Showing posts with label "humanitarian intervention". Show all posts
Showing posts with label "humanitarian intervention". Show all posts

Wednesday, May 4, 2011

SYRIA: Who is Behind The Protest Movement? Fabricating a Pretext for a US-NATO "Humanitarian Intervention"

May 3, 2011

There is evidence of gross media manipulation and falsification from the outset of the protest movement in southern Syria on March 17th.

The Western media has presented the events in Syria as part of the broader Arab pro-democracy protest movement, spreading spontaneously from Tunisia, to Egypt, and from Libya to Syria.

Media coverage has focussed on the Syrian police and armed forces, which are accused of indiscriminately shooting and killing unarmed "pro-democracy" demonstrators. While these police shootings did indeed occur, what the media failed to mention is that among the demonstrators there were armed gunmen as well as snipers who were shooting at both the security forces and the protesters.

The death figures presented in the reports are often unsubstantiated. Many of the reports are "according to witnesses". The images and video footages aired on Al Jazeera and CNN do not always correspond to the events which are being covered by the news reports.


Alawite Map

There is certainly cause for social unrest and mass protest in Syria: unemployment has increased in recent year, social conditions have deteriorated, particularly since the adoption in 2006 of sweeping economic reforms under IMF guidance. The IMF's "economic medicine" includes austerity measures, a freeze on wages, the deregulation of the financial system, trade reform and privatization. (See IMF  Syrian Arab Republic — IMF Article IV Consultation Mission's Concluding Statement, http://www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2006/051406.htm, 2006)

With a government dominated by the minority Alawite (an offshoot of Shia Islam), Syria is no "model society" with regard to civil rights and freedom of expression. It nonetheless constitutes the only (remaining) independent secular state in the Arab world. Its populist, anti-Imperialist and secular base is inherited from the dominant Baath party, which integrates Muslims, Christians and Druze.

Moreover, in contrast to Egypt and Tunisia, in Syria there is considerable popular support for President Bashar Al Assad. The large rally in Damascus on March 29, "with tens of thousands of supporters" (Reuters) of President Al Assad is barely mentioned. Yet in an unusual twist, the images and video footage of several pro-government events were used in an utterly twisted fashion by the Western media to convince international public opinion that the President was being confronted by mass anti-government rallies.

Tens of thousands of Syrians gather for a pro-government rally at the central bank square in Damascus March 29, 2011. (Reuters Photo)

Syrians display a giant national flag with a picture of Syria's President Bashar al-Assad during a
pro-government rally at the central bank square in Damascus March 29, 2011. (Reuters Photo)

The "Epicenter" of the Protest Movement: Daraa: A Small Border Town in southern Syria

What is the nature of the protest movement? From what sectors of Syrian society does it emanate? What triggered the violence?


What is the cause of the deaths?

The existence of an organized insurrection composed of armed gangs involved in acts of killing and arson has been dismissed by the Western media, despite evidence to the contrary.

The demonstrations  did not start in Damascus, the nation's capital. At the outset, the protests were not integrated by a mass movement of citizens in Syria's capital.

The demonstrations started in Daraa, a small border town of 75,000 inhabitants, on the Syrian Jordanian border, rather than in Damascus or Aleppo, where the mainstay of organized political opposition and social movements are located. (Daraa is a small border town comparable e.g. to Plattsburgh, NY on the US-Canadian border).

The Associated Press report (quoting unnamed "witnesses" and "activists") describes the early protests in Daraa as follows:

   The violence in Daraa, a city of about 300,000 near the border with Jordan, was fast becoming a major challenge for President Bashar Assad, .... Syrian police launched a relentless assault Wednesday on a neighborhood sheltering anti-government protesters [Daraa], fatally shooting at least 15 in an operation that began before dawn, witnesses said.

   At least six were killed in the early morning attack on the al-Omari mosque in the southern agricultural city of Daraa, where protesters have taken to the streets in calls for reforms and political freedoms, witnesses said. An activist in contact with people in Daraa said police shot another three people protesting in its Roman-era city center after dusk. Six more bodies were found later in the day, the activist said.

   As the casualties mounted, people from the nearby villages of Inkhil, Jasim, Khirbet Ghazaleh and al-Harrah tried to march on Daraa Wednesday night but security forces opened fire as they approached, the activist said. It was not immediately clear if there were more deaths or injuries. (AP, March 23, 2011, emphasis added)

The AP report inflates the numbers: Daraa is presented as a city of 300,000 when in fact its population is 75,000;  "protesters gathered by the thousands", "casualties mounted".

The report is silent on the death of policemen which in the West invariably makes the front page of the tabloids.

The deaths of the policemen are important in assessing what actually happened. When there are police casualties, this means that there is an exchange of gunfire between opposing sides, between policemen and "demonstrators".

Who are these "demonstrators" including roof top snipers who were targeting the police.

Israeli and Lebanese news reports (which acknowledge the police deaths) provide a clearer picture of what happened in Daraa on March 17-18. The Israel National News Report (which cannot be accused of being biased in favor of Damascus) reviews these same events as follows:

   Seven police officers and at least four demonstrators in Syria have been killed in continuing violent clashes that erupted in the southern town of Daraa last Thursday.

   .... On Friday police opened fire on armed protesters killing four and injuring as many as 100 others. According to one witness, who spoke to the press on condition of anonymity, "They used live ammunition immediately -- no tear gas or anything else."

   .... In an uncharacteristic gesture intended to ease tensions the government offered to release the detained students, but seven police officers were killed, and the Baath Party Headquarters and courthouse were torched, in renewed violence on Sunday. (Gavriel Queenann, Syria: Seven Police Killed, Buildings Torched in Protests, Israel National News, Arutz Sheva, March 21, 2011, emphasis added)

The Lebanese news report, quoting various sources, also acknowledges the killings of seven policemen in Daraa: They were killed  "during clashes between the security forces and protesters... They got killed trying to drive away protesters during demonstration in Dara’a"

The Lebanese Ya Libnan report quoting Al Jazeera also acknowledged that protesters had "burned the headquarters of the Baath Party and the court house in Dara’a"  (emphasis added)

These news reports of the events in Daraa confirm the following:

   1. This was not a "peaceful protest" as claimed by the Western media. Several of the "demonstrators" had fire arms and were using them against the police:  "The police opened fire on armed protesters killing four".

   2. From the initial casualty figures (Israel News), there were more policemen than demonstrators who were killed:  7 policemen killed versus 4 demonstrators. This is significant because it suggests that the police force might have been initially outnumbered by a well organized armed gang. According to Syrian media sources, there were also snipers on rooftops which were shooting at both the police and the protesters.

What is clear from these initial reports is that many of the demonstrators were not demonstrators but terrorists involved in premeditated acts of killing and arson. The title of the Israeli news report summarizes what happened:  Syria: Seven Police Killed, Buildings Torched in Protests.

The Daraa "protest movement" on March 18 had all the appearances of a staged event involving, in all likelihood, covert support to Islamic terrorists by Mossad and/or Western intelligence. Government sources point to the role of radical Salafist groups (supported by Israel)

Other reports have pointed to the role of Saudi Arabia in financing the protest movement.

What has unfolded in Daraa in the weeks following the initial violent clashes on 17-18 March, is the confrontation between the police and the armed forces on the one hand and armed units of terrorists and snipers on the other which have infiltrated the protest movement.

Reports suggest that these terrorists are integrated by Islamists. There is no concrete evidence as to which Islamic organizations are behind the terrorists and the government has not released corroborating information as th who these groups are.


Hizb ut-Tahrir anti-Assad rally in Tripoli, Lebanon
 (40 km from Syrian border), April 22, 2011.

Hizb ut-Tahrir is banned in Syria

Both the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood (whose leadership is in exile in the UK) and the banned Hizb ut-Tahrir (the Party of Liberation), among others have paid lip service to the protest movement. Hizb ut Tahir (led in the 1980s by Syrian born Omar Bakri Muhammad) tends to "dominate the British Islamist scene” according to Foreign Affairs. Hizb ut Tahir is also considered to be of strategic importance to Britain's Secret Service MI6. in the pursuit of Anglo-American interests in the Middle East and Central Asia. (Is Hizb-ut-Tahrir another project of British MI6? | State of Pakistan).

Syria is a secular Arab country, a society of religious tolerance, where Muslims and Christians have for several centuries lived in peace.

Hizb ut-Tahrir (the Party of Liberation) is a radical political movement committed to the creation of an Islamic caliphate. In Syria, its avowed objective is to destabilize the secular state.

Since the Soviet-Afghan war, Western intelligence agencies as well as Israel's Mossad have consistently used various Islamic terrorist organizations as "intelligence assets". Both Washington and its indefectible British ally have provided covert support to "Islamic terrorists" in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Kosovo and Libya, etc. as a means to triggering ethnic strife, sectarian violence and political instability.

The staged protest movement in Syria is modelled on Libya. The insurrection in Eastern Libya is integrated by the Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) which is supported by MI6 and the CIA. The ultimate objective of the Syria protest movement, through media lies and fabrications, is to create divisions within Syrian society as well as justify an eventual "humanitarian intervention".


Armed Insurrection in Syria

An armed insurrection integrated by Islamists and supported covertly by Western intelligence is central to an understanding of what is occurring on the ground.

The existence of an armed insurrection is not mentioned by the Western media. If it were to be acknowledged and analysed, our understanding of unfolding events would be entirely different.

What is mentioned profusely is that the armed forces and the police are involved in the indiscriminate killing of protesters.

The deployment of the armed forces including tanks in Daraa is directed against an organized armed insurrection, which has been active in the border city since March 17-18.

Casualties are being reported which also include the death of policemen and soldiers.

In a bitter irony, the Western media acknowledges the police/soldier deaths while denying the existence of an armed insurrection.

The key question is how does the media explain these deaths of soldiers and police?

Without evidence, the reports suggest authoritatively that the police is shooting at the soldiers and vice versa the soldiers are shooting on the police. In a April 29 Al Jazeera report, Daraa is described as "a city under siege".

   "Tanks and troops control all roads in and out. Inside the city, shops are shuttered and nobody dare walk the once bustling market streets, today transformed into the kill zone of rooftop snipers.

   Unable to crush the people who first dared rise up against him - neither with the secret police,  paid thugs or the special forces of his brother's military division - President Bashar al-Assad has sent thousands of Syrian soldiers and their heavy weaponry into Deraa for an operation the regime wants nobody in the world to see.

   Though almost all communication channels with Deraa have been cut, including the Jordanian mobile service that reaches into the city from just across the border, Al Jazeera has gathered firsthand accounts of life inside the city from residents who just left or from eyewitnesses inside who were able to get outside the blackout area.

   The picture that emerges is of a dark and deadly security arena, one driven by the actions of the secret police and their rooftop snipers, in which soldiers and protestors alike are being killed or wounded, in which cracks are emerging in the military itself, and in which is created the very chaos which the regime uses to justify its escalating crackdown. (Daraa, a City under Siege, IPS / Al Jazeera, April 29, 2011)

The Al Jazeera report borders on the absurd. Read carefully.

"Tanks and troops control all roads in and out",  "thousands of Syrian soldiers and their heavy weaponry into Daraa"

This situation has prevailed for several weeks. This means that bona fide protesters who are not already inside Daraa cannot enter Daraa.

People who live in the city are in their homes: "nobody dares walk ... the streets". If nobody dares walk the streets where are the protesters?

Who is in the streets? According to Al Jazeera, the protesters are in the streets together with the soldiers, and both the protesters and the soldiers are being shot at by "plain clothes secret police", by "paid thugs" and government sponsored snipers.

The impression conveyed in the report is that these casualties are attributed to infighting between the police and the military.

But the report also says that the soldiers (in the "thousands") control all roads in and out of the city, but they are being shot upon by the plain clothed secret police.

The purpose of this web of media deceit, namely outright fabrications  --where soldiers are being killed by police and  "government snipers"-- is to deny the existence of armed terrorist groups. The later are integrated by snipers and "plain clothed terrorists" who are shooting at the police, the Syrian armed forces and local residents.

These are not spontaneous acts of terror; they are carefully planned and coordinated attacks. In recent developments, according to a Xinhua report (April 30, 2011), armed "terrorist groups" "attacked the housing areas for servicemen" in Daraa province, "killing a sergeant and wounding two".

While the government bears heavy responsibility for its mishandling of the military-police operation, including the deaths of civilians, the reports confirm that the armed terrorist groups had also opened fire on protesters and local residents. The casualties are then blamed on the armed forces and the police and the Bashar Al Assad government is portrayed by "the international community" as having ordered countless atrocities.

The fact of the matter is that foreign journalists are banned from reporting inside Syria, to the extent that much of the information including the number of casualties is obtained from the unverified accounts of "witnesses".

It is in the interest of the US-NATO alliance to portray the events in Syria as a peaceful protest movement which is being brutally repressed by a "dictatorial regime".

The Syrian government may be autocratic. It is certainly not a model of democracy but neither is the US administration, which is characterized by rampant corruption, the derogation of civil liberties under the Patriot legislation, the legalisation of torture, not to mention its "bloodless" "humanitarian wars":

   "The U.S. and its NATO allies have, in addition to U.S. Sixth Fleet and NATO Active Endeavor military assets permanently deployed in the Mediterranean, warplanes, warships and submarines engaged in the assault against Libya that can be used against Syria at a moment's notice.

   On April 27 Russia and China evidently prevented the U.S. and its NATO allies from pushing through an equivalent of Resolution 1973 against Syria in the Security Council, with Russian deputy ambassador to the UN Alexander Pankin stating that the current situation in Syria "does not present a threat to international peace and security." Syria is Russia's last true partner in the Mediterranean and the Arab world and hosts one of only two Russian overseas naval bases, that at Tartus. (The other being in Ukraine's Crimea.)" (Rick Rozoff,   Libyan Scenario For Syria: Towards A US-NATO "Humanitarian Intervention" directed against Syria? Global Research, April 30, 2011)

The ultimate purpose is to trigger sectarian violence and political chaos within Syria by covertly supporting Islamic terrorist organizations.

What lies ahead?

The longer term US foreign policy perspective is "regime change" and the destabilization of Syria as an independent nation-state, through a covert process of "democratization" or through military means.

Syria is on the list of "rogue states", which are targeted for a US military intervention. As confirmed by former NATO commander General Wesley Clark the "[The] Five-year campaign plan [includes]... a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan" (Pentagon official quoted by General Wesley Clark).

The objective is to weaken the structures of the secular State while justifying an eventual  UN sponsored "humanitarian intervention". The latter, in the first instance, could take the form of a reinforced embargo on the country (including sanctions) as well as the freezing of Syrian bank assets in overseas foreign financial institutions.

While a US-NATO military intervention in the immediate future seems highly unlikely, Syria is nonetheless on the Pentagon's military roadmap, namely an eventual war on Syria has been contemplated both by Washington and Tel Aviv.

If it were to occur, at some future date, it would lead to escalation. Israel would inevitably be involved. The entire Middle East Central Asian region from the Eastern Mediterranean to the Chinese-Afghan border would flare up.

Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (Emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and Editor of globalresearch.ca. He is the author of The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003) and America’s “War on Terrorism” (2005). He is also a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica. His writings have been published in more than twenty languages.  He spent a month in Syria in early 2011.

Read about Osama Bin Laden in Michel Chossudovsky's international best-seller America's "War on Terrorism".(also available in pdf format).

_____________________________________

Submitted to PalestineFreeVoice by Global Reserach
 _______________________________________________

 "Palestine is the heart of Arab countries" - PalestineFreeVoice
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

International Crisis Group Sweating over Syria


Baath Party Headquarters
Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer

The International Crisis Group (ICG) has been at the center of the unfolding "Arab Spring" since the very beginning.

Mohamed ElBaradei, a member of the ICG board of trustees, was literally leading the color revolution in the streets of Cairo along with his admitted underling, Google executive Wael Ghonim. The ICG has also recently made a heeded call for intervention in the Ivory Coast.

ICG includes George Soros and Zbigniew Brzezinski, two men notorious for their extraterritorial meddling and their fomenting of color revolutions in far flung lands.

To explain why they are so eager to pry their way into sovereign nations, despoil, topple, and rebuild them, one only has to look at ICG's corporate supporters.

They include such ignoble organizations as Chevron, Morgan Stanley, and Deutsche Bank Group with equally ignoble intentions that are confidently expressed through ICG's nefarious agenda.

In the ICG's most recent report, "Syria: Quickly Going beyond the Point of No Return," they worryingly state that, "By denouncing all forms of protest as sedition, and dealing with them through escalating violence, the regime [Syria] is closing the door on any possible honourable exit to a deepening national crisis. With little the international community can do, the optimal outcome is one whose chances are dwindling by the day: an immediate end to the violence and a genuine national dialogue to pave the way for a transition to a representative, democratic political order."In other words, the window is closing on Western-engineered regime change in Syria.

The ICG goes on to state that "the regime blames all casualties on its foes -- agents provocateurs and, more recently, jihadis," but they concede that "one cannot exclude possible foreign involvement in the ongoing crisis..." ICG's report degenerates into a hypocritical, somewhat bizarre and uncharacteristically incoherent rant stating that even though foreign influence is evident and that "there are plausible reports of security forces being ambushed by unidentified armed groups, as well as of protesters firing back when attacked," Syria's bid to restore order amidst a clearly violent, foreign-funded insurrection is a "violent, unlawful and disorderly response."

Perhaps the deep pockets of George Soros and the myriad of influential world leaders that populate the International Crisis Group's board of trustees and serve as advisers, are unable to afford a copy of the New York Times paper stating that the entire "Arab Spring" was prepared and directed years in advance by the US. Perhaps the ICG is incapable of reading AFP reports openly stating that Syrian protesters were trained abroad by the US and sent back to Syria to fuel a "ripple effect."

It seems they are also absent-minded of the corporate-funded Brookings Institution report, "Which Path to Persia?" which gives specific acknowledgment to the Smith Richardson Foundation, upon which Zbigniew Brzezinski sits as an acting governor.

In this Brookings report, fueling simultaneous popular revolutions, armed insurgencies, and tempting military units to carry out a coup are openly talked about as viable options used in tandem to destabilize a targeted nation. In addition, "some form of military support" is cited as an absolute necessity when fomenting a popular revolution to prevent it from being crushed by competent security forces. Judging from Damascus' daily claims, video, and photographic evidence, coupled with eye witness accounts from the protesters themselves of mysterious gunmen, it appears the "Which Path to Persia?" doctrine is being carried out in earnest within Syria's borders.

The untenable position the global corporate-financiers are in to intervene further is illustrated in ICG's report where they conclude, "the international community clearly has an important stake in the outcome of the current crisis, even if little capacity to influence it." ICG recognizes how further intervention will make it abundantly clear to the general population that indeed this is an orchestrated, foreign-funded plot - something the world's leaders, from Cairo to Damascus, from Minsk to Beijing have already pointed out.

Despite ICG's apparent resignation to sitting the Syrian conflict out on the sidelines (apparently not counting the already admitted funding and support the US has given the Syrian opposition) it should be noted that a campaign to build up support for a Libyan-style military intervention in Syria is already underway.

The Economist notes that the missing component is the Arab League's support - without which, military intervention is almost unimaginable. We can then expect a concerted and furious effort made to twist arms in Riyadh, Cairo, Amman, and even Istanbul to match Qatar's fervent support for this Western-driven regional conflagration. The impetus to wring out such a concession however, is almost unimaginable.  

Tony Cartalucci's articles have appeared on many alternative media websites, including his own at 
Land Destroyer Report.  
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Monday, May 2, 2011

"In Syria, as the old French saying goes, it is urgent to do nothing!"

Via FLC

"... Liberation from outside is as dangerous a game as revolution. With neither can the outcome be predicted. The Poles were liberated from the Nazis in 1945, only to find themselves under the Red Army. Many Iraqis wanted to depose Saddam Hussein in 2003, but the American Army turned out to be a blunt instrument that made their lives more hellish than Saddam had. I remember when Palestinians in the West Bank complained about Jordanian rule. I suspect that having since 1967 been occupied by Israel’s army and displaced by Israel’s settlers, they would give anything to have the Jordanians back. So before Uncle Sam rides to the rescue in Syria, give it some thought...."
Posted by G, M, Z, or B at 10:50 AM
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Sunday, May 1, 2011

Davutoglu: Internationalization of events in Syria will "lead to undesired outcomes"...

Via FLC

avutoglu: Internationalization of events in Syria will "lead to undesired outcomes"...

"Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said efforts should be exerted to prevent international intervention in Syria. Speaking at a TV program, Davutoglu said such an international intervention may lead to undesired outcomes, "Syria is our neighbor and a sovereign country. We give high importance to resolution of the matter within the country itself. There is still a chance for this. This chance should not be missed."
Asked if there would be a military intervention in Syria where clashes escalated recently and asked to comment on policy Turkey would pursue, Davutoglu said, "we should work to prevent such a possibility. International intervention may lead to undesired results particularly in such nonhomogeneous societies in sociological sense."
Posted by G, M, Z, or B at 2:52 PM
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Saturday, April 30, 2011

'Even Human Rights groups are more cautious on Syria...'

Via FLC

"... Human-rights groups are even more cautious. “If Obama were to call for Assad to go, I don’t think it would change things on the ground in any way, shape, or form,” said Joseph Stork, deputy director of the Middle East division of Human Rights Watch, which had been supportive of military action in Libya. In this case, he said, targeted sanctions, he said, were the right move....  The administration did not sanction President Assad, saying it focused on those directly responsible for human-rights abuses. A senior official said the United States would not hesitate to add him to the list if the violence did not stop. But the White House seemed to be calculating that it could still prevail on him to show restraint.
“Our goal is to end the violence and create an opening for the Syrian people’s legitimate aspirations,,” said a spokesman for the National Security Council, Tommy Vietor. .... ..... .....  for the Obama administration, abandoning Mr. Assad has costs. For two years, it cultivated him in the hope that Syria would break the logjam in the Middle East peace process ... ... .... Israel’s sensitivity about Syria is so acute that when reports began circulating this week that Israeli officials were pressing the White House to be less tough on Damascus, Israel’s ambassador to the United States, Michael B. Oren, called reporters to insist that his government was doing nothing of the sort. ... ... “The regime coming down in a speedy, orderly transition to a Sunni government would be a setback for Iran, but that’s not what’s happening,” said Andrew Tabler, a Syria expert at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “We’re headed for something much messier. The Iranians can play around in that.”

Right or Wrong

You were Right, Right, Right 

Yvonne Ridley said Linyan war "is another oil-fuelled, reckless act by gung-ho leaders who would end up being sucked in to a long military campaign as futile as the Bush-Blair adventures into Iraq and Afghanistan that we are still paying for in terms of wasted lives."

First: I don't think USA-Nato is ready into a long military campaign in Libya as futile as the Bush-Blair adventures into Iraq and Afghanistan. On the contrary, because of their bloody intervention in both Iraq and Afghanistan they are using the so called soft power, divide the people ethnically, religiously, tribally, and let them kill each other.
Second: its not only about oil, they were getting the oil from Khadafy. its also about creation of a separation zone to prevent the integration of revolutions in Tunis and Egypt. Despite The Interim Transitional National Council wishful thinking and its committment to liberate every part of Libya from Aamsaad in the east to Ras Jdir in the west, and from Sirte in the north to Gatrun in the south, The No fly zone, and the "humanitarian intervention" is drawing the new borders of divided Libya, the US-Nato, and their Arab puppets wanted the people of Libya to be "brutally crushed without mercy" until they cry for help, as Sheikh Mohammed Bosidra told you. Those Libyans who are crystal clear in one thing: Gaddafi must go, should have thought and planed how they would force him to go, like in Tunis, Egypt, Yemen, and Bahrain, they should have avoided violence, and giving Khadafy an excuse to crushed without them mercy. So far the conspiracy failed in Tunis, and Egypt, but brought Libyans to their knees, and turned it from a popular revolution into a civil war.

Its not true that the war in libya is led by no one, with no particular aim, and its not true that the No fly zone prevented a Massacre. In every revolution, there is the people's will to get free, and there is the conspiracy's will, where conspiracy try to ride drive the people to face the wall untill they cry for help.

Somebody, called, the Arab uprising, "The Grand Arab Revolution", referring to the Grand Arab Revolution led by Sharif Husain of Mecca, where the people wanted liberation from the Ottoman Empire, and the Conspiracy was about dividing Arab world, and creation of the Zionist entity.

History is repeating itself, but in other forms. The so called "constructive chaos" is now used to redraw the region according to US-Israeli "geo-strategic needs and objectives." Therefore and Syria is the main target, because its the corner stone of the Resistance Axsis, The loss of Syria, God fordid, shall compensate the loss of Egypt, and pave the way to the NEW zionist middle east. The struggle is greater than Libya, its about the middle east, and its heard, Syria.
So the question is, even in Tunis and Egypt, is about who would laugh at the end.

Uprooted Palestinian

+++++++++++++++

Yvonne Ridley: “I was wrong to oppose military intervention in Libya – wrong, wrong, wrong”  

By Yvonne Ridley in Benghazi

30 April 2011

Yvonne Ridley explains from Benghazi in eastern Libya why she was wrong to oppose Western intervention in Libya, which she now accepts was necessary to avoid the bloodbath Libyan mafia chief Muammar Gaddafi had planned for Libyans for daring to rise up against him.

Just a few weeks ago I stood on a public platform and vigorously slammed proposals for Western military intervention in Libya.
The hasty scramble by the Americans, French and Britons lacked strategy and a clear goal.

To me it appeared to be yet another oil-fuelled, reckless act by gung-ho leaders who would end up being sucked in to a long military campaign as futile as the Bush-Blair adventures into Iraq and Afghanistan that we are still paying for in terms of wasted lives.

“Here we go again,” I said. “Another imperialistic adventure with the long-term aim of getting our grubby hands on other peoples’ oil.”

To those few Libyans present, I warned they would live to regret this pact with the West that I likened to jumping into bed with the devil.

Being very conscious of the fact I’m not a Libyan and desperate at not wanting to be seen as another opinionated Westerner sticking my nose into matters I didn’t understand, I sought the views of many Libyan friends and contacts.

Their reaction was mixed, but more often than not I was told that without outside help the Libyan people would be slaughtered by Gaddafi who himself described those who opposed him as cockroaches that needed to be crushed.

To justify my stand I reasoned that all revolutions are bloody and that the heroic people of Tunisia and Egypt had paid the blood price in their hundreds to win freedom.

I even recounted Malcolm X telling people that if they were not prepared to die for it they should remove the word freedom from their vocabulary.

Of course, making grand statements from platforms in central London is one thing but going to see for myself what was happening on the ground was something else.

My few days in Libya proved to be extremely humbling, illuminating and provided me with a reality check.

I was wrong about opposing military intervention. No if, buts or maybe – I was wrong, wrong, wrong.

The people of Libya would have been brutally crushed without mercy if the West had not responded to their cries for help.

Perhaps the greatest shame is that Arab leaders stood by emotionless as the Libyan people begged everyone and anyone for help to bring down Gaddafi.

Some of those Arab leaders had no such hesitation in answering cries for help from the oppressive royal regime in Bahrain – obviously the Saudis and rest of the Gulf Cooperation Council cabal felt uncomfortable helping to bring down an evil, brutal, dictator who routinely abused and oppressed his people while happily propping up another.

It could have been an opportunity for the rising regional power Turkey to step in to the breach but to the massive disappointment of the Libyan people Recep Tayyip Erdogan refused to become embroiled.

So in the end the West did intervene and although the blood of innocents is still flowing in the streets at least it is not a torrent.

And maybe this is a war led by no one, with no particular aim, but the enforcement of the no fly zone has prevented a massacre.

That is the view held by one of Libya's spiritual leaders, Sheikh Mohammed Bosidra, who told me: "We had no choice. It was either make a pact with NATO or be crushed. It was a matter of survival, as simple as that."

However many have already paid the ultimate blood price. Each town and city has a special place for its martyrs, and there are many. Faces of young men stared back at me from family portraits proudly hung in the central square in Benghazi and what struck me was how young they were.

In Derna, more portraits of the sons of Omar al-Mukhtar hung in the town centre and some of the bodies have been buried in a cemetery next to the tombs of three Sahaba and 70 other martyrs who fought against Roman and Byzantine forces in 692AD.

“We have a very fine tradition of producing martyrs in Derna and that is why Gaddafi hates the people of Derna more than anywhere else in Libya,” one woman told me.

And then she pointed to a French Tricolor and a Union Jack whispering: “Thank you, we will never forget what you have done for us.”

I admit I felt uncomfortable, even a fraud, on several different levels by accepting her thanks. Usually I end up apologizing for the deeds of various British governments and empire so this was something new for me.

We are still not clear what is the endgame of the NATO-led force, but the Libyan people are crystal clear in one thing: Gaddafi must go.

Only then can they begin to work out the next move, and it won’t be easy.

The Interim Transitional National Council says it is committed to liberate every part of Libya from Aamsaad in the east to Ras Jdir in the west, and from Sirte in the north to Gatrun in the south.

But from what I could see the mission is unstable and unpredictable, chaotic, disorganized and confused.

“It is clear to me that once Gaddafi is gone – and he will go – the Libyan people will not replace him with another tyrant or a Western puppet. Whatever government and constitution they choose will be one of their own making.”



However, what is undeniable is the bravery and courage of the Libyan people who we in the media routinely refer to as rebels. These people are not rebels. They are shopkeepers, students, doctors, businessmen and mechanics who have never owned a gun or wanted to pick one up in anger, until now.

And yet there they are tens of thousands prepared to die for freedoms and liberties they’ve never known in Gaddafi’s 41-year rule.

I was moved to tears by a regiment of young men who marched, rallied and chanted demanding to be sent to the front lines in Misrata to help their brothers in arms.

Their personally-delivered message in Benghazi was to the members of the interim government and they were extremely critical of some elements of the ITNC who they said were more interested in parading around with bodyguards intoxicated with the little power they had than making real decisions.

The criticism of the leadership was stinging but reassuring that these young men were not blind to the shortcomings of their own. Too often in the Middle East people are blind and unquestioning in their loyalty to their leaders.

It is clear to me that once Gaddafi is gone – and he will go – the Libyan people will not replace him with another tyrant or a Western puppet. Whatever government and constitution they choose will be one of their own making.

But first we in the West must give them all the help and support they need to accomplish the removal of Gaddafi until it is time for NATO to go in a dignified exit.

And who knows, for once, Western intervention might just be regarded as a force for good.

[Wishfull thinking]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Monday, April 25, 2011

"I don't see a scenario right now or in the future where the injection of US or NATO military action would help the situation..."

Via FLC

I don't see a scenario right now or in the future where the injection of US or NATO military action would help the situation..."



"(On Syria), Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said Monday "I don't see a scenario right now or anytime in the near future where the injection of U.S. or NATO military action would in any way beneficially help the situation, I'm sorry to say," McCain said on NBC's "Today" show.
McCain, the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has been an advocate for U.S. intervention in Libya... "
Posted by G, M, Z, or B at 11:17 AM
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The Odyssey of the Libayn-civilian

FAD

 http://blogs.state.gov/images/Dipnote/behind_the_scenes/2011_0414_civilians_libya_m.jpg
Civilians

http://www.dw-world.de/image/0,,2021021_1,00.jpg
Refugees

http://emajmagazine.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/turkish-gastarbeiter-wdr-de.jpg
Foreign workers

http://www.centree.cn/en/images/b_2_4.jpg
and the , back home !!


"The NATO shall protect the civilians of Libya"
so we are told.......
Which civilians ,are protected ?? may I ask,
also the civilians supporting Qaddafi  ??............ I think not !!

So,  it must be exclusively to protect the anti-Qaddafi-civilians.

But once an-anti-Qaddafi-civilian starts to carry weapons.......
is he still considered as " civilian"  ???............I think not !! 
but he would still be protected by NATO because :
"The NATO shall protect the civilians of Libya"
so they said.

But ,
if and when some Libyan-civilians take a fisher-boat
and risk to sail to the south of Italy
and then ask for asylum......would they get it ???
I think not !!.........they would be deported,
or dropped over the borders into France
and then France smuggles them into Germany
to work as illegal-cheap-labour until their employers
shall send them back to Libya .........
as civilians without any civil-rights !!
(otherwise known as: illegal-alients)


Once back in Libya ,
Qaddafi shall give them a house,
a job and free-education for their children.
When those children will grow up,
they shall ask again for the removal
of the dictatorship of Qaddafi ,
because Qaddafi is not as democratic........... as Berlusconi !!
or  as Sarkozy !!
.................I think not !!


Sherlock HommosNovelist.
 
Posted by Tlaxcala at 1:33 PM
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

In the name of......another name.

FAD


http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n13/aphra_behn/slavery2tradeimage.jpg
"Civilisation"
then, meant enslaving other humans
to build a land they stole from ,also ,other humans.


In the past 350 years
the Western-World
invaded and occupied
and colonised 2/3 of this Globe........
all that happened,
in the name of
Christianity and of the Christianising of others.

Today, they do the same ,but,
in the name of Democracy and Democratising
or eventually in the name of "Human-rights".

Ask ,please, Bernard Koushner....
http://www.enjoyfrance.com/images/stories/france/news/French-Foreign-Minister-Bernard-Kouchner.jpg

They could not christianise the Muslim-world
because all the Muslims believed, anyhow, in the same Jesus Christ,
so now they want, to democratise-the-Muslim-world.


Hoping that the Muslim-world shall soon obey the rule
and the reign of the Talmud.

Raja Chemayel
a Christian-Muslim and a democrat-Arab
Posted by Tlaxcala at 7:39 PM
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Alain Juppe: "We have underestimated Gaddafi's capacity to adapt..."

Via FLC

(Reuter/Africa)- France is opposed to the idea of sending troops into Libya to guide air strikes as the West struggles to break a military stalemate in the North African country, Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said on Tuesday. Juppe said the situation in Libya was "difficult" and "confused" a month after France launched the first U.N.-mandated strikes against Muammar Gaddafi's forces. He added that the West had underestimated the Libyan leader's ability to adapt his tactics in response to the coalition campaign... "It is likely ... that there will not be a military solution," he added... Juppe said a political solution would require a "real" ceasefire and for the rebel opposition to sit down around a negotiating table with tribal leaders and defected Gaddafi officials. He added that military pressure should be maintained and even intensified to encourage more defections...
Posted by G, M, Z, or B at 11:52 AM
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Tough choices for West in Libya

FLC


(Reuter)- "... "The U.N. Security Council never aimed to topple the Libyan regime," (Serguei Lavrov) said in Belgrade. "All those who are currently using the U.N. resolution for that aim are violating the U.N. mandate. It is crucial to establish a ceasefire."
Even the advocates of more robust attacks on Gaddafi's forces have insisted they will not deploy ground troops. But the European Union outlined a tentative plan on Monday to do just that to protect aid deliveries to Misrata and elsewhere if requested by the United Nations..."
Posted by G, M, Z, or B at 9:59 AM
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Three different names for the same Libyans.

FAD

http://www.independent.co.uk/multimedia/dynamic/00597/misrata_597284s.jpg
The machine-gun has three legs ,
while the man on the right has only one !!

In Libya,
we have now reached a more clear picture:

Half of Libya wants a change
and the other half does not obviously.
The NATO bombs the second half
and sometimes also the first-half , but by mistake.

When NATO kills Libyans it is called Collateral-damages
When Qaddafi kills his own citizens it is called Human-rights-violation
When the Insurgents kill the Qaddafi-loyal´s it is called Civil-War.

I wonder if it matters, really ,for the poor victims ,
what name will be used ??


Raja Chemayel
Posted by Tlaxcala at 9:43 PM
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian