisations or the same? Weird don’t you think?

whitehelmetswebsitegrab2

Their Wikipedia entry states they are both the same organisation.

It seems whoever they are, they fulfil the same function for US intelligence as Bellingcat or the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (both nothing more than UK-based bloggers in actual fact) who provide convenient content which is designed to push a ready-made agenda – in other words propaganda.

To understand the connection here between the White Helmets and Al Jazeera read this report written in September last year at Global Research.

Then watch the Al Jazeera report on the Aid Convoy Attack.

Throughout all this blanket coverage designed to make us believe it is Russia and the Syrian Government who are to blame for this terrible event, no one has mentioned IS remember these are terrorist forces we are talking about here, terrorists who have just gone on the offensive against the Syrian Government troops in Aleppo. Is it omission by intent by the US government and their corporate media cohorts?


34 Comments

  1. “Just when we think it cannot get any worse, the power of depravity sinks lower.” (Ban Ki-moon)
    This story gathers pace, it is set to run and run (running away from Dier ez-Zor); it is set to be the focus of the (probable) breakdown of the ceasefire (rather than the act of war perpetrated by UK/US Australian forces providing air cover for Daesh.) Now we have it on the lofty authority of Boris Johnson that it was the Russians – Russian planes fly in pairs, Syrian individually; Russian strikes are precise, Syrian (particularily if using barrel bombs) are inaccurate; and “we are not sure of the Syrian night flying capability.” So it wasn’t a helicopter then? It is now claimed that the “panicked narrator” (White Helmet) in the video “claims the convoy was attacked by planes.” This is easily demonstrated as a lie (see video evidence below) but is is the ends that it is being twisted to that make it more sinister.
    On the back of this Kerry demands the grounding of the Syrian airforce (a partial NFZ that he has no right to declare – it is the Coalition airforces that are acting illegaly in direct violation of Syrian airspace); his French counterpart (Jean-Marc Ayrault) demands “all Syrian troops should be confined to barracks” (like at Dier ez-Zor – so they can be more easily targetted by the Coalition and their Daesh ground forces?)

    In Bojos words: “It’s too early to say anything about criminality and to make conclusive judgments about responsibility, but put it this way: when you look at what happened to the aid convoy, there are only two possible culprits “ – Martin Chulov and Julian Borger

    Like

    • Whoops – the Johnson quote ends with ‘culprits’ – the journalists names should be outside the quote (perhaps you could ammend OffG?)

      Like

  2. I think it is obvious by now that the so-called and self-styled “white” helmets are one of the US’s terrorist groups.
    How else to explain that they are always conveniently on hand to record the aftermaths of alleged attacks.
    If you study their faces while being filmed, they are barely able to suppress their obvious mirth and delight.
    Rather like the high-fiving Mossad agents “witnessing” and filming the apparent attack on the WTC on 9/11.
    I think these “stunts” are being born by the Russians in order to assist Clinton’s bid for the White House.
    They are designed to make the current administration look “tough” to deflect criticism by Trump.
    There truly is a whole slew of unsavouriness behind everything currently going on in Syria.

    Like

    • You’re correct on the general point at least.
      In the modern age everything ‘humanitarian’ (including the ‘white helmets’) can be translated as “war-mongering”.
      The good thing is that the public at large is beginning to realise that our own establishment is the ongoing source of this stuff.
      Ethical inversions r’ us.
      Moral inversions r’ us.
      Therefore, Satans r’ us.
      … and … Wars r’ us.

      Like

  3. Interesting piece in the Independent, a ‘left-leaning’ British newspaper, owned by the Russian oligarch Alexander Lebedev long-time critic and liberal oppositionist to the Russian government (looks like an axe to grind). The report deals with the atack on the humanitarian convoy to Aleppo. Herewith a following excerpt.
    ”The UN suspended all aid to Syria after a destructive attack on its lorries attack near the besieged city of Aleppo on Monday. The attack at Urum al-Kubra PROBABLY (my empasis) by Russian or Syrian forces destroyed 18 of 31 lorries and killed about 20 civilians … ” Please note PROBABLY. This of course means that although we may assert that this was a deliberate attack by the Syrians/Russian, we don’t have any evidence to corroborate it.

    Exactly the same form of words were used in the Litvinenko case. Litvinenko was a double agent who had defected to the British. He was murdered with polonium poisoning. The recent inquiry that the possible guilty party was – you’ve guessed it – Vladimir Putin. In the words of the public enquiry: ”A public inquiry into the radioactive poisoning of the former KGB officer found that Mr Putin “probably” sanctioned the assassination by two Russian agents in London in 2006.”

    Again no hard evidence just ‘probably’ Seem that evidence has become a little passe.

    Like

  4. michaelk says

    It’s interesting that the UN is backtracking on the claim that it was an attack carried out from the air by jets bombing the convoy, and now only maintains that the convoy was ‘attacked.’

    The Americans are claiming that two Russian jets attacked the convoy. That’s a really serious allegation. Where’s the evidence? Does one even need any? Is the mere allegation enough, if the Russians are accused and the Americans say what’s happened? Who in our media dares question the American version of the events described?

    The trucks don’t look like they were blown apart by high-explosive bombs delivered by Russian jets. There must be bomb fragments with Russian markings lying around. The trucks look like they’ve been torched. They are burnt out, not destroyed by bombs. Where are the creators left behind by the bombing? The list could go on.

    We’ve come to a dreadful place when our media chooses to follow the American lead on military attack without any questioning and scrutiny at all, as if the Americans don’t have a proven record of lying about this kind of thing in order to gain advantage over an enemy on the battlefield. Our journalists appear credulous as hell, even though it’s war we’re dealing with and the sources are partisan, like the non-existant moderate rebels.

    It’s like voluntary war-time censorship and propaganda has been introduced inside our media without any public debate. Are we, as far as the media are concerned, already effectively at war with Russia?

    Like

  5. I can’t find the original (its been changed for a compilation on the Guardian website) but if you go to the 55sec mark on this video you can hear the White Helmet clearly say the “the Regime, helicopter, targeted this place with four barrels.”
    This morning US officials claim that it was Russian SU-24’s that carried out the attack. Get your story straight, boys!

    Like

      • Yes the Graun has changed the original video to include a picture of a burn out truck in the daytime sometime later. But the story it seems as you say still remains contradictory.

        You can still see the original White Helmets video here:

        Like

        • So how do we call out the Graun (let alone the rest of the M$M) on this; they are not even trying to be consistent, let alone meet the minimal journalistic standard; and seem content to stenograph the Pentagon, State Department etc?
          Since the Wintour article (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/07/syrian-opposition-coalition-to-announce-democratic-transition-plan) – which got 1117 comments; of which I would say a good 60% were negative (ie: moderate rebels – do they just throw gays from the second floor of the carpark as opposed to from the top?) and very few were moderated. Since then, they seem to have just disabled BTL comments for any Syrian article completely.

          Like

    • This video is from the English-language French state TV channel France 24, i.e., it is French propaganda. France has an even more hardline anti-Assad stance than the US.

      Like

    • This following video is alleged to be the moment the trucks were hit and if (and i mean IF) true backs the claim jets were involved not a helicopter

      However who knows when or where it was filmed exactly as i cannot find a channel called Aleppo 24 and it could be disinformation.
      One thing for sure is that this event has conveniently drawn all attention away from the killing of Syrian government troops in “error” by the US coalition.

      Like

  6. My first reaction was that the US had made yet another ‘mistake’ as they are rather prone to do in conducting surgical airstrikes against anybody they damn well please. Once the I hear the White Helmets were involved I knew the jig was up. Ah well, plus ça change…

    Like

  7. I don’t think we need to worry too much as to whether the Syria Civil Defense jihadis are the same people as the Syrian White Helmets or not. If the two “organisations” are jihadi fronts then their membership will be whatever it is on the day. The same goes for fake media organisations among the so-called rebels like the Aleppo Media Centre or the Raqqa Media Centre.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. A Word on the Syrian Observatory On Human Rights.

    The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) is commonly used as a standalone source for news and statistics. Just this week, news agency AFP carried this story: “Syrian forces pounded Aleppo and Deir Ezzor provinces as at least 35 people were killed on Sunday across the country, among them 17 civilians, a watchdog reported.” Various atrocities and casualty numbers are listed, all from a single source: “Observatory director Rami Abdel Rahman told AFP by phone.” This was in 2012.

    Statistic after horrific statistic pours from “the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights” (AP). It’s hard to find a news report about Syria that doesn’t cite them. But who are they? “They” are Rami Abdulrahman (or Rami Abdel Rahman), who lives in Coventry, a town in the midlands of the UK.

    According to a Reuters report in December of last year: “When he isn’t fielding calls from international media, Abdulrahman is a few minutes down the road at his clothes shop, which he runs with his wife.”

    When the Guardian’s Middle East live blog cited “Rami Abdul-Rahman of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights” it also linked to a sceptical article in the Modern Tokyo Times – an article which suggested news outlets could be a bit “more objective about their sources” when quoting “this so-called entity”, the SOHR.
    That name, the “Syrian Observatory of Human Rights”, sound so grand, so unimpeachable, so objective. And yet when Abdulrahman and his “Britain-based NGO” (AFP/NOW Lebanon) are the sole source for so many news stories about such an important subject, it would seem reasonable to submit this body to a little more scrutiny than it’s had to date.

    The Observatory is by no means the only Syrian news source to be quoted freely with little or no scrutiny …

    Liked by 2 people

  9. Insignificant says

    It looks like there may not have been any shelling or air strikes at all, just some shameless msm propaganda with assistance by the corrupt UN. The convoy was delivered according to Russia which had drone surveillance of it up until that point. Sometime after that it was set alight in a militant area, with the white helmets on hand to spread a false narrative. The worrying thing is that if civilians were killed it was by the militants with the white helmets there or arriving very shortly thereafter but not noticing who killed them or that there were no impact craters from shelling. http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/09/russia-points-finger-at-al-nusra-white.html

    Liked by 1 person

  10. The White Helmets have been exposed multiple times as weapon carrying groups who gather up the wounded terrorists and stage mock attacks for video recording using stage actors and Ussama Sulwheini(SOHR)is a convicted embezzler, thief and liar who writes fairy tales from his Coventry based 2 bed semi. The US massacres Syrians in an illegal or incompetent air raid and IS terrorist brigades just happen to be ready and organised to take full advantage of it. If any one believes the US crud then likely they will believe that I am Santa Claus and my pet is called Rudolph.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Reblogged this on Worldtruth and commented:

    The White Helmets have been exposed multiple times as weapon carrying groups who gather up the wounded terrorists and stage mock attacks for video recording using stage actors and Ussama Sulwheini(SOHR)is a convicted embezzler, thief and liar who writes fairy tales from his Coventry based 2 bed semi. The US massacres Syrians in an illegal or incompetent air raid and IS terrorist brigades just happen to be ready and organised to take full advantage of it. If any one believes the US crud then likely they will believe that I am Santa Claus and my pet is called Rudolph.

    Like

  12. michaelk says

    Great Powers, great imperial powers like the United Sates, always have their work cut out running such a huge empire, especially when so much of the empire is so far away and so alien, complex and different from the US. For these reasons alone there are going to be differences of opinion about how best to do it. How much is it going to cost in men and money? How much blood can we get away with spilling? If we destroy this place, what’s the point of being there?

    There are conflicts in Washington about what’s the best course to follow in Syria. Clearly the idea that toppling Assad was going to be as easy as toppling Gadaffi has proven to be an enormous miscalculation from the American side.

    The ‘realists’ in Washington are probably thinking along the lines of what many Europeans are thinking, not speaking, in private. What happens if IS wins? Syria collapses as a unified state. There is chaos. A terrible bloodbath. The entire region is distabilized. A huge wave of refugees flees Syria. What’s to stop IS, which is already difficult to control, stopping with Syria? Why not push onwards and topple the Gulf States and the Saudi monarchy too? Think of that vast source of wealth just waiting there for a bold leader to reach out and take it. Are the Americans really going to send a huge army to fight IS over Saudi Arabia?

    What happens to Europe if millions more refugees begin to arrive on our shores? Doesn’t one risk destabilizing Europe too? The National Front takes over in Paris, for example. Then the same thing happens in Berlin. That’s a real risk. The US begins to lose control over Europe. It could happen. Is toppling Assad worth taking such a risk?

    Of course the Unitd States itself is protected by two huge oceans and Canada and Mexico from the refugee tide, but it’s Europe that’s the problem, the rise of the nationalist right, that perceives the continent as occupied territory.

    An awful lot can happen and is at stake in Syrian. The Russians understand all this. Which is why they are involved, but there are also people in Washington that also understand that they aren’t totally immune to the dire consequences of the total destruction of Syria.

    https://www.rt.com/news/359990-russia-denies-aleppo-strike/

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Very many thanks for this – a more considered and slightly less emotive response than the one I posted earlier (on Syria attack exposes cracks…)
    When will people realise that we (the Coalition, Turkey, Isreal etc) are backing Daesh in this purely manufactured tragedy?
    I mean, after nearly a year of Coalition airstrikes Daesh were on the offensive, had taken Palmyra and had designs on Damascus. Hundreds of airstrikes, thousands of tons of laser guided smart bombs, and barely a drop of oil spilt! Enter Russia, two weeks of strikes and the desert was on fire, the tankers burnt out, $50-80 million a month revenue severely reduced and Daesh in retreat.
    Fast forward to the diplomatic inititative; the High Negotiations Committee: who dafuq are they – 30 organisations on the ground fronted by a guy from Riyadh? If you extrapolate from any 30 ‘soft’ rebel groups, you must at least include a few that are al Quaeda/ Nusra/ Daesh affiliates. So are we backing Daesh both militarily and politically? I mean, who do they think they are kidding?
    After the weekends events and now todays – the endgame is clear – under the guise of a humanitarian intervention we are now openly backing the establishment of a takfiri Salafist Caliphate under Sharia law. God help us all!

    Liked by 3 people

    • Of course what we’re really doing is backing the creation of a number of ANY kind of shattered Statelets on Syrian territory because this is good for Israel.

      The ‘nations’ of the entire western world are colonies of International Zionist money-power.

      Zionism won WW2 and the deadly charge of ‘anti-Semitism’ and tales of ‘The Holocaust’ remain in our faces every day of every week of every year in order to ensure that no one has the nerve to speak this truth out loud.

      Liked by 1 person

  14. paulcarline says

    Another fraudulent MH-17 type attempt to incriminate Russia and to provide an excuse for breaking off the ceasefire. For either Russia or Syria to do this would have been utter stupidity – and neither Putin nor Assad is stupid (or evil). But there’s a clear advantage for the usual suspects – USrael – who have no qualms about murdering innocents for propaganda purposes.

    Like

    • Not sure you’re right on this one. Cutting off “aid” 8i.e. arms and ammunition) to the rebels is definitely not in Israel’s interests. This looks more like Russia saying, “We know all about your arms shipments and your phoney humanitarian ‘white helmets’. We now understand there will be no peace negotiated with you, your intelligence operatives and your proxy arab army. Now we will fight you.”
      the fact the (supposedly impartial (they ain’t0 UN has suspended aid deliveries tells us that the situation will become very serious very quickly for the Syrian rebels in Aleppo who have been murdering civilians who tried to leave their territory via ‘humanitarian corridors’. These civilians may die but they are unlikely to remain captives of the Nusras etc for much longer.

      Like

  15. Secret Agent says

    It’s a fraud. Complete Bullshit. And just in time for Obamas big speech to the UN. What a duplicitous twat. Well, I guess the Graun NYT and WP and their handful of readers will believe him. They will give him a PR victory. He seems quite happy with those. Near as I can tell Obama can’t tell the difference between bullshit and reality and neither can the press.

    It’s time to tune out forever.

    Like

  16. One treacherous crime begat another, though as Thierry Meyssan report that it is a fact that so-called “humanitarian” convoys are loaded with arms and ammunition for the rebels.
    http://www.voltairenet.org/article193367.html
    Russia are sending the message. We’re done with you and your ‘ceasefires’. As Meyssan says, the consequence of the latest US/UK Australia (we’re all one Israeli-led outfit) treachery is that the US will either have to take on Russia directly, which it doesn’t want to do [they won’t win and some of the war-mongers might get hurt, I suppose] or … accept that their proxies are going to lose.

    Below Finan Cunningham explains why the USA needed to end the ceasefire. It’s a credible report:
    http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/09/20/why-us-had-kill-syrian-ceasefire.html

    Liked by 1 person

.....................

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s