NEWS: Syria & Russia Accuse U.S. Coalition, ‘White Helmets’, of Preparing Chemical Weapons Attacks in Idlib
Eric Zuesse
The Governments of Syria and Russia claim to have proofs that the U.S. coalition that has invaded and now occupies Syria has prepared chlorine and sarin gas attacks for Idlib and other areas where Syria and Russia are trying to destroy all jihadists — prepared attacks designed to be blamed against Syria’s Government.
Headlining on Friday, September 7th, “New details surface about terrorists’ preparations to stage chemical attack in Idleb and Hama”, the official Syrian Arab News Agency reports from its sources in both Idlib and Hama in Syria, that:
The White Helmets have picked three new locations for carrying out the attacks after information was leaked about the previously-planned locations, and the three locations are: al-Najia town in Jisr al-Shughour countryside, al-Hamawsh town in the northwestern countryside of Hama, and Kafr Nubbul town in Idleb countryside.
The sources affirmed that sarin gas and chlorine gas shipments have been transported to these three areas, and that dozens of children ages two to ten who had been abducted recently from a camp near Salqin now were transported from Jisr al-Shughour to an unknown location.
The sources suggest that it’s likely that the White Helmets and the armed groups will carry out a real massacre this time to avoid the inconsistencies that surfaced in the staged chemical incident in Douma.
The next day, SANA reported that Russian intelligence had confirmed that there was:
full readiness of participants in such provocations, the play [or set-up] would be completed by Thursday evening September 13th, stressing that terrorists “are waiting for a special order from foreign contacts as a signal to start the practical phase.”…
Terrorist organizations in cooperation with the so called “White Helmets” acting as an arm of the terrorists, “Jan” in Syria, have shipments of chlorine gas and sarin gas to several regions of idleb and Hama countryside, to move dozens of children from addicted hospital In the middle of nowhere who were kidnapped recently from a camp near the city of salqin aged between two and ten years in order to prepare for chemical play scenario in these areas to accuse the Syrian Arab Army…
[And there are also] preparations for armed terrorist groups in Latakia and Aleppo, Idlib and surrounds, to use toxic chemicals against civilians and widely in order to disrupt the military operation against terrorism In those areas.
On Saturday, September 8th, SyriaNews.cc bannered “Nine Civilians Killed as UN Warns Syria Not to Fight Terrorists” and reported:
Nine civilians were murdered in Mhardeh today as UNSC President Nikki Haley warned Syria against fighting terrorism and terrorists in Syria.”
The source for that allegation regarding Nikki Haley was unfortunately not linked-to but was this from the current President of the United Nations Security Council, America’s Ambassador, Nikki Haley, speaking on September 7th:
The Assad regime and its enablers, Russia and Iran, have a playbook for this war. First, they surround a civilian area. Next, they make the preposterous claim that everyone in the area is a terrorist, so every man, woman, and child becomes a target. Then comes the ‘starve and surrender’ campaign, where they keep attacking until the people no longer have food, clean water, or shelter. It’s a playbook of death. The Assad regime has spent the last seven years refining it with Russia and Iran’s help.”
Polling by a British pollster, Orb International, which has been done annually throughout Syria since 2014, has shown that Idlib province is by far the most pro-jihadist region of Syria, and that over 90% of the residents there support Al Qaeda and/or ISIS. Collateral damage is routinely accepted in war; and, when, in 1945, the U.S. and Britain firebombed Dresden, and the U.S. nuked both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the slaughter of civilians wasn’t “collateral damage” but was actually the purpose.
But now, the U.S. and its allies warn Syria and Russia not to bomb the only region of Syria that is overwhelmingly supportive of the very same “Radical Islamic Terrorism” that Donald Trump had railed against while running for the U.S. Presidency. Syria’s Government has been bussing all surrendered jihadists to Idlib, and so the percentage of jihadists there has increased even more, presumably to well over 90%. But U.S. President Donald Trump is threatening war against Russia, World War III, if Russia supports its ally, Syria’s, efforts to exterminate all jihadists in Syria. The United States Government cites ‘humanitarian concerns’ as the reason for threatening WW III.
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
@ Admin:
<a href=”https://off-guardian.org/2018/09/08/news-syria-russia-accuse-u-s-coalition-white-helmets-of-preparing-chemical-weapons-attacks-in-idlib/#comment-130127>Somewhere in the thread below, you wrote:
“And a follow up. Where did you find the data on Assad’s record of brutality? We have been looking for a good source on this.”
Here is a link to material published by an online periodical managed by Raymond Hinnebusch (that both of us, or anyone else, including Eric, might turn to account): Syrian Studies
You can read the issues online, in .pdf format, in your browser or as downloads.
The periodical, as it appears online, seems to have gone dormant.The volumes and dates currently posted range from Vol 1 No 1 (2008) to Vol 9 No 2 (2017).
@ Admin:
You can examine one version of Hinnebuch’s Curriculum Vitae HERE.
Thank you – we will check it out.
In my opinion, an apt rebuke to the western ‘anti-war’ left:
Indefensible: Idlib and the left — Leila Al-Shami | Leila’s blog
Items from SANA Syrian Arab News Service. Syrian refugees flee back to (copywrite AZC) “Assad the blood-soaked, barrel-bombing, gas-spreading tyrant”:
Hundreds of displaced Syrians return from Lebanon
https://sana.sy/en/?p=146677
Damascus International Fair in its fourth day
https://sana.sy/en/?p=146680
Faculty of Health Sciences at Damascus University
https://sana.sy/en/?p=145757
I was always puzzled as to why so many ‘Jihadi Terrorists’ were allowed to leave in buses at the end of previous battles by the Syrian army…
They were allowed to leave the areas where they’d been defeated by the SAA and its allies … but the buses all took them to Idlib province.
There, they could fight (and even kill) one another to their hearts’ content. Making the job easier for Syria when eventually the Army has to mop them all up in Idlib.
Jen
What you say is, of course, correct but, just reading your explanation as if I didn’t know the background, I think it’s just worth clarifying that when the terrorists agreed to be ‘bussed out’ with their families they were fully aware their destination would be Idlib, already recognised as a (if not THE) major last terrorist stronghold, leaving just a few small pockets elsewhere (coincidentally (??) largely where the US forces have stationed themselves).
“Polling by a British pollster, Orb International, which has been done annually throughout Syria since 2014, has shown that Idlib province is by far the most pro-jihadist region of Syria, and that over 90% of the residents there support Al Qaeda and/or ISIS.” 90%, eh? What is the estimated population currently in Idlib? I’ve read from a number of different sources that the UN estimate is around 3 million. But some claim as “few” as 1.5 million. But regardless of which of the population estimates is closest to the truth, if the estimate of the percentage of Idlib residents who support Al Qaeda and/or ISIS is accurate, that is a lot of people unfriendly to the Syrian government. I suppose, then, that it is reasonable to expect widespread resistance to the liberation of Idlib, and that many will have to die or leave, and judging from the tenor of the… Read more »
So, Norman, what is your prescription?
Should Idlib be left to the wahhabis ? Or the US? or the Turks? Should they be requested kindly not to use the place as a base for carrying out massacres in Latakia?
You hinted earlier that the carnage in Mosul was attributable to Iraq and Iran rather than the USAF, so do you think that perhaps the US should be given the job of ‘liberating’ Idlib and installing a proletarian dictatorship there?
“You hinted earlier that the carnage in Mosul was attributable to Iraq and Iran rather than the USAF, so do you think that perhaps the US should be given the job of ‘liberating’ Idlib and installing a proletarian dictatorship there?” Please show me where I hinted that the carnage in Mosul was “rather more” the responsibility of Iraq and Iran than the USAF? Quote me to me. I want to read that hint. As for my prescription, I have none. The situation is beyond tragic, and whatever chance the people of Syria may have had to extricate themselves out from under the governance of the current Syrian patrimonial system of rule, it has by now completely evaporated . What I’m seeing is ordinary people whose lives had become so intolerable that they rose up in discontent, and for daring to stand up for themselves, are now being drowned in blood.… Read more »
“What I’m seeing is ordinary people whose lives had become so intolerable that they rose up in discontent, and for daring to stand up for themselves, are now being drowned in blood. ” No. What you are seeing, and have been since 2011, is a carefully choreographed propaganda offensive designed to give a “Human Rights” and R2P gloss to a massive invasion designed to neutralise the last state in the region not to have surrendered to the Zionist programme. You have seen nothing, just read the claims being made. It is very clear from the obviously authentic reactions of people in Ghoutta and Aleppo that, on balance, the SAA is very much welcomed after their western sponsored opponents have been defeated. “All I can do is to acknowledge the ‘reality’ as I see it: colluding capitalist regimes quelling the last vestiges of a popular uprising.” Be fair, Norman: the US… Read more »
“You have seen nothing, just read the claims being made.” And you yourself have seen . . . what? Like me, you read claims (and viewed videos of claims being made) that both run counter to the claims that I now find more credible and that I, too, have read and to which for a good long time I adhered, just as you still do. Then it struck me that the claim that there had never been anything like an uprising or peaceful protests in Syria was actually a rather baseless claim, that there was scant evidence being offered up for it and, furthermore and perhaps more importantly, that it flew in the face of what other very reliable sources had to say on that particular issue. Samir Amin, for one, who is an Egyptian and a Middle East scholar, had written something that just didn’t square with the “no… Read more »
Norman, you seem quite a nice fellow but — forgive me — you sound like a Trot. There was a Leftwing lady (called Marsinah?) BTL The Indie around 2010 who sounded quite reasonable until NATZO invaded Syria; and then one realized that she had swallowed the “rebel’ line hook and sinker, and that she and her Trotskyist comrades were the enemies of Arab Socialist countries such as Libya, Syria and Iran. Thank goodness for clear sighted socialist voices such as Ramin Mazaheri in the Saker.
Re prescription for Idlib: apply same remedy as cured the well paid NATZO so-called ‘rebels’ in Aleppo and 95% of NATZO’s well-paid, well armed so-called ‘ISIS caliphate’. Prescription of Dr.Assad, MD: negotiation, reconciliation, clemency — and integrity, both personal integrity and integrity of multi-ethnic Syria.
Vexarb, I sound like a Trot. You don’t like Trots. I guess that means there is a black mark against my name. I’m sorry you feel that way. If it makes you feel any better, I assure you that I’m not sectarian – at least I don’t think that I am — even if I happen to agree (and also disagree) with a lot of what many avowed Trots profess. On the other hand, I’m also not much for ingratiating myself to anyone if doing so means compromising on what I believe to the truth about a point of disagreement. Bad manners on my part, I know. But none of us are perfect. This is the second time that you recommend Ramin Mazaheri to me. I followed up on Mazaherie the first time you recommended him. Unfortunately, you may have missed my original reply to you pertaining to him. You… Read more »
May we ask Norman – as another commenter has already – what do you think should happen in Syria?
Is upholding international law not appropriate? Does the concept of lesser evil not apply?
And a follow up. Where did you find the data on Assad’s record of brutality? We have been looking for a good source on this.
“May we ask Norman – as another commenter has already – what do you think should happen in Syria?” See my reply to the other commenter . . . “Is upholding international law not appropriate? Does the concept of lesser evil not apply?” International law? Whose ‘international law?’ The ‘international law’ as written by ruling bourgeoisies? Or the ‘international law’ that does not as yet exist, and cannot yet exist, because the currently existing international congress of nations is not a congress of ‘democratic nations,’ but of plundering and murderous elites. “Where did you find the data on Assad’s record of brutality? We have been looking for a good source on this.” Did I find ‘data,’ or did I come across the disquisitions of scholars who attest to the ‘tyranical’ and ‘repressive’ nature of the Syrian regime? Samir Amin and Raymond Hinnebusch, for example, come to mind. And what about… Read more »
But you do acknowledge that IF this bourgeois international law had been observed by all sides there would currently be no war in Syria, no US/Turkish/Israeli occupation. And many people now dead would be alive? International law forbids the prosecution of aggressive war. It may not be perfect but it offers more chance of peace and security than the imperialist free-for-all favoured by the US. Surely this alone is a reason for supporting those who support international law? And right now that is Russia and its allies. Even if they do so for self-interested reasons that still makes them the least worst option. Purist notions that refuse to differentiate or recognise nuance have little value beyond academic essays. Sitting back and sadly shaking ones head at human folly may feel good but won’t help save lives. Getting behind the least bad resolution in Syria and supporting demands for renewed respect… Read more »
“But you do acknowledge that IF this bourgeois international law had been observed by all sides there would currently be no war in Syria, no US/Turkish/Israeli occupation. And many people now dead would be alive?” No. Because as Putin himself acknowledged (see the video in my reply to Bevin starting @ “2 minutes 40 sec” to “2 minutes 55 sec”), given the manner in which the Syrian government resisted the general population’s call for change (read: democratization), the subsequent militarization of that confrontation became inevitable.The responsibility for the ensuing war lies at the feet of Assad and Co.exactly where Putin lays it, as does Amin, Hinnebusch, and many others. As for international law: it is a restraint only on those countries that can be brought to heel by greater powers. Those that can’t be defied, will not be defied; and those that can defy, will defy. International law operates in… Read more »
Putin does not say the subsequent militarisation became inevitable. He says that Assad should have initiated reforms before the protests began. Putin would scarcely say what you attribute to him since he has condemned the illegal foreign invasion of Syria at every turn.
But regardless of what Putin says, and regardless of whether Assad was or wasn’t a tyrant, the simple fact is that if international law was being observed in Syria there would currently be no foreign invasion and no mercenary armies on Syrian soil, no chemical attacks, no civil war, and thousands now dead would be alive.
This fact is NOT open to debate.
The simple fact is that if you could compel the most powerful nations to abide by international law, sure, a lot of what did and is happening in Syria would not have happened. But you can’t compel the most powerful to behave in ways that they deem run counter to their “national” interests, can you? I mean, regardless of what any international law proscribes or prescribes, right? So . . . your point is what, exactly? Now there are a few items that you shoehorn into the fact that is NOT, according to you, open to debate that are in fact debatable. For instance, that there would not have been a civil war. In fact, getting people to acknowledge the longstanding and ongoing brutality of the Syrian government’s method of governance (i.e., the question of whether or not Assad was or wasn’t a tyrant) is half of the admission that… Read more »
Had Syria transitioned in a more socialist or social democratic direction after Bashar al Assad became President in 2000, there may still have been a move towards regime change with the result of “civil war” and an “opening” for foreign intervention.
If you doubt, you may ask the current Venezuelan President (Nicolas Maduro) or a former Brazilian President (Dilma Rousseff) as to whether their countries’ attempts to move towards becoming socialist or social democratic made them less attractive as targets for regime change.
Actually, yes and no (and good repartee, btw 😉 ). If the general population is with you, it’s a lot harder for you to be overthrown by foreign meddlers. If in doubt, ask the current Venezuelan President, the preceding one, or the guys still hanging on in Cuba. On the other hand, I think Trotsky had it about right when he suggested that socialism in one country wasn’t really something that could happen or be sustained, that is to say, in the long run. That’s why people have to become internationalists in their thinking, to see all of the capitalist ruling classes everywhere as the one and only enemy, and all of the working classes everywhere as the one and only true working class. At the moment, we are a long ways away from that, aren’t we? What with the Russians and Iranians and Americans and Sunnis and Shiites and… Read more »
A good case can be made for Trotsky being a tool of the west whose main aim was to distract and divide support among the Left for communist Russia. His followers certainly have a history of performing the same function to this day. They propose idealist absolutes that can’t be achieved in the real world and use this to frame inaction into a form of purism from which they feel able to condemn all sides. But inaction always favours those in power. Trotsky effectively paralysed future generations of his adherents from engaging in any meaningful attempts at changing the system – because if you can’t change it completely you might as well not bother. Trotsky, let’s not forget, lived a cosy bourgeois life of plenty before he encountered the ice pick. His plans for worldwide revolution remained reassuringly theoretical, while he took every opportunity to attack Russia in the media… Read more »
I suppose that we can now derail this thread into a discussion of Trotsky’s merits or demerits. I thought I was discussing Syria, in what light to regard the Syrian governement, and whether there had been an uprising in Syria in 2011. For these things bear directly on how one should regard the impending military operations to be visited upon the people in Idlib. “They propose idealist absolutes that can’t be achieved in the real world and use this to frame inaction into a form of purism from which they feel able to condemn all sides.” And what action do you propose? That we get behind the precepts of international law? That we ally with those ‘nations’ insisting that the law be respected, right? In other words, that we permit ourselves to be coopted by those ‘administrations’ into following their lead. And what is their lead? Do they act in… Read more »
Kinda making my point for me aren’t you. But you’re correct, this isn’t the place for a discussion of Trotsky. It was wrong of me to derail. Consider this particular thread closed
“Kinda making my point for me aren’t you.”
If I can be of assistance, I’m always glad to help. 😉
If I’m slow to reply over the course of the rest of this day, my apologies. Appointments and errands.
(And please don’t take my obdurate stance on Syria as being in any way an indictment of Off-G. I love you guys. But you already knew that. (Ooops. And it’s happened again . . . Sorry for derailing the discussion in yet another irrelevant channel.))
The issue with being “internationalist” in order to oppose the capitalist elite is that in order to appeal to working classes everywhere the concept needs to be all-encompassing in its values and ideology to the point where it either becomes so abstract and idealistic that it means nothing at all and cannot inspire people to action, or it starts to drown in its own contradictions. On the other hand, capitalist ruling classes are already “internationalist” in a negative sense, in that in respecting only their own short-term self-interests, living in the present, they find meaningless and bothersome abstractions such as the notion of a sovereign state with defined borders and territories worth defending by a people with their own collective identity and set of values. Do we want or need to end up like that bunch of “internationalists”? The Russians, the Chinese and others have a point in arguing for… Read more »
“The issue with being “internationalist” in order to oppose the capitalist elite is that in order to appeal to working classes everywhere the concept needs to be all-encompassing in its values and ideology to the point where it either becomes so abstract and idealistic that it means nothing at all and cannot inspire people to action, or it starts to drown in its own contradictions.” I have to disagree. An example, for me, of a meaningless abstract concept is that of “the nation.” There are plenty of others, but lets stay with only this one for the sake of brevity and clarity. For “the nation,” as that expression is commonly used, designates a purportedly homogeneous and unified group, that is to say, homogeneous and unified in socio-political terms. Unfortunately, the truth is that we live in class divided “nations:” there are the property owners and oligarchies, and then there’s the… Read more »
Re. Norm Pilon’s “If the general population is with you, it’s a lot harder for you to be overthrown by foreign meddlers.”:
That is stunningly naive. For example, just consider this (and there’s a lot more on similar lines I have in my files):
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jan/17/syrians-support-assad-western-propaganda
“Most Syrians back President Assad, but you’d never know from western media”
Jonathan Steele, 17 January 2012
As I’ve shown, Obama entered office in 2009 hoping to overthrow Assad. He put policies in place for that purpose. The CIA has been trying to conquer Syria since 1949. Are you ignorant of this history?
Have you read Raymond Hinnebusch, Eric?
How ignorant of the situation in Syria as it has evolved from 1963 to 2011 might you be, Eric?
In case you missed it, because I know you are all about the facts, and sources and references, Eric:
Syria: from ‘authoritarian upgrading’ to revolution? — Raymond Hinnebusch (11/01/2012) | International Affairs
Oh, and by the way Eric, if after reading all of my comments you still have the impression that I’m just not twigging to the imperialist designs of the U.S. of f***king A as such, it’s obvious to me that you didn’t really read them, except perhaps at a gallop . . . On the other hand, you refer me to something by Jonathan Steele published in ‘The Guardian.’ This in itself does not invalidate Steele’s contentions, but you know every bit as well as I do that ‘The Guardian’ is an establishment tool, and that ‘truth,’ every bit as much as outright ‘fabrication,’ can be enlisted in the work of confounding the masses about the ‘intentions’ or ‘designs’ of the Empire, so that what may appear to be the latest in a longstanding series of unbroken and ongoing attempt to ‘conquer’ or ‘overthrow,’ may be a cover for a… Read more »
The ‘point’ is you claimed ‘bourgeois’ international law had no value. And now you admit that is not true, which is progress.
Creating a climate in which the law is applied and respected is perhaps the only hope for preventing future Syrias, Iraqs and Libyas. The fact this is unlikely to be achieved during this time of US empire doesn’t make it less true.
Therefore it behooves us all to support those who support international law, since they represent, in most cases, the lesser evil.
In this instance, that involves supporting Russia in its bid to end the mercenary occupation of Syria.
Putin, whom you (mis) quoted has always distinguished between the foreign invaders and any domestic problems Syria has. He has said repeatedly that first the invasion/occupation needs to end and only then can the domestic issues be dealt with.
Presumably you would agree with that?
“The ‘point’ is you claimed ‘bourgeois’ international law had no value. And now you admit that is not true, which is progress.” Question: what is the point of a law that cannot be enforced, or that is always only selectively enforced? “Putin, whom you (mis) quoted has always distinguished between the foreign invaders and any domestic problems Syria has.” Did I mis-quote Putin, or did I, according to you, mis-interpret what he said? You read him one way, I read him another. My point is that the likes of Beeley, Bartlett, Anderson and Gowans deny that Syrians ever had cause to ‘reble’ against the Syrian regime, but here you have Putin strongly suggesting that there was — what? — widespread dissent to which Assad should have accomodated himself rather than ‘react’ as he did. If I am mis-interpreting Putin, you clearly mis-interpret my purports. Against Beeley, Bartlett, Anderson and Gowans,… Read more »
Are you seriously asking what the point is of a law that is not 100% enforceable?
The point is to enforce it as much as possible! And one way to do that is to support those who are trying to enforce it. Which is why we should give informed approval to Russia in Syria.
Regarding Assad. OffG has never offered unqualified endorsement. What we do insist on, however, is that claims of his brutality are properly sourced.
Given that he’s currently in the cross hairs of the empire and we are inundated with propaganda aimed at making him seem monstrous, you will agree it’s essential we filter this propaganda and deal only with solidly sourced data, no?
“Given that he’s currently in the cross hairs of the empire and we are inundated with propaganda aimed at making him seem monstrous, you will agree it’s essential we filter this propaganda and deal only with solidly sourced data, no?” Filter away, as you see fit. I’m interested in the truth. Is the Syrian regime anti-imperialist? Yes or no? Is it socialist? Yes or no? Does it mis-treat its captive populaltion? Yes or no? Did the people os Syria rise up in righteous anger in 2011? Yes or no? Did the Syrian regime meet that anger with brutality? Yes or no? As for solidly sourced material, am I not sourcing my claims? Amin? Hinnebusch? To name only two sources that in my estimation are by far and away more solid than Beeley, Bartlett, Anderson or Gowans. Of course, we are in complete agreement that here, under Western rule, as Pinter… Read more »
“Regarding Assad. OffG has never offered unqualified endorsement. What we do insist on, however, is that claims of his brutality are properly sourced.” Two paragraphs, attesting to the brutality and repressive nature of the Syrian government, properly sourced: Quote begins: The regime’s initial response to the revolt was to mix massive repression with traditional attempts at appeasement and cooptation: giving pay increases to public employees, ceasing to enforce regulations, granting privileges to tribal, religious or communal notables. Promises of limited political reform remained largely on paper: for example, the regime ended the emergency law but allowed the security forces to continue to use violence with impunity.27 Concessions to the Kurds over citizenship and identity, together with links to Iraqi Kurdish leaders and Turkey’s opposition to Asad, kept the Kurds ambivalent. But the regime refused to concede democratization as a legitimate way out of the crisis or to accept the opposition… Read more »
This article is troubling. It itemises the government efforts at concession but NOT the instances of brutality. When it addresses them it suddenly becomes non-specific and allusive. How many funerals? How were the people killed? By whom? Is this known or disputed? Do we have film of violent police repression? Data for number of arrests/disappearances/killings? We have been trying to get details on questions like these for some time, but the sources rarely if ever seem to provide any, which is very frustrating. Given the enormity of the propaganda assault on Assad we do need hard data before buying the narrative, don’t we? And this kind of vagueness should make us wary. It’s reminiscent of the claims made about the Maidan and alleged police brutality, which have been shown to be in many cases reversals of reality. Not saying Assad was not repressive, just noting the difficulty in finding solid… Read more »
How do we know anything at all to be “true” when what we have to rely on are “claims” or “counter-claims” being made (in print or other media) by anyone, eh? How can we believe our own first hand perceptions when we know that they often lead us astray? You can always doubt whatever it is you find is”troubling” to you, no matter how vague or specific the claims may be. That’s just the nature of “things alleged” by others, let alone the difficulty of sorting out for yourself “events” or “circumstances” to which you yourself are a firsthand witness. You say that these claims are “reminiscent of the claims made about the Maidan and alleged police brutality, which have been “shown to be in many cases reversals of reality.” Okay, according to you, the claims about the Maidan massacre and alleged police brutality were “shown to be in many… Read more »
Calm down. there’s really no need to get hysterical and defensive about the impossibility of ultimate proof. I’m not asking for ultimate proof – just a few details and sources.
Do you not notice he provides absolutely none?
If this brutality is real there will be more than Person X’s ‘testimony’. There will be names of the dead or missing, dates, video footage, blood in the streets. Hard evidence of the kind we saw at the Maidan or in Odessa or wherever real atrocity and oppression occurs.
Perhaps he provides this in other work?
Am I hysterical? Am I defensive about the impossibility of ultimate proof? Or am I not, rather, holding up a mirror for you to observe your own rhetorical strategy in action? You had no trouble adducing a vaguely stated claim as ‘evidence’ that the Maidan massacres were the result of a false flag operation. Why? Because you knew that I was more or less already familiar with the file, so to speak, and between us, no more was needed as a statement of “fact.” A word to the wise, eh, that being all that is required for people who already know. In a like manner, Hinnebusch’s piece provides more than sufficient details to anyone who doesn’t live under a rock to prove the historical and presently repressive nature of the government of Syria, and at precisely the same level of generality that you are more than happy to embrace when… Read more »
Please stop the confrontational attitude. I’m not disagreeing with you. I’m not claiming there was no repression in Syria. I’m just asking how much data there is. This is a serious question. I’m not pretending I don’t know as you very oddly seem to assume.
In contrast to the Maidan where a civilian death toll is well documented, it’s hard to find the same solid info for Syria. How much of a peaceful uprising was there? How many unarmed civilians are documented to have been injured/killed? How many people were under political arrest prior to the protests? How many were disappeared or otherwise badly treated?
Do you know? If you don’t can you just say so please?
Everything to follow is being pilfered from Joseph Daher’s website (the two links per post limit will be respected):
Item:
Repression, reforms and resistance
Item:
A Statement by the LCC Regarding the Massacre that Happened in Teremsah
There’s no solid data there. Not even a link to official casualty estimates from a source as reliably pro-imperialist as Amnesty, let alone anything impartial. Did the alleged deaths occur due to brutal repression of unarmed civilians or during conflict between police/security forces and armed rebels? How many police were killed, if any? And, crucially, what was Assad’s record of repression like before the conflict began? We need to ask these questions because Syria has been subjected to the same regime change plan inflicted on Ukraine, and in the latter case we know how an initially peaceful protest was deliberately infiltrated in order to create a climate of violence, and how that violence was then used to demonise the government. In this regard, I do notice even these very hostile commenters acknowledge that efforts at conciliation were initially made by Assad’s government. They also refer to claims that armed groups… Read more »
“There’s no solid data there.” Why am I not surprised at your ‘reaction.’ As I wrote to you last night, pertaining to your reaction to Hinnebusch’s piece: Quote begins: You write: “Please stop the confrontational attitude” In what possible sense am I being “confrontational?” You dismissed a reference I made as providing insufficient grounds for establishing the repressive nature of the Syrian government. I disagreed with your assessment, and “explained” my disagreement. Apparently, my “explanation” was a full-on display of hysteria. Your reading, not mine. So I also disagreed with that assessment and stated my disagreement, and then concluded my reply by expressing the sentiment that I believe you are strongly committed to a point of view, regardless of what the actual facts of the matter may be. On the latter score, I may be wrong, and, therefore, retract that judgement. Nevertheless, it simply remains beyond me how anyone can… Read more »
Look, Norman, I have no idea if this man can substantiate his claims or not, all I know is YOU haven’t produced any such substantiation.
To repeat, given the level of propaganda directed against Assad we need to be sure this narrative isn’t as skewed and dishonest as the one that depicts Yanukovych as a tyrannical monster when he was no such thing.
To which end we need to know a few things, viz – How objective is this source? Do other sources say different? How well documented are the deaths? Were they provably killed by govt forces? Were they peaceful protesters or armed insurgents? Syrians or foreigners?
If your source answers these points, why not just post those answers here, minus all the rather laboured attitudinising that really doesn’t help and feels mildly offensive.
“Look, Norman, I have no idea if this man can substantiate his claims or not, all I know is YOU haven’t produced any such substantiation.” Oh, but I have, see. I’ve provided plenty of substantiation. You just keep pushing it away and dismissing it out of hand. You raise pertinent question. But they are YOUR questions, NOT mine. I’ve already done my homework and have established to my satisfaction that Daher is a solid source of information. YOU claim his work is without substance. Prove to us that Daher is not to be trusted. Show us a pattern of errors or lies in his claims and analyses, that is to say, to substantiate YOUR claim that “there’s no solid data” in his work. I say his work is solid. And I provided you with corroborating statements by two other Middle East scholars. Is Amin solid? Yes. Is Hinnebusch solid. Yes.… Read more »
You acknowledge I raise pertinent questions, acknowledge you don’t know the answers – but for some reason you don’t want to find out. You trust this author to tell you the truth and feel no need to fact check.
Ok. That’s your call. But under these circumstances you can’t expect others to pretend you’ve proved a case when you haven’t.
Once again, I don’t claim this guy’s version is wrong, wholly or in part. Just because Assad is a victim of western propaganda doesn’t make him automatically Snow White. But I do expect the allegations to be detailed and to answer those ‘pertinent’ questions. You acknowledge they don’t. The discussion stalls here.
“You acknowledge I raise pertinent questions, acknowledge you don’t know the answers – but for some reason you don’t want to find out. ” Your doubts about Daher, Amin and Hinnebusch are not my doubts. They are YOUR doubts. I can’t resolve YOUR doubts for you. That’s something for YOU to do. You raise pertinent questions, but from my perspective, if I take on YOUR questions as my OWN questions, they are adequately resolved, see. When you say that I acknowledge that I don’t know the answers to your questions, you are projecting your own lack of answers onto me. I acknowledge no such thing. That should be clear from everything that I’ve written. Establishing Daher’s credibility in your own mind is your problem. That isn’t anything that I can do for you. He’s already credible in mine. And as you yourself have acknowledge, maybe Daher is a reliable witness.… Read more »
This author says categorically
1) the West is NOT pursuing regime change in Syria
2) the West is trying to defeat ISIS.
The first is disavowed by the US regime’s numerous avowals that Assad must go, and prosecution of a war that almost destroyed him, the second by their documented support for ISIS.
This author is bending the truth and maybe even outright lying, presumably to push an agenda. He’s not a reliable source.
Did you even read the article? Daher clearly states HIS reasons as to why HE believes ‘regime change’ is not what the U.S. was after: At the beginning of the uprising in March 2011, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton characterized Assad as a “reformer” and added that many members of Congress who have gone to Syria in recent months also believed that he’s a reformer. The absence of any kind of organized and decisive military assistance from the US or Western states to the democratic components of the Free Syrian Army are further proof of this lack of will for any radical change in Syria. In addition, the United States has also opposed the supply of anti-aircraft missiles to various FSA forces. In 2014, Barack Obama’s $500 million plan (which was approved by Congress) to arm and equip 5,000-10,000 Syrian rebels, was never implemented and not aimed at overthrowing the… Read more »
This is too weird, Norman. Let’s call it a day
Yep.
Yes, well, I can see the weirdness in my reply, to which you allude. I know what I wanted to say, but it came out all garbled. Oh well, if you haven’t slept and English isn’t your mother tongue, it sometimes gets away from you.
My point is that you claim Daher is lying or has an agenda. But the “facts” he adduces for his belief that the U.S. never really intended to topple Assad are solid (see the four paragraphs I quote). So if there is a difference between you and him, it’s in your interpretation of those facts, about what one may infer from those facts about the intents of the U.S. as pertains to their actual interventions in Syria.
I hope this dispels the weirdness in my former reply.
BTW: on the off chance that you want to read the two-part interview with Daher, but are having trouble accessing the second part, here is the link to part 2:
Syria: Grassroots Democracy, Future Prospects
For people who only understand English, Raymond Hinnebusch’s short presentation in the featured and first video begins at the 3 minute mark and ends at the 24 minute and 20 second mark. The second related video is in English only. Also highly pertinent to all of this content, you might actually want to read what to my mind is a highly informative piece of analysis by Hinnebusch, titled, “Syria: from ‘authoritarian upgrading’ to revolution?,” and to which I’ve already provided a link (multiple times, I think).
Just so other readers can go and judge for themselves, while keeping in mind that Joseph Daher, PhD, is a Syrian expat and thus presumably sources his information through a network of contacts in Syria, some items of interest from only a handful of articles he wrote and posted on his blog (for ease of posting, I’m providing no links, but instead provide the title and date of the of Daher’s post in which the item of interest appears, so that people can go and read the articles themselves): Item(s): On Tuesday 22nd of February, 14 people were also arrested and several people beaten by uniformed and plainclothes police after about 200 staged a peaceful sit-in outside the Libyan embassy to show support for Libya’s protesters. Civil rights campaigners have suffered intimidation tactics these past few weeks, including visits from agents of the intelligence services and close monitoring of internet… Read more »
“Just so other readers can go and judge for themselves, while keeping in mind that Joseph Daher, PhD, is a Syrian expat and thus presumably sources his information through a network of contacts in Syria …”
So Norman, you admit you haven’t asked Joseph Daher where he’s sourcing his information from in Syria before pasting a deluge of posts he’s written on the protests in Dar’aa in 2011?
A case I think of putting the cart before the horse.
Clearly, Jen, Daher just makes the stuff up as he goes along. Hence the level of detail in his fiction. And if his made up claims just happen to find corroboration in the claims of other independent scholars whose specialty is the Middle East, well that’s because they’re all just making it all up together, or simply getting their information from the wrong sources. Didn’t I mention something or other about how people fixated at a certain level of analysis will tend to discredit sources because of a presumed, albeit entirely spurious, association? I think I did. See one of my replies to Admin not too far back up the thread. But speaking about putting the horse before the cart, what about this: without contacting Daher about his presumed evidence free purports, without following up on his claims, concluding that “[t]here’s no solid data there.” So everyone, let’s all just… Read more »
Posting paragraphs of waffle from ‘scholars’ isn’t accepted as evidence by most here, I think.
I have been trying to find some more information from or about Michael Karadjis of whom Matt the Venezuelan … erm, sorry, I mean Norman P has spoken with some admiration, and I discovered he is truly is a headbanger.
Ben Norton, “Michael Karadjis whitewashes Syrian Al-Qaeda as “decent revolutionaries” ”
https://bennorton.com/michael-karadjis-syrian-al-qaeda-jabhat-al-nusra/
Patrick O’Connor, “Australian pseudo-lefts complicit in US war drive against Syria”
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/09/03/plef-s03.html
Wow, some “scholar” Karadjis turns out to be.
Ooops, I think my reply to you ended up directed at Thomas Peterson.
It reads:
@ Jen,
You discredit yourself, I’m afraid.
The two pieces you link to are out and out slanders and mischaracterizations of Karadjis’s purports.
But other than to tell you to go and read Karadjis yourself, what can I say, eh?
By they way,
In this thread, I referenced one piece by Karadjis, a piece that I think merits some thought. Karadjis makes an interesting argument, backed up by “evidence,” that foreign intervention in Syria, be it from the East or West, isn’t and never was about overthrowing Assad, but about quelling a popular rebellion. That’s the extent of my “esteem” for the man. I don’t hold him in the same regard that I hold Daher, Amin, and Hinnebusch. I’ve read some of his pieces and found some of his observations to be either intriguing and sometimes even on point. I’m not, so to speak, wedded to him.
I’m not going to waste too much of my time defending anything that Karadjis has to say, but let’s make only one comparison between what Norton claims Karadjis is saying and what Karadjis actually is saying: Ben Norton writes: “Karadjis, who has declared that Syrian al-Qaeda shooting down Russian planes would be “a victory for all humanity,” is part of a small yet obsessive crew of so-called leftists who viciously attack anti-war socialists. Source: see the link you provided. Michael Karadjis actually writes, and I quote somewhat at length to contextualize the upshot of Karadjis’ remark: The other main issue often arising in discussion is that of which rebel groups control the various parts of Aleppo now under attack. For many Rojava-Firsters, this is a good excuse to support this counterrevolutionary action: “Oh, but that area is controlled by Nusra, so it’s good that the “democratic” forces are ejecting them”… Read more »
But one line rebuttals of nothing are?
@ Jen,
You discredit yourself, I’m afraid.
The two pieces you link to are out and out slanders and mischaracterizations of Karadjis’s purports.
But other than to tell you to go and read Karadjis yourself, what can I say, eh?
The Empire is crumbling and it’s death throes it’s lashing out in all directions, commiting despicable crimes against humanity. Under-reported is that a couple of weeks ago China and Mongolia joined Russian a huge military exercise, clearly they are collaborating and will do whatever is necessary to swat the Neocon threat. It’s time that far more decent people in the US and here in the UK woke up to what is happening before it’s too late.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45454142
A clever piece here by the BBC that exemplifies it’s rampant hypocrisy with aplomb. Now I understand the identical timestamp was very deliberate and bait to hand such an article on. Shows we all have to be super careful, especially when some bit of evidence is handed to US on a plate.
What do you really expect? The BBC is a State-funded broadcaster, just like RT. Both put out their governmental propaganda.
I watch both, sometimes it is truly comical, especially on RT with their new style animations and creepy music, it’s really appalling propaganda. The BBC does it in a different way but it’s equally effective propaganda.
Thankfully there are lots of independent British and Russian and other sources and independent journalists where we can get much nearer to the truth!
RT was very quick to debunk the timestamp images that Craig Murray and Moon of Alabama called identical, stating that they were from adjacent corridors.
I agree all major media outlets are full of blatant propaganda. However RT is championing journalists that do have integrity, like Afshan Ratansi and Lee Camp and universally journo and guests are given absolute freedom in what they produce and say. This is not the case in western MSM outlets. So comparing them like for like is unfair and disrespectful to the integrity of RTs honest journalists and the guests they invite to speak.
The actual shows and documentaries and journalists are good, if not excellent. I’m thinking more of the hourly 00-29 news output in my criticism. The crass frequent propaganda in that news segment impacts the credibility of the excellent work being done by Keiser, Ratansi, Galloway and Lavelle and some others. Having said that, the RT UK evening news is probably the highest quality output of any in the UK.
Whilst they may not be to everyone’s taste in terms of presentation, surely “animations and creepy music” are not in themselves propaganda. It is the message that they are conveying that needs to be judged as to whether or not it is propaganda. Propaganda (“information of a biased or misleading nature…”) is from my observations far more to the fore, and consciously so, on the BBC than RT. In fact, if anything, RT go to the opposite end of the spectrum in order not to be accused of promoting propaganda. When interviewing people about the Skripal case, for example, I have noticed that Bill Dod (one of their English news presenters) states the UK position as fact to his independent interviewee (without so much as a wink and a nod) and asks them for their thoughts, allowing them to help the viewer to decide for themselves what they wish to… Read more »
I don’t disagree with much of what you say and as i said the individual shows are often excellent, but the lampoonish animations hark back to the days of Cold War propaganda.
Also the headlines are often not major stories but rather an opportunity for RT editors to have a dig at the UK or US. It’s often deserved but the placement is inappropriate.
RT remains one of my info sources but they are going to lose a lot of credibility and fall into the hands of OFCOM again and unnecessarily so.
Anyway, no state funded media is impartial, at least not in its overall mission, and that’s my main point.
No privately owned part of the UK MSM is impartial: it is overwhelmingly neoconservative propaganda funded bt tax avoiding billionaires who often live offshore.
Andrew Marr and the Mekon are in full anti Russian mode on the BBC.
So I just noticed. I love the way that Javid so authoritatively announces with calm assurance that it is the Russkies that are doing it.
The reason is that he is never required to put up collateral against lies.
Say this to him: ‘if you knew that putting a bullet through your spine was the consequence for telling anything other than the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, would you wish to modify your statement?’
These politicians happily make orders/supinely follow such orders to murder millions half way around the world, but kill fifty in London and it is ‘outrage, outrage!’
But never is the propagandist like Marr required to hold public representatives to meaningful account….
It is not killing anyone asking this question, it is removing any legal defence for a politician choosing to continuing to lie….
And with habitual liars/script readers, it is really the only way to put the fear of god into them….
I see the Guardians Jihadi apologist in chief is pleading for gentle treatment of the western sponsored groups who have been terrorising Syria for the last 7 years. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/09/putin-pretends-peace-europe-caught-in-trap
SyrPer analyst Canthama recommends: “This is a very good article by the excellent Joaquin Flores. I see him as good as Bernhard of MoonofAlabama on their understanding of broader geopolitics with a laser eye approach in what it really matters. Worth reading it.” https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/09/breaking-liberation-of-idlib-has-begun/?utm_medium=ppc&utm_source=wp&utm_campaign=push&utm_content=new-article Canthama also suggests that there is still a chance for diplomacy and dignity to prevail at the UNSC (despite the presence of ambassadors from F UK U$A) because the Syrian ambassador is raising the tone of the debate before the guns begin to fire in earnest: Canthama “It is always a pleasure to hear Dr. Bashar Al-Jaafari, Syria’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, a person who has shown a tremendous sense of dignity and love for his country over the years, and has been a beacon of light inside the rotten UNSC. One of Jaafari’s best moments, in the recent meeting at UNSC, was when… Read more »
Just when one thinks this theatre of the absurd can’t get any more, well, absurd – here we go again. I used to think that the West’s global colonial genocide evidenced the very lowest dregs the human psyche is capable of. However, it is hard to argue against or dismiss the complete amorality and psychopathic inhumanity of our current generation of Western leaders, their MSM cheerleaders, and Western publics that simply can’t be bothered to “know” about the murder and mayhem they are party to daily.
Now is the time to consider how we will counter the West’s false claims, when the WH actors are wearing gloves and gas masks, supplied by Avon Protective systems, and the children are actually showing signs of acute Sarin exposure. They might also aim to make some “Women of Idlib” – in WH gear, victims of real Sarin, and victims of their own commanders.
Since Mattis, oddly, came out and said that “the terrorists don’t have the ability to use nerve gases” on Friday, this whole story looks very probable.
But perhaps we can’t actually counter the propaganda, given we failed with Douma and Ghouta and Khan Shaikoun; the focus will have to be on supporting Russia and Syria, and attacking other weak points, like the Novichok story. But something might be planned for that too….
Saw on the BBC news tonight footage of a “makeshift hospital in Idlib seriously damaged by SAA barrel bombs” And so it begins… “Fortunately nobody was injured”, meaning western intelligence organisations haven’t yet given the signal to role out casualties; they clearly just wanted to warm up gullible Westerners and MSM gently.
“… a bombshell poll”
The only poll that counts is the one on election day.
The groan just gives and gives.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/08/unions-poll-massive-backing-second-eu-brexit-referendum
This week, The US military is conducting air-assault drills on Syrian soil.
News like this, becoming routine and yet … NO mainstream media criticized or challenged these flagrant violations of international laws.
And no American citizens protested this continued US aggression on foreign soils.
Let’s hope other armies, the Syrian or Vietnamese army for example, be conducting Military drills on US soil very soon, and the media and US citizens will see nothing wrong with this. Wish them well!
US Senator Richard Black has met with Assad and claims to have knowledge of the West planning a fake chemical attack.
https://www.newsweek.com/senator-meets-assad-claims-west-planning-fake-chemical-attack-1110161
Seems to be a man of honesty and integrity – rare qualities in positions of authority in the West. Interesting that he specifically – as the Russians have done previously incurring May’s ‘holier than thou’ affronted reaction – names and shames British intelligence as being primarily involved.
Whilst we have our on Cuba missile crisis moment, this tidbit to keep us amused in the bunkers from the MSM.
““I like him. He’s different to other politicians. I’ve always liked him. This isn’t the end of him, not really. It happens to everyone, don’t it”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/08/villain-our-boris-town-divided-over-looming-divorce
They don’t give a shit about serial adulterers, in Hillingdon, Nr London apparently, as their MP.
I think they should be asked asap if that is the case.
Time to get back to basics i say.
I’m sure John would agree.
Not ‘sir john’ but John!
Oh TMS how you have foresaken Me…Et TU Brute?!
And the Met Police too. Urrgghh.
I nearly turned off and missed some great crikit.
Really mate, most constituencies around where I live (my MP Nick Hurd, OE MP) weigh the Conservative majority. As long as the MP is shagging adults, not children, sex is not enough to change voting patterns.
I personally consider rather more weighty matters than the wandering nature of MPs todgers.
You know, things like:
1) Views on Brexit;
2) Views on Western warmongering;
3) Views on local issues (e.g. Heathrow Runway III)
4) Views on housing;
5) Views on eduction;
6) Views on climate change and green issues;
Etc etc.
Do you find that monogamy really affects MP performance? Was Brown better than Major? Clinton more evil than Daddy Bush?
N.ikki Haley, what can one say.
She delivers her words with the panache of an automotan wind up doll from an agreed scripted agenda.
Why mainstream media seem to drool over ever utterance is beyond me but there again her audience and her words are not directed towards me but to another group entirely.
Watching United Nations Security Council meetings is highly instructive in that the ambassadors of the United States, United Kingdom, France, Sweden, the Netherlands seem to find nothing bad to say about their paid mercenary terrorist mass-murderers. These ambassadors might come across to the uninformed as having absolutely no clue that murderous terrorists EVEN EXIST!
Why do they never criticize – or even as much as acknowledge – terrorists? Of course, they are fully aware of the real terrorists in Syria. These ambassadors’ clear hands-off-terrorists stance and total silence is absolute evidence of war crimes guilt.
Global Depopulation Program and effects of it on Syrian War
http://real-agenda.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/KILLING-US-SOFTLY2.pdf
And just to ratchet it all up at this apparently critical time:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/09/08/russias-gru-spy-network-targeted-ukenergy-networks-vital-infrastructure/
Casablanca Moon posted this self explanatory diagram of Russian air cover over Syria and environs. Note the position of Great Britain’s AkroTir military airport from which St.Theresa (supported by JC) threaten to rain the wrath of God on those wicked Russkies and the bloodstained regime of Dr.Bashar Assad, MD. Not shown are the fleet of very big and very expensive U$ AirCraft Carriers and the solitary French ACC which are in the area c,vered by that map — or are they?
News? That’s just verbal sparring before the big match. Real news starts next week. BTL SyrPer and Saker Vineyard, Idlib finals kick off Mon10th or Tue11th. Probable formations:
Syrian Army vs ISIS, boots on the ground.
Russia, air cover to prevent invasion of the pitch (link).
NATZO, boos and bottle throwing (possible bottles of sarin, chlorine or Novijoke).
But with a Putin game plan, one can expect to see some skilful play and an exciting surprise.
The offensive has started on schedule. 6 hours in, at 1.30 GMT. No NATO response yet. I’m having a pleasant nightcap. Hope there is a tomorrow.
the NATO response is to ban all official state syrian channels from youtube this morning. i expect PressTV and any other iranian channels will be next. false flag incoming in time for breakfast news tomorrow, or for the numbers lovers, the 11thon tuesday
Here’s a thought, how convenient would it be if the staged gas attack is done with ‘eau de novichok?’ The opcw will come out and say (and rightly so) that the samples are identical to the Skripal samples. They are highly likely to be the same as its my belief the novichok originated from porton down.
Haley is a professional liar and she cannot be believed. Her job depends on how well she can lie and she is very, very good at it. Meanwhile the White Helmets have been caught with their pants down on several occasions where mass killings have taken place. They weren’t there to help but to initiate the murders. They also can’t be trusted. The US will do everything within its power to maintain its slipping control of the Middle East and the deaths of thousands of people doesn’t even register on its foreign policy Richter scale!
Haley is a prolific liar, though I don’t agree that she’s good at it. Being a good liar takes intelligence, which is not her forte.