Saturday, 23 February 2013

Spielberg v. Tarantino

Saturday, February 16, 2013 at 9:07AM

Gilad Atzmon
Hollywood and the Past

History is commonly regarded as an attempt to produce a structured account of the past. It proclaims to tell us what really happened, but in most cases it fails to do that. Instead it is set to conceal our shame, to hide those various elements, events, incidents and occurrences in our past which we cannot cope with. History, therefore, can be regarded as a system of concealment. Accordingly, the role of the true historian is similar to that of the psychoanalyst: both aim to unveil the repressed. For the psychoanalyst, it is the unconscious mind. For the historian, it is our collective shame.

Yet, one may wonder, how many historians really engage in such a task? How many historians are courageous enough to open the Pandora Box? How many historians are brave enough to challenge Jewish History for real? How many historians dare to ask why Jews? Why do Jews suffer time after time? Is it really the Goyim who are inherently murderous, or is there something unsettling in Jewish culture or collectivism? But Jewish history is obviously far from being alone here: every people’s past is, in fact, as problematic. Can Palestinians really explain to themselves how is it that after more than a decade of struggle, they wake up to find out that their current capital has become a NGO haven largely funded by George Soros’ Open Society? Can the Brits once and for all look in the mirror and explain to themselves why, in their Imperial Wars Museum, they erected a Holocaust exhibition dedicated to the destruction of the Jews? Shouldn’t the Brits be slightly more courageous and look into one of the many Shoas they themselves inflicted on others? Clearly they have an impressive back catalogue to choose from.

The Guardian vs. Athens
The past is dangerous territory; it can induce inconvenient stories. This fact alone may explain why the true Historian is often presented as a public enemy. However, the Left has invented an academic method to tackle the issue. The ‘progressive’ historian functions to produce a ‘politically correct’, ‘inoffensive’ tale of the past. By means of zigzagging, it navigates its way, while paying its dues to the concealed and producing endless ad-hoc deviations that leave the ‘repressed’ untouched. The progressive subject is there to produce a ‘non- essentialist’ and ‘unoffending’ account of the past on the expense of the so-called ‘reactionary’. The Guardian is an emblem of such an approach, it would, for instance, ban any criticism of Jewish culture or Jewishness, yet it provides a televised platform for two rabid Zionist so they can discuss Arab culture and Islamism. The Guardian wouldn’t mind offending ‘Islamists’ or British ‘nationalists’ but it would be very careful not to hurt any Jewish sensitivities. Such version of politics or the past is impervious to truthfulness, coherence, consistency or integrity. In fact, the progressive discourse is far from being ‘the guardian of the truth’, it is actually set as ‘the guardian of the discourse’ and I am referring here to Left discourse in particular.
But surely there is an alternative to the ‘progressive’ attitude to the past. The true historian is actually a philosopher – an essentialist – a thinker who posits the question ‘what does it mean to be in the world and what does it take to live amongst others’? The true historian transcends beyond the singular, the particular and the personal. He or she is searching for the condition of the possibility of that which drives our past, present and future. The true historian dwells on Being and Time, he or she is searching for a humanist lesson and an ethical insight while looking into the poem, the art, the beauty, the reason but also into the fear. The true historian is an essentialist who digs out the concealed, for he or she knows that the repressed is the kernel of the truth.

Leo Strauss provides us with a very useful insight in that regard. Western civilization, he contends, oscillates between two intellectual and spiritual poles – Athens and Jerusalem. Athens — the birthplace of democracy, home for reason, philosophy, art and science. Jerusalem — the city of God where God’s law prevails. The philosopher, the true historian, or the essentialist, for that matter, is obviously the Athenian. The Jerusalemite, in that regard, is ‘the guardian of the discourse’, the one who keeps the gate, just to maintain law and order on the expense of ecstasies, poesis, beauty, reason and truth.

Spielberg vs. Tarantino

Hollywood provides us with an insight into this oscillation between Athens and Jerusalem: between the Jerusalemite ‘guardian of the discourse’ and the Athenian contender – the ‘essentialist’ public enemy. On the Left side of the map we find Steven Spielberg, the ‘progressive’ genius. On his Right we meet peosis itself, Quentin Tarantino, the ‘essentialist’.

Spielberg, provides us with the ultimate sanitized historical epic. The facts are cherry picked just to produce a pre meditated pseudo ethical tale that maintains the righteous discourse, law and order but, most importantly, the primacy of Jewish suffering (Schindler’s List and Munich). Spielberg brings to life a grand epic with a clear retrospective take on the past. Spielberg tactic is, in most cases, pretty simple. He would juxtapose a vivid transparent binary opposition: Nazis vs. Jews, Israeli vs. Palestinians , North vs. South, Righteousness vs. Slavery. Somehow, we always know, in advance who are the baddies and who are the goodies. We clearly know who to side with.

Binary opposition is indeed a safe route. It provides a clear distinction between the ‘Kosher’ and the ‘forbidden’. But Spielberg is far from being a banal mind. He also allows a highly calculated and carefully meditated oscillation. In a universalist gesture of courtesy he would let a single Nazi into the family of the kind. He would allow the odd Palestinian to be a victim. It can all happen as long as the main frame of the discourse remains intact. Spielberg is clearly an arch guardian of discourse – being a master of his art-form, he will certainly maintain your attention for at least 90 minutes of a historic cinematic cocktail made of factual mishmash. All you have to do is to follow the plot to the end. By then the pre-digested ethical message is safely replanted at the hub of your self-loving narcissistic universe.

Unlike Spielberg, Tarantino is not concerned with factuality; he may even repel historicity. Tarantino may as well believe that the notion of ‘the message’ or morality are over rated. Tarantino is an essentialist, he is interested in human nature, in Being and he seems to be fascinated in particular in vengeance and its universality. For the obvious reasons, his totally farfetched Inglorious Bastards throws light on present Israeli collective blood thirstiness as being detected at the time of Operation Cast lead. The fictional cinematic creation of a revengeful murderous WWII Jewish commando unit is there to throw the light on the devastating contemporary reality of Jewish lobbies’ lust for violence in their relentless push for a world war against Iran and beyond. But Inglorious Bastards may as well have a universal appeal because the Old Testament’s ‘eye for and eye’ has become the Anglo American political driving force in the aftermath of 9/11.

Abe’le vs. Django

What may seem as a spiritual clash between Jerusalemite Spielberg and Athenian Tarantino is more than apparent in their recent works.

The history of slavery in America is indeed a problematic topic and, for obvious reasons, many aspects of this chapter are still kept deeply within the domain of the concealed. Once again Spielberg and Tarantino have produced a distinctively different accounts of this chapter.
In his recent historical epic Lincoln, Spielberg, made Abraham Lincoln into a Neocon ‘moral interventionist’ who against all (political) odds, abolished slavery. I guess that Spielberg knows enough American history to gather that his cinematic account is a crude Zigzag attempt, for the anti slavery political campaign was a mere pretext for a bloody war driven by clear economical objectives.

As one may expect, Spielberg peppers his tale with more than a few genuine historical anecdotes. He is certainly paying the necessary dues just to keep the shame shoved deep under the carpet. His Lincoln is cherished as a morally driven hero of human brotherhood. And the entire plot carries all the symptoms of contemporary AIPAC lobby assault within the Capitol. Being one of the arch guardians of the discourse, Spielberg has successfully fulfilled his task. He added a substantial cinematic layer to ensure that America’s true shame remains deeply repressed or shall we say, untouched.

Needles to mention that Spielberg’s take on Lincoln has been cheered by the Jewish press. They called the president Avraham Lincoln Avinu (our father, Hebrew) in The Tablet Magazine. ‘Avraham’, according to the Tablet, is the definitive good Jew. “As imagined by Spielberg and Kushner, Lincoln’s Lincoln is the ultimate mensch. He is a skilled natural psychologist, an interpreter of dreams, and a man blessed with an extraordinarily clever and subtle legal mind.” In short, Spielberg’s Lincoln is Abe’le who combines the skills, the gift and the traits of Moses, Freud as well as Alan Dershowitz. However, some Jews complain about the film. “As an American Jewish historian, writes Lance J. Sussman, “I’m afraid I have to say I am somewhat disappointed with the latest Spielberg film. So much of it is so good, but it would have been even better if he had put at least one Jew in the movie, somewhere.”

I guess that Spielberg may find it hard to please the entire tribe. Quentin Tarantino, however, doesn’t even try. Tarantino is, in fact, doing the complete opposite. Through a phantasmic epic that confesses zero interest in any form of historicity or factuality whatsoever, he manages, in his latest masterpiece Django Unchained, to dig out the darkest secrets of Slavery. He scratches the concealed and judging by the reaction of another cinematic genius Spike Lee, he has clearly managed to get pretty deep.

By putting into play a stylistic spectacle within the Western genre Tarantino manages to dwell on every aspect we are advised to leave untouched. He deals with biological determinism, White supremacy and cruelty. But he also turns his lens onto slaves’ passivity, subservience and collaboration. The Athenian director builds here a set of Greek mythological God like characters; Django (Jamie Fox), is the unruly king of revenge and Schultz (Christoph Waltz) the German dentist turned bounty hunter is the master of wit, kindness and humanity with a giant wisdom tooth shining over his caravan. Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio) is the Hegelian (racist) Master and Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson) is the Hegelian Slave, emerging as the personification of social transformation. To a certain extent, the relationships between Candie and Stephen could be seen as one of the most profound yet subversive cinematic takes on Hegel’s master-slave dialectic.

In Hegel’s dialectic two self-consciousness’ are constituted via a process of mirroring. In Django Unchained, Stephen the slave, seems to convey the ultimate form of subservience, yet this is merely on the surface. In reality Stephen is way more sophisticated and observant than his master Candie. He is on his way up. It is hard to determine whether Stephen is a collaborator or if he really runs the entire show. And yet in Tarantino’s latest, Hegel’s dialectic is, somehow, compartmentalized. Django, once unchained, is clearly impervious to the Hegelian dialectic spiel. His incidental liberation induces in him a true spirit of relentless resilience. When it comes to it, he kills the Master, the Slave and everyone else who happens to be around, he bends every rule including the ‘rules of nature’ (biological determinism). By the time the epic is over, Django leaves behind a wreckage of the Candie’s plantation, the cinematic symbol of the dying old South and the ‘Master Slave Dialectic’. Yet, as Django rides on a horse towards the rising sun together with his free wife Broomhilda von Shaft (Kerry Washington), we are awakened to the far fetched cinematic fantasy. In reality, I mean the world out of the cinema, the Candie’s plantation would, in all likelihood, remain intact and Django would probably be chained up again. In practice, Tarantino cynically juxtaposes the dream (the cinematic reality) and reality (as we know it). By doing so he manages to illuminate the depth of misery that is entangled with the human condition and in Black reality in America in particular.

Tarantino is certainly not a ‘guardian of the discourse.’ Quite the opposite, he is the bitterest enemy of stagnation. As in his previous works, his latest spectacle is an essentialist assault on correctness and ‘self-love’. Tarantino indeed turns over many stones and unleashes many vipers into the room. Yet being a devout Athenian he doesn’t intend to produce a single answer or a moral lesson. He leaves us perplexed yet cheerful. For Tarantino, I guess, dilemma is the existential essence. Spielberg, on, the other hand, provides all the necessary answers. After all, within the ‘progressive’ politically-correct discourse, it is the answers that determine, in retrospective, what questions we are entitled to raise.

If Leo Strauss is correct and Western civilization should be seen as an oscillation between Athens and Jerusalem, truth must be said – we can really do with many more Athenians and their essentialist reflections. In short, we are in a desperate need of many more Tarantinos to counter Jerusalem and its ambassadors.

Gilad Atzmon’s latest book is: The Wandering Who? A Study of Jewish Identity Politics latest book is: The Wandering Who? A Study of Jewish Identity Politics

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Israel instructs Obama: “Iranian and Syrian Sanctions are Not Painful Enough!”

….impose an international blockade now!

Franklin Lamb
Graphics by Alex

On 3/26/2013 Iran is expected to meet with other world powers in Astana, Kazakhstan to discuss its nuclear program. Discussions that the occupiers of Palestine fervently hope will not be successful. It is toward this end that their key demand this week to the US Congress, the White House and the European Union is “to cast responsibility on the Iranians by blaming them for the talks’ failure in the clearest terms possible.”

According to the Al-Monitor of 3/19/13, Israel also demands that the countries meeting in Kazakhstan“make it perfectly clear that slogans such as ‘negotiations can’t go on forever’ are their marching orders to the White House, and they want the Kazakhstan attendees to act “so severely that the Iranians realize that they face a greater threat than just Israeli military action.” 

“The message must be that this time the entire west, behind Israel’s leadership, is contemplating the launch of a massive military action.” Unsaid is that “the entire West” is expected to confront Iran militarily while Tel Aviv’s forces will mop up Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Syria if necessary.
Pending the above arrangements, Israel this week is further demanding that the Obama White House issue another Executive Order dramatically ratcheting up the US-led Sanctions against Iran and Syria while it prepares for a hoped for “ game changing international economic blockade, including no-fly zones enforced by NATO.

To achieve yet another lawyer of severe sanctions, and at the behest of AIPAC, a “legislative planning” meeting was called by Congressman Eliot Engel, who represents New Yorks 17thDistrict (the Bronx) and who is the Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Rep. Ros-Lehtinen (Florida’s 27th District), Chair of the House Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa. The session was held in a posh Georgetown restaurant and participant’s included representatives from AIPAC, Israel, and Saudi Arabia, Bahrain plus half a dozen Congressional staffers.

Congressman Engel has co-sponsored virtually every anti-Arab, anti-Islam, anti-Palestinian, anti-Iran, and anti-Syrian Congressional broadside since he entered Congress a quarter-century ago. His campaign literature last fall stated: “I am a strong supporter of sanctions against those who repeatedly reject calls to behave as responsible nations. (Israel excepted-ed). I have authored or helped author numerous bills which have been signed into law to impose sanctions against rogue states including Iran and Syria.” Ros-Lehtinen and Engel led all members with AIPAC donations on the House side in last fall’s Congressional elections. They are ranked number one and two respectively as still serving career recipients of Israel-AIPAC’s “indirect” campaign donations.

 Some Congressional operatives accuse Rep. Ros-Lehtinen of being a bit lazy and neglecting the bread and butter needs of her Florida constituents. But others argue that it depends on which constituents one has in mind. Her election mailings and her Congressional website claim that the Congresswoman “led all Congressional efforts tirelessly to generate votes to block what she views as anti-Israel resolutions offered at the former UN Commission on Human Rights.”

A big fan of US-led sanctions against Iran and Syria, Rep. Ros-Lehtinen introduced the Iran Freedom Support Act on January 6, 2005, which increased sanctions and expanded punitive measures against the Iranian people until the Iranian regime has dismantled its nuclear plants. Rep. Ros-Lehtinen also introduced H.R. 957, the Iran Sanctions Amendments Act, which she claims “will close loopholes in current law by holding export credit agencies, insurers, and other financial institutions accountable for their facilitation of investments in Iran and sanction them as well.” In addition, H.R. 957 seeks to impose liability on parent companies for violations of sanctions by their foreign entities. She also co-sponsored H.R 1357 which requires “U.S. government pension funds to divest from companies that do any business with any country that does business with Iran.” Her campaign literature states that, “She was proud to be the leading Republican sponsor of H.R. 1400, the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act. This bill applies and enhances a wide range of additional sanctions.”
In addition, last year Illeana introduced H.R. 394, which enlarges US Federal Court Jurisdiction regarding claims by American citizens their claims in U.S. courts. Unclear is whether she realizes that one consequence of her initiative would be to open even wider US courtroom doors to Iranian-Americans and Syria-Americans who today are being targeted and damaged by the lady’s ravenous insatiable craving for civilian targeting economic sanctions.
But Ileana and Elliot appear to be fretting.

So is Israel.

The reasons are several and they include the fact that the US-led sanctions have failed to date to achieve the accomplishments they were designed to produce. These being to cripple the Iranian economy, provoke a popular protest among the Iranian people over inflation and scarcity of food and medicines, weaken Iran as much as possible before adopting military measures against it, and, most essentially, achieving regime change to turn the clock back to those comfortable days of our submissive, compliant Shah.

Zionist prospects for Syria aren’t any better at the moment. Tel Aviv’s to intimidate the White House into invading Syria have not worked. Plan A has failed miserably according to the Israeli embassy people attending the Engel-Ros Litinen’s informal conflab. Neither did the “how about we just arm the opposition” plan that originated last year with David H. Petraeus and was supported by Hillary Clinton while being pushed by AIPAC. The goal was to create allies in Syria that the US and Israel could control if Mr.Assad was removed from power. Moreover, the White House believes thatthere are no good options for Obama. It has vetoed 4 recent Israeli proposals including arming the rebels and is said to believe that Syria is already dangerously awash with “unreliable arms.”
The recent shriveling in Israeli prospects for a dramatic Pentagon intervention in Syria reflect White House war weariness. And also Israel’s predilection to bomb targets itself in Syria, as it did recently to assassinate a senior Iranian officer in the Quds force of the Revolutionary Guards, Gen. Hassan Shateri. Contrary to the false story that Israel attacked a missiles convoy, some unassembled equipment was damaged but that was not the primary target according to Fred Hof, a former U.S. State Department official. Gen. Shateri was.
Golani Brigade soldier Osher Maman
posts photos of himself playing with weapons in irresponsible ways
Making matters worse for Tel Aviv, the Israeli military is reportedly becoming skittish due to its deteriorating political and military status in the region and its troops have recently completed subterranean warfare drills to prepare them for a potential clash with Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, the Jerusalem Post reported on 2/20/13.

“Today during training, we simulated a northern terrain, that included what we might encounter,” Israeli Lt. Sagiv Shoker, commander of a military Reconnaissance Unit of the Engineering Corps, based at the Elikim base in northern Israel near the border with Lebanon explained. Shoker added that his units spent a week focused on how to approach Hezbollah’s alleged underground bunkers and tunnels in South Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley quietly and quickly. 

Israeli forces commander Gantz has been complaining recently to the Israeli cabinet that Hezbollah Special Forces are gaining much valuable experience in Syria fighting highly skilled and motivated al Nusra jihadists and his troops may not be prepared to face them on the battlefield if a conflict erupts. It has been known since 2006 that Israeli soldiers “are having motivation deficits” as Gantz and others have complained.

Ordinary citizens in Iran and Syria with whom this observer met recently, including some with whom he has shared lengthy conversations while posing many questions, cannot ignore the burden of the US-led sanctions in various aspects of their lives. Nor can the Iranian or Syrian governments or their economic institutions. At the beginning of the summer of 2010, and even more so since the summer of 2012, the US-led civilian targeting sanctions imposed were significantly tightened by the Obama administration and its allies.

The administration realized that the sanctions imposed on Iran until then were ineffective and understood that Iran’s steady progress toward nuclear power capability would quickly leave the US with no alternative than the acceptance of a nuclear Iran. But the administration, according to former State Department official Hof, believed that unless it took more drastic measures against Iran, Israel would launch a military strike against Iran which would likely destroy Zionist Israel- a prospect not every US official and Congressional staffer privately laments. Congressional sources report that the White House now feels that Iran has achieved deterrence and that Israel would be dangerously foolhardy to attack the country.
While Israel advocates an economic blockade of Iran and Syria, under binding rules of international and US law, economic blockades are acts of war. They are variously defined as surrounding a nation with hostile forces, economic besieging, preventing the passage in or out of a country of civilian supplies or aid. It is an act of naval warfare to block access to a country’s coastline and deny entry to all vessels and aircraft, absent a formal declaration of war and approval of the UN Security Council.
All treaties to which America is a signatory, including the UN Charter, are binding US law. Chapter VII authorizes only the Security Council to “determine the existence of any threat to the peace, or act of aggression (and, if necessary, take military or other actions to) restore international peace and stability.” It permits a nation to use force (including a blockades) only under two conditions: when authorized by the Security Council or under Article 51 allowing the “right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member….until the Security Council has taken measures to maintain international peace and security.”
As International law Professor Francis Boyle reminds us, Customary International Law recognizes economic blockades as an act of war because of the implied use of force even against third party nations in enforcing the blockade. Writes Boyle,“Blockades as acts of war have been recognized as such in the Declaration of Paris of 1856 and the Declaration of London of 1909 that delineate the international rules of warfare.” America approved these Declarations, thereby are became binding US law as well “as part of general international law and customary international law.” US presidents Dwight Eisenhower and Jack Kennedy, called economic blockades acts of war.
So has the US Supreme Court.
In Bas v. Tingy (1800), the US Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of fighting an “undeclared war” (read extreme economic sanctions). It ruled the seizure of a French vessel (is) an act of hostility or reprisal. The Court cited Talbot v. Seaman (1801) in ruling that “specific legislative authority was required in the seizure. In Little v. Barreme (1804), the Court held that “even an order from the President could not justify or excuse an act that violated the laws and customs of warfare. Chief Justice John Marshall wrote that a captain of a United States warship could be held personally liable in trespass for wrongfully seizing a neutral Danish ship, even though” presidential authority ordered it.
“The Prize Cases” (1863) is perhaps the most definitive US Supreme Court ruling on economic blockades requiring congressional authorization. The case involved President Lincoln’s ordering “a blockade of coastal states that had joined the Confederacy at the outset of the Civil War. The Court….explicitly (ruled) that an economic blockade is an act of war and is legal only if properly authorized under the Constitution.”

Iran and Syria pose no threat to the US or any peaceful law abiding nation. Imposing a blockade against either violates the UN Charter and settled international humanitarian laws as well as US law. It would constitute an illegal act of aggression that under the Nuremberg Charter is the designated a “supreme international crime”above all others. It would render the Obama administration and every government of other participating nations criminally liable.
IRGC: Key Stage of “Great Prophet 8” Kicks Off
Contrary to what the occupiers of Palestine may fantasize, if the White House wants an economic blockade of Iran or Syria it must declare war, letting the American people be heard on the subject and convince the UN Security Council to pass a UNSCR under Chapter 7.
The White House cannot legally, morally or consistently with claimed American humanitarian values continue to target civilian populations with economic sanctions on the cheap.

Franklin LambFranklin Lamb is doing research in Syria and can be reached c/o

He is the author of The Price We Pay: A Quarter-Century of Israel’s Use of American Weapons Against Civilians in Lebanon.
He contribute to Uprooted Palestinians Blog
Please Sign
Beirut Mobile: +961-70-497-804
Office: +961-01-352-127

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Erdogan will drink the poison in the same cup that he wanted Assad to drink

بقلم: سعيد سليمان سنا
دام برس:
كرّرها الناتو طويلا .. سورية ليست ليبيا وكان فعلاً يقصد ما يقول لأن سورية فعلاً ليست ليبيا . لكن في السر وتحت الطاولة كان الناتو ( الأمريكي ) يقول لحلفائه ( قطر ، وتركيا ) سورية مثل ليبيا ، وجسر الشغور وإدلب مثل بنغازي ، وكم راهن ( الأتراك و القطريون ) على إقامة منطقة عازلة ، وكانت تدرك واشنطن أن المنطقة العازلة ستكون مثل دارفور وليس مثل بنغازي ، على عكس ما وعد الناتو حلفاؤه حين حاول توريطهم بورطة كبيرة يفاوض فيها على رؤوسهم ، لأن الناتو يدرك تماماً أن الحظر الجوي على سورية يعني احتراق الشرق الأوسط وربما العالم .
الناتو كان يريد من منطقة جسر الشغور أو إدلب أن تتحوّل إلى دارفور مشتعلة يتمّ التفاوض مع السوريين عليها ، وأن تُستعمل هذه المنطقة لجر أسماء كبار الضباط والقادة إلى محكمة الجنايات الدولية للتفاوض مع سورية ،
يبقى السؤال بعد صمت طويل وطول انتظار : هل سيعود أوغلوا و أردوغان إلى التحدث بشؤون سورية قبل الإفطار وبعده وقبل الغداء وبعد الحمّام .
إن ما حدث في المناطق السورية وجبل الزاوية تحديدا أثبت لهم أن : جلّ ما سيقدمه الناتو هو القليل من المرتزقة ، ونعتقد أن الأتراك قد فهموا الرسالة ، ولكن القطريين ربما الأمر ليس بيدهم أن يفهموا الرسالة .
فالحملة التي تشنها فرنسا وإسرائيل ودول الخليج على تركيا تدل على أن الأتراك فهموا تماماً ألرسالة بل وفهموا أنّ الروس ربّما قد يقبلوا بخط غاز ( I T G I ) ولكن يستحيل أن يمر خط غاز ( NAPCO ) في المدى القريب ، والأتراك يدركون أنّ الغرب إذا ما ورّطهم فهم محاصرون ، ولكن إذا عاقبهم فلهم محيطهم ، نعم العالم يرسم من جديد وملوك النفط يحلمون بالبقاء في الماضي .

الساسة الأتراك اندفعوا صوب سوريا بطريقة غريبة خصوصا بعد فشل سياساتهم بتقاسم النفوذ مع إيران في العراق ، وبعد يأسهم من الدخول كعضو فاعل في الاتحاد الأوربي ، فقرروا التدخل في سوريا لإحراج إيران وإذلال أوربا في المستقبل . كانوا يظنون بأن القضية السورية مجرد أسابيع أو أشهر بسيطة وتنتهي الحكاية ، وتصبح سوريا من حصّة تركيا ، وحينها تساوم إيران في سوريا ولبنان وصولا للعراق أو تعرض صفقة ما على الإيرانيين أدواتها طائفية واقتصادية .

ومن الجانب الآخر كان في خلد تركيا إذلال أوربا و أنها ستكون ألجابي الذي لن يرحم ، والذي سيفرغ جيوب الجميع بضمنهم قادة الخليج ، والأوربيين ،
وفي نفس الوقت تذل الروس سياسيا من خلال سلاح الاقتصاد .
لقد ظن الساسة الأتراك بأن تركيا ستصبح الاب الروحي والأخ الأكبر " العراب " للقادة الجدد في سوريا ، وبالتالي ستمسك الخيوط كلها ،وسوف تقف بوجه جميع الخطوط الإستراتيجية وفي طريق جميع المخططات الإقليمية والدولية ،
وحينها تعلن بأنها الشرطي صاحب الهراوة في المنطقة فتخيل الساسة الأتراك بأمرهم سوف : 
  • لن تمر أنابيب الغاز القطرية إلى المتوسط إلاّ بموافقة تركية .
  • ولن يمر خط الحرير الاستراتيجي النازل من أفغانستان مرورا ببحر العرب فالخليج فالعراق فسوريا وصولا لمياه البحر المتوسط فأوربا . إلا بموافقة تركية .
  • ولن يمر ويصمد " الهلال الشيعي " من إيران نحو لبنان مرورا بسوريا بفعل الهلال السني الذي سترعاه تركيا .
  • ولن يبقى في لبنان نفوذا للسعودية وسوريا .
  • ولن يتحقق لها النفوذ السني في المثلث العراقي إلا بمشاركة تركية .
  • ولن يمر أنبوب الغاز العربي من مصر عبر سوريا والأردن إلا بقرار تركي .
  • ولن تحصل علي غاز أوربا منخفض الأسعار ، إلا من خلال الموافقة التركية ، وبعد دفع الرشاوى والرسوم الى تركيا .
فكل ما ورد أعلاه حفز الروس ليرموا بثقلهم خلف النظام السوري لأنها حرب اقتصادية شرسة وقذرة بالضد من روسيا ورأس حربتها دولة قطر وتركيا ومن ورائهما الولايات المتحدة ،
لأن وصول الغاز القطري الى مياه البحر المتوسط قبالة الساحل السوري سوف يصل لأوربا وبأسعار مخفضة فيعني كساد الغاز الروسي الذي تعتمد عليه أوربا .
وهذا ما دفع الأوربيين لدعم تركيا وبقوة بالضد من النظام في سوريا لأنهم أرادوا استعمال تركيا كشرطي وناطور ،

وحال اكتمال المخطط ستشاهد تكون المساومة بعضوية الإتحاد الأوربي أومن خلال تغيير النظام في تركيا وبأساليب كثيرة وبدعم واشنطن .

أما الصين فهي حليف رئيسي لإيران ، وأن أي ضعف لإيران يعني الضعف للصين ، وأن أي انهيار لإيران سيكون عاملا مهددا بل انهيارا قادما نحو الصين ، فسارعت لتقف الى جانب روسيا بدعم النظام السوري لأن الصين عرفت وتيقنت بأن ما يدور في سوريا هو مقدمة لما سيدور في إيران ،
وعرفت وتيقنت وأسوة بروسيا وإيران بأن بقاء الرئيس الأسد هو الذي يمنع تحقيق تلك الآمال التركية والأوربية والأمريكية ، ولهذا اصطفت أنقرة والدوحة والرياض وواشنطن والقاهرة وأوربا لتطالب بإسقاط الرئيس بشار الأسد خروجه من الحكم ،
أما السعودية فوجدتها الفرصة الذهبية لإبعاد الخلايا المتطرفة بعيدا ونحو سوريا ، ووجدتها فرصة ذهبية لتجامل واشنطن ومن جديد برفدها بالمسلحين وبالخلايا المتطرفة والوهابية لدعم المشروع الأميركي في سوريا ، وفرصة لتحسين جبهتها الداخلية وتعطيل المشاريع التغييرية في المملكة ،
والأهم وجدتها فرصة ذهبية لإسقاط " الهلال الشيعي " من خلال الخلايا المتطرفة والوهابية وفلول القاعدة، وكذلك من خلال تركيا .
ولدى السعودية أمنية أخرى وهي إسقاط حزب الله لتعود الحاكم الفعلي في لبنان .
كل هذا عرفته طهران فرسمت خططها على ضوء هذا الصراع ومن خلال النفس الطويل والصبر الجميل .
ولكن المتضرر ولحد هذه الساعة فهو ليس النظام السوري بل هي تركيا والخلايا المسلحة المتحالفة مع الإرهابيين في داخل سوريا والتي تمولها السعودية وقطر عبر تركيا وأطراف لبنانية ،
وأن الأطراف المحرجة ليست العراق أو إيران أو النظام السوري ، بل هي الجامعة العربية " العبريّة " و قطر والسعودية ودول الخليج وجميع الأطراف المؤججة للصراع ! ..
الولايات المتحدة آمنت بنظرية المغامرة والتخريب ونشر الفوضى ،
فليس من مصلحة الدول الأوروبية وبعض الدول العربية من مرافقة الولايات المتحدة نحو صياغة خطوات الشر ضد سوريا
" وليس كل مرة تسلم الجرّة " .
ويجب على الحكام العرب الذين لا زالت تطير من أراضيهم الطائرات الأميركية أن : يخجلوا ، ويضعوا حدا لهذا التمادي والاشتراك بالجريمة الإنسانية الكبرى ..!
فبعد نجاح الجيش السوري بصد الحرب الكونية في سوريا ، والتي اهم الحركات الجهادية والإرهابية أدواتها ومن مختلف التسميات .
وكذلك بعد نجاح الإدارة السورية في أدارة الأزمة في سوريا وعدم الانجرار نحو التهور راحت الدول الداعمة للإرهاب في سوريا لتفتضح أمام شعوبها ، وأمام الرأي العام العربي والإقليمي والدولي .
والأهم بعد أن عرفت الولايات المتحدة بأن ما يجري في سوريا قد يكون الكود السري لحرب إقليمية أو حتى حرب عالمية ثالثة وحينها سيكون أول الخاسرين وأول الضحايا هي إسرائيل والمصالح الأميركية في المنطقة بأسرها ولمصلحة تنظيم القاعدة ، وتنظيمات الجهاد الإسلامي وقوى أخرى مناوئة لواشنطن. خصوصا عندما برزت حقيقة ماثلة للعيان وهي أن :
بقاء الرئيس السوري بشار الأسد هو الذي يمنع الحرب الأهلية وهو الذي يقف بوجه " أفغنة " سوريا ،
لأن هناك مؤامرة لاستنزاف الدولة السورية وتهديم صرح الدولة وتحويل سوريا الى جمهورية موز فقيرة تتصارع فيها المافيات وزعماء الحرب .
وأن إسرائيل شعرت ولأول مرة بأن مقولة " الرمي في البحر " باتت شبه حقيقة وتقترب شيئا فشيئا من إسرائيل ،
ولكن بعد تدمير المنطقة بأسرها وللأبد فيما لو حسبنا أعداد الصواريخ النووية والأسلحة الذرية التي بحوزة إسرائيل ......
فالجيش السوري وعندما إستمات في الدفاع عن سوريا وعن نفسه يعرف جيدا أن بانتظاره : سيناريو الجيش العراقي بعد سقوط نظام صدام ، وأنه يعرف بأن الولايات المتحدة والغرب يريدان فرض ثقافة عسكرية جديدة في سوريا على أنقاض الثقافة السائدة ، ستكون مهمة الجيش السوري هي حماية إسرائيل والمشاركة بدعم واشنطن في حربها ضد ما يسمى بالإرهاب ومن خلال تأسيس جيش سوري هجين وجديد! وأن قادة الجيش السوري والقادة السياسيين والأمنيين وحتى كبار العلماء والمثقفين السوريين باتوا يعرفون بأن مصيرهم الاجتثاث والقتل والتهجير والسجن وأسوة بما حدث في العراق . وفي أحسن الأحوال إجبارهم على العمل في دول الخليج والأردن ضمن مؤامرة خليجية استعملت بالضد من علماء وكفاءات العراق وليبيا ،

والشعب السوري بات يعرف بأن ما يحدث هي مؤامرة كبيرة جدا وليس لها علاقة بالإصلاح ، وأن من يريد الإصلاح لا يدمر المدن والمنشآت والعملة والبنية التحتية في سوريا . فصار هناك وعيا بأن هناك حرب كونية في سوريا ومن مصلحة السوريين الصمود وإفشالها .

فحتى المعارضة السورية ليس لها رابط، وليس لها قيادة ، وحتى أن هناك جماعات تذبح وتفجر وتقتل وتنهب وتحتل القرى والنواحي وهي لا تعرف لماذا تعمل هكذا ؟ . ولا تعرف لمصلحة من ؟ . خصوصا هؤلاء الغرباء الوافدين للقتل والتفجير والذبح فأن كانوا يريدون الشهادة فلماذا لا يذهبون صوب إسرائيل ! .

لهذا فالجيش السوري وحسب المعلومات التي حصلنا عليها من اطراف سورية رفيعة قادر علي إنهاء التمرد تماما ، وفي غضون أسبوع ولكنه قرر تأجيل الحسم لما بعد الانتخابات الأميركية ، ويبدو أن هناك تفاهم سري بين " واشنطن و موسكو عبر دمشق " ومن خلال الهندسة الإيرانية بأن : لا يتم زيادة وتيرة الصراع في سوريا، خصوصا عندما أنذرت واشنطن الدول التي تمد المسلحين السوريين بالسلاح والعتاد والمال .

فحتى وأن أجبر الرئيس السوري جبرا على الدخول في : المشاريع الطائفية " التي يرفضها الأسد جملة وتفصيلا " سوف يجد وطنا جاهزا ، وهو أهم منطقة في سوريا ، وهي الساحل السوري ، بحيث سوف تمر عليه جميع خطوط الطاقة التي سببت الصراع في سوريا . ]] أي من يريد إسقاط الأسد في دمشق بسبب أمداد خطوط الغاز القطري والمصري ، سوف يظهر لهم الأسد في الساحل السوري وسوف يقف بوجه خطوط الغاز من جديد . [[ وخصوصا عندما نجح السوريون بربط الشريط الساحلي السوري مع الجنوب اللبناني حيث " حزب الله "

خلال الشهر الأخير ، وهي الرسالة الاستراتيجية والبالغة الأهمية التي أرسلها الرئيس الأسد والسيد نصر الله معا آلي واشنطن وباريس وبروكسل ولندن والى الدوحة وأنقرة والقاهرة والرياض والتي مفادها ] ها نحن أغلقنا الطريق على مخططاتكم أيضا [ .
من هنا سارعت الاستخبارات الدولية لتتخلص من رجل أمريكا في لبنان و رئيس فرع المعلومات في لبنان اللواء " وسام الحسن " لكي تصبح للدول الأوربية حجة للتدخل في لبنان ، وهذا ما حصل فعلا ، لا بل راحت تلك الدول لتقف بوجه أمنيات المعارضة اللبنانية التي يقودها فريق 14 آذار بزعامة الحريري ، وأعلنت دعمها لحكومة ميقاتي أي الدول الأوربية ، لا بل راح وليد جنبلاط ليبتعد عن سعد الحريري ، ويرسل الإشارات الودية لطهران وحزب الله . وكلها توسلات استباقية لحزب الله وطهران .
واستجداء أوربي أن لا ينفجر لبنان وتخسر أوربا كل شيء ومعها واشنطن التي دفعت بالأوربيين الى هذه المواقف .
السؤال :
  • أين ستتجه الحركات والمجاميع الإرهابية بعد دحرها من قبل الجيش السوري قريبا ؟ .
  • أين يتجه الغرباء الذين شحنتهم تركيا بأموال قطرية وسعودية نحو العمق السوري بعد دحرهم قريبا ؟ .
  • أين سيذهب السلفيون المتشددون الذين اشترتهم الرياض وقطر من السجون الأردنية والمغاربية ؟ .
  • أين سيذهب فلول القاعدة التي أتت بها تركيا وقطر والرياض من ليبيا والشيشان والعراق والمغرب العربي ؟ .
لن تدوم الفرحة التركية باستقطاب المستثمرين من السعودية وقطر والدول الخليجية ، فسوف تهرب المليارات الخليجية من تركيا قريبا وربما تعود للاستثمار في سوريا نفسها ! . ولن تنفع السياسة المذهبية التي يتبعها أردوغان في المدن العلوية ، بل ستكون سببا بخروج المارد " العلوي " والذي سيتشاطر مع المارد " الكردي " ضد النظام التركي بزعامة حزب العدالة والتنمية . فتركيا وحتى وأن بدأت عمليات الإعمار والترميم في سوريا فلن تحصل تركيا على شيء .
أما في العراق فهناك توجه رسمي وشعبي بعدم التعامل مع الشركات التركية بعد اكتشاف أن تلك الشركات التركية مليئة بالعيون الاستخبارية في جميع الدول التي تعمل فيها بضمنها العراق .

فتركيا ومثلما يقال باللهجة الشعبية : " بلعت الخازوق " . وسقط شعارها الذي رفعته : " صفر مشاكل " نحو شعار فرضته وستفرضه الظروف على تركيا هو " ألف مشاكل " فتركيا بانتظار عودة ما صدرته الى سوريا من إرهاب وموت ! .

لقد سقطت الأقنعة ، ومن أسقطها هو الجيش العربي السوري البطل و صمود القيادة السورية وحنكة في ادارة الأزمة .
عندما تغرق تركيا في مستنقع الخراب والتفجيرات والدماء هذا يعني إنهاء الأحلام التركية وللأبد بأن تصبح دولة عضو في الاتحاد الأوربي وسوف تصبح دولة شرق اوسطية بامتياز . أي سوف تصبح بيد الأوربيين حجة بعدم قبولها بينهم ، وهذا يعني أن الاستراتيجية الإسرائيلية بالضد من تركيا تخدم المخططات الأوربية بالنسبة لتركيا .

وهنا نستطيع القول سوف يشرب أردوغان سما بنفس الكأس الذي أراد أن يسقي به الأسد ! . أي سوف يعود الإرهاب الذي أشرفت عليه الحكومة التركية بزعامة أردوغان وأوغلو الى الحضن التركي وسوف يحرق أصابعهما ! .
التاريخ يعيد نفسه في سوريا ،
ولا ندري هل لسر الحروف التي تجمع : " روسيا بـ : سوريا " هي السر ، أم أن هناك سر أخر ؟ .
من يتابع سير الأحداث في العالم العربي ومنطقة الشرق الأوسط يشعر بأن ما يجري : شبيه بسير الأحداث والسيناريوهات التي أعقبت الغزو السوفيتي لأفغانستان ، حيث عمليات التجميع للحشد الهائل لما يسمى بالمجاهدين والحركات الجهادية والسلفية وإرسالها للدول العربية بحجة الجهاد وتحرير الشعوب من الطغاة والديكتاتوريين ، وكل هذا بتمويل سعودي وخليجي ، وبتخطيط أميركي غربي إسرائيلي .

الخداع والغش والاحتشاد غير المسبوق ضد سوريا،
وكأننا نستذكر احتشاد الدول الخليجية والخلايا المتطرفة والجماعات الجهادية وأمريكا والغرب ضد الاتحاد السوفيتي في أفغانستان .

ما لذي حصل ويحصل ؟ .
ومن قال أن بن علي ، ومبارك ، وصالح ، والقذافي ، والأسد أكثر ديكتاتورية من حكّام الخليج وبعض الدول العربية التي ساندت عمليات الغزو و التغييرات التي حصلت في تلك الدول ، والأخرى الدائرة بطريقة بربرية في سوريا ؟
سوريا تجيد وأجادت التفرّج على الخصوم والأعداء ، ليس من باب الخوف أو الإٍستكانة ،ولكن من باب الحكمة ، ومن باب أن لا تكون هي البادية بأمر قد لا تحمد عقباه ، وهي المبادئ الأخلاق الإسلامية في زمن الصراع والحروب ، والتي تنصح بالتروي مع الاستعداد للصد والتوغل وأخذ زمام المبادرة ، وأنّ هذا التفرّج أتعب إسرائيل والولايات ألمتحدة ، و أتعب خصوم سوريا من اللبنانيين وغيرهم ،
الذين يتمنون أن يشاهدوا أعمدة الدخان والحرائق تنبعث من دمشق لا سمح الله ، وعلى طريقة خصوم العراق من الكويتيين سابقا ولاحقا ، ولكن هذا لا يعمم على الشعب اللبناني وعقلاء لبنان ، وكذلك لا يعمم على الشعب الكويتي وعقلاء الكويت .
وبقيت الخصلة الأخرى أو السياسة الأخرى أو الحكمة الأخرى التي أجادها السوريون وهي الكتمان المحمود للخصوم وللأعداء ،
فقد قالها السوريون : " كل ما يخص الأمن لن نعلن عنه " . وأنّ الكتمان هنا ليس كتمان الأشرار واللصوص والذين يقطعون الطرقات ، والذين يغيّرون جغرافياتهم بين فترة وأخرى ، بل أنّه كتمان محمود تحركه اليقظة ، وفي جغرافية واحدة وهي سوريا ،
ولهذا أصبحت الولايات المتحدة ومن معها ، وإسرائيل ومن معها يحسبون ألف حساب قبل الشروع بأية مغامرة أو محاولة لجس النبض السوري ، ومعرفة ردة الفعل السورية بل معرفة الكمائن السورية .
 ولقد جرّبوا من قبل وفشلوا .
ودون أن تكشف سوريا أسرار قوتها نتيجة الغضب وردة الفعل والتي اعتادوا عليها من خصومهم العرب ،وعبر تاريخ الصراع العربي الإسرائيلي ، ولهذا صعّدت صحفهم العبرية ، ومنابرهم السياسية والخطابية ومنذ العدوان الإسرائيلي على لبنان " حرب تموز " ولحد هذه اللحظة ضد سوريا ، بأنّها :
  • تصّنع سلاحا فتاكا ،
  • وأنّها تهرب الأسلحة صوب لبنان ،
  • وأنّها استوردت سلاحا سريا من روسيا ،
  • وأنّها شريكة لطهران في صنع الصواريخ ،
  • وأنّها هرّبت السلاح عبر تركيا ،
وتهم كثيرة ومختلفة ، بحيث أصبحنا عاجزين من اللحاق بها كي ندونها ونناقشها .... علما أنّها وسيلة من وسائل الاستفزاز والحرب النفسية . لهذا يسرنا أن ننضم الى طابور الناصحين والمحذرين
قالوا لا يكفي أن تكون في النور لترى ، بل يجب أن يكون ما تراه في النور، ونحن السوريون نقول ساخرين : " قد يكفي أن تملك مناظير ليلية ، وترى أينما كنت . "  
.River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!


Posted on February 22, 2013 by Libya 360°

Lavrov: Washington Vetoing UNSC Condemnation of Damascus Bombing Indicates Double Standards

Feb 22, 2013
MOSCOW/NEW YORK, (SANA) – Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, said the US vetoing a Security Council statement condemning the terrorist bombing which hit Damascus on Thursday stresses that it deals with double standards towards terrorism.
Following his talks with his Chinese counterpart, Yang Jiechi, Lavrov voiced Moscow’s frustration with the fact that all member states of the UNSC without exception were until recently inclined towards the position of condemning any attacks regardless of their perpetrators, place and motives.
He noted that the terrorist bombing took place near the Russian Embassy in Damascus and caused damage to the building and claimed a very large number of victims among the Syrians.
“This opposition by our American partners…is not the first time in which they seek a form that justifies those who fight the Syrian regime,” said Lavrov.
“Russia sees in the American position an application of double standards and a dangerous approach in terms of the Americans moving away from the main principle of condemning terrorism in all its forms,” he added.
He called upon all the parties concerned to be guided by the Geneva Statement issued on June 30, 2012.
Lavrov reiterated stress on Russia and China’s stance which calls for respecting the terms of the UN Charter and preventing military intervention and the use of force as a means to solve the crisis in Syria, the Iranian nuclear file and the situation in Afghanistan.
For his part, the Chinese Foreign Minister said his country unconditionally condemns Damascus bombings, stressing that Beijing supports an unbiased approach towards the crisis in Syria.
Russia’s UN Permanent Mission: Foiling UNSC Condemnation of Terrorist Bombings in Damascus Unacceptable
Meanwhile, Russia’s permanent mission to the UN criticized the United States for the failure of the UN Security Council to issue a Russian draft resolution condemning the terrorist bombings in Damascus.
Russia Today quoted Russia’s UN mission as saying in a statement that Russia considers the US stance unacceptable, adding that “It is obvious that by doing so the US delegation encourages those who have been repeatedly targeting American interests, including US diplomatic missions.”
It is not the first time that the US hinders taking an indispensible reaction by the UN Security Council to a terrorist attack, the statement added, pointing out that the Russian side considers such efforts to find justifications for such terrorist practices unacceptable.
R. Raslan/H. Said

US justifies terrorism by blocking Damascus bombing condemnation – Russia

February 22, 2013
Burning after a powerful car bomb exploded near the headquarters of Syria's ruling Baath party in the centre of Damascus.(AFP Photo / Sana)
Burning after a powerful car bomb exploded near the headquarters of Syria’s ruling Baath party in the centre of Damascus.(AFP Photo / Sana)
Russia has accused the US of blocking a draft UN Security Council statement condemning the suicide bombings in the Syrian capital, which were among the deadliest in the two years of the armed conflict. The US blamed Russia in return.
The draft document submitted by Russia was aiming to express condolences to the victims of the Thursday attack on Damascus, which killed at least 53 people and wounded more than 250, and to condemn terrorism in any form.
But the adoption was blocked by the US and its allies, which wanted to add language condemning the Syrian President Bashar Assad, a move that Russia could not accept.
“Unfortunately, such an indispensable reaction by the Security Council to this terrorist attack has been once again blocked by the US delegation linking it with other questions,” the office of, Vitaly Churkin, Russia’s envoy to the UN, said.
“We consider unacceptable this search for justifications for terrorist actions. It is obvious that by doing so the US delegation encourages those who have been repeatedly targeting American interests, including US diplomatic missions,” the statement added.
The words are a thinly-veiled reference to the September 2012 attack on the US diplomatic mission in Libya’s Benghazi, in which America’s ambassador to the country and three other staff members were killed by Al-Qaeda-linked militants. Russia’s embassy in Damascus was among the buildings damaged by the suicide bombings, which Syria says were also carried out by Al-Qaeda-linked militants.

Damaged vehicles and the Russian embassy building (rear C) are seen after an explosion in central Damascus February 21, 2013.(Reuters / Sana)
Damaged vehicles and the Russian embassy building (rear C) are seen after an explosion in central Damascus February 21, 2013.(Reuters / Sana)
Spokeswoman for the US mission to the UN, Erin Peltin, said“We strongly condemn all indiscriminate terrorist attacks against civilians or against diplomatic facilities.
“We agreed with the Russian draft of a statement from the Security Council and only sought to add similar language on the regime’s brutal attacks against the Syrian people. Unfortunately, Russia refused to engage on a credible text.”
Opponents of the Syrian regime both among the rebel fighters and the international backers of the opposition have been pressuring Assad to step down. They accuse Russia of supporting him despite the thousands of lives the confrontation has claimed, saying most of the violence is his and his government’s fault.
“The problem is that the opposition saying every five minutes that they don’t want to talk to Bashar Assad,” told RT in an interview UN and Arab League special envoy to Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi.
The latest opposition demand for Assad to step down comes in a political statement from the Western-, Arab- and Turkish-backed Syrian National Coalition, which the body adopted after a late session on Thursday in Cairo.
The statement was passed after an angry debate, in which some members both Islamist and liberal camps of the 70-strong body criticized their chief Moaz Khatib for his earlier proposal of talks without setting a “clear goal”, as the critics said.
“We have adopted a political document that sets the parameters for any talks. The main addition to the draft is a clause about the necessity of Assad stepping step down,” said Abdelbasset Sida, a member of the coalition’s 12-member politburo and one of Khatib’s critics.
Russia has on many occasions insisted that the personal fate of Assad is not Moscow’s concern. But Moscow insists that Assad staying in power or stepping down can only be discussed after the violence is stopped and a diplomatic solution to the conflict in found, and cannot be a precondition for negotiations. It offers itself as mediator for possible talks between Damascus and the opposition, including hosting such a meeting in Moscow.
Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem is due for talks in Moscow. Russia hopes that Khatib will also visit soon in search of a breakthrough.

Moscow blasts US for blocking UN declaration on Syria attack

Russia is disappointed with the US’s decision to block a declaration, initiated by Russia, to condemn a terror act in Syria, where 53 were killed, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Friday. “So far all the members of the UN Security Council, without exception, have always resolutely condemned any terrorist acts,” he said. Thursday’s explosion was probably caused by a car bomb that detonated in the Al Mazraa district in central Damascus.

UN must condemn terrorist attack in Syria: Foreign Ministry

Smoke rises from burning vehicles following a car bomb attack in the Syrian capital, Damascus. (File photo)
Smoke rises from burning vehicles following a car bomb attack in the Syrian capital, Damascus. (File photo)
Syria has called on the United Nations to issue a clear condemnation of the deadly attack that left more than 50 people dead in the Syrian capital, Damascus.
In letters to the UN secretary general and the chairman of the UN Security Council on Thursday, the Syrian Foreign Ministry said the Council’s firm stance against the violent act will send a message to the terrorist groups and those who support them.
“But if the UNSC turns a blind eye to this terrorist act just as it did previously, it will deepen doubts in its seriousness in combating terrorism and its commitment to implementing its resolutions in this regard,” the ministry said.
On Thursday, at least 53 people lost their lives and 250 others were injured in a powerful bomb explosion near the headquarters of Syria’s ruling Baath Party and the Russian Embassy in the capital, Damascus.
Following the incident, Syria’s Foreign Ministry said the explosion was “carried out by armed terrorist groups linked to al-Qaeda that receive financial and logistic help from abroad.”
The ministry further said in the letters that the Council’s credibility of fighting terrorism “is now under unprecedented test as the most disgusting form of terrorism hit the Syrian civilians with no mercy or differentiating between an elderly man or a child.”
Many people, including large numbers of security forces, have been killed in the violence that erupted in Syria nearly two years ago.
Damascus says certain Western states, especially the United States, and their regional allies are fueling the unrest.

US encourages militants in Syria by foiling UN condemnation

Syrian security agents carry a body following a huge explosion that shook central Damascus, Syria, February 21, 2013.
Syrian security agents carry a body following a huge explosion that shook central Damascus, Syria, February 21, 2013.
Russia has criticized the United States for the failure of the UN Security Council to issue a condemnation of a car bomb attack by the militants in Syria that left over 50 people dead.
Russia’s UN mission said on Thursday that Washington “encourages” the militants’ deadly attacks in Syria by preventing the Council from issuing statements condemning such acts of violence.
Earlier on Thursday, at least 53 people lost their lives and 250 others were injured in a powerful bomb explosion near the headquarters of Syria’s ruling Baath Party and the Russian Embassy in the capital, Damascus.
The Syrian Foreign Ministry said the explosion was “carried out by armed terrorist groups linked to al-Qaeda that receive financial and logistic help from abroad.”
Following the deadly attack, Russia reportedly proposed a statement to the UN Security Council against the deadly incident.
“The text confirmed the unshakable principles that terrorism in all its forms and manifestations constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security and has no justification,” said Anton Uspensky, spokesman for Russia’s UN mission.
According to UN diplomatic sources, the United States and its Western allies sought to include criticism of the Syrian army in the proposed statement. However, Moscow refused to do so, the sources added.
“Unfortunately, such an indispensable reaction by the Security Council to this terrorist attack has been once again blocked by the US delegation linking it with other questions,” Uspensky added.
He went on to say that Washington’s efforts to find justifications for such “terrorist actions” are “unacceptable.”
“It is obvious that by doing so the US delegation encourages those who have been repeatedly targeting American interests, including US diplomatic missions,” he said.
Moscow has been calling for a resolution to the ongoing unrest in Syria “on the basis of mutual consent” among all sides in the country.
Many people, including large numbers of security forces, have been killed in the violence that erupted in Syria nearly two years ago.
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Palestinians Disqualify U.S. as Peace Broker

palestine (2)The “unbreakable alliance,” which will be confirmed by the upcoming visit of President Barak Obama to Israel , will disqualify the United States as an honest broker of peace in the Arab – Israeli conflict in Palestine , a Palestinian veteran peace negotiator says.

This “unbreakable alliance” will doom whatever hopes remain during Obama’s visit for the revival of the U.S. – sponsored deadlocked “peace process,” on the resumption of which depends the very survival of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ leadership, and explains as well the Palestinian frustration, low expectations, unenthusiastic welcome and the absence of celebrations for their most cherished among world celebrities, in a stark contrast to the euphoria that is sweeping Israel in waiting for what the U.S. and Israeli officials are describing as an “historic” visit.

On February 19, the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office released the official blue, red and white logo that will be on all documents and signs during Obama’s visit late in March. The logo shows the words “Unbreakable Alliance” written in English and Hebrew under a combined Israeli and U.S. flags.
During his visit, Obama will become the first ever serving U.S. president to receive Israel’s presidential medal to honor the fact that he has “established the closest working military and intelligence relationship with Israel in the country’s history: Joint exercises and training, increased security assistance every year, unprecedented advanced technology transfers, doubling of funding for Israel’s missile defense system, and assistance in funding for the Iron Dome system,” according to Steven L. Spiegel in Huffington Post late last year.

Speaking exclusively to RFI Hanan Ashrawi, the Palestinian veteran peace negotiator and member of the executive committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), Israel’s partner in signing the defunct Oslo peace accords, said the first – term Obama administration “have just managed to buy more time for Israel” to “create facts on the (Israeli – occupied Palestinian) ground.”

“Our experience has been really tragic with this American administration,” which “started with such high hopes and tremendous promises,” but “they backed down so quickly it was incredible,” she added, to conclude: “The U.S. has disqualified itself as a peace broker.”

Therefore, “there are no plans to celebrate” Obama’s visit to Ramallah, because “they haven’t forgotten the part he played” in aborting the PLO’s efforts in 2011 to win the United Nations’ recognition of Palestine statehood as a full member and in opposing its UN recognition as a non – member observer state the next year, according to Shlomi Eldar in Al-Monitor on February 14. Still, to make a bad situation worse, Obama will convey the same message to Abbas during his upcoming visit, because “our position has not changed” neither to Palestinian statehood nor to Palestinian national reconciliation according to U.S. State Department spokeswoman Olivia Nuland on February 19.

Obama will visit on the backdrop of a two –year old simmering Palestinian – U.S. political crisis, which potentially could explode in the aftermath of his visit.

The U.S. subscription to the UN recognition of Palestinian statehood would establish irrevocably the prerequisite to make or break the only viable “two – state solution” for the almost century – old conflict, because it would confirm the 1967 borders as the basis for such a solution and, consequently, will for sure defuse the time bomb of the Israeli illegal settlement enterprise in the Palestinian occupied territories and pave the way for the resumption of negotiations. However neither Obama nor the U.S. is forthcoming and they continue to “manage” the conflict instead of seriously seeking to solve it.

Earlier this month, Israel in an unprecedented move boycotted the UN Human Rights Council because a year – long investigation by the council produced a report urging that “Israel must, in compliance with article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, cease all settlement activities without preconditions. It must immediately initiate a process of withdrawal of all settlers from the OPT (occupied Palestinian territories).” The report stated that about 250 settlements were established in the Israeli –occupied Palestinian West Bank where 520,000 settlers live now, which the report said could be subject to prosecution as possible war crimes.

Recently, Yacov Ben Efrat, the General Secretary of the Israeli DAAM Party, wrote in Challenge Magazine that when Obama arrives in the Israel – occupied Palestinian territories “he will see that his policy of appeasing the Israeli right has nearly killed the Palestinian (self- ruled) Authority” economically as well as politically, to conclude: “Having already experienced the Oslo accords, the Palestinians have already seen how the temporary becomes permanent, and there is no way they will accept this.”

“It’s plain and simple: Either the settlements or peace … even Obama won’t get us abandon this principle,” PLO chief negotiator Saeb Erekat was quoted as saying on February 14.

Should Obama decide to act accordingly, he may reinforce the “unbreakable alliance” with Israel to his convenience, from a Palestinian perspective. Otherwise, any initiative by Obama to resume the Palestinian – Israeli peace talks during his upcoming visit to the region will be doomed as a non – starter.

On this February 19, author Marvin Kalb wrote ( “Instead of opening his Mid-East diplomacy with a cutting critique of Israel’s cantankerous settlements policy, often considered the third rail of Israeli politics, … instead of allowing, even encouraging, a discomfiting coolness in Israeli-American relations, … the Israelis and the Palestinians might be engaging in serious, face-to-face negotiations on a peace treaty by this time.”

Releasing a $ 700 million of U.S. blocked Palestinian aid, using U.S. good offices to make Arab donors honor their pledges to them or convincing Israel to release the tax and customs revenue it collects on their behalf are not the kind of U.S. “carrots” that would open a breakthrough
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Terrorism with a “Human Face”: The History of America’s Death Squads)

Death Squads in Iraq and Syria. The Historical Roots of US-NATO's Covert War on Syria

Image: El Salvador Death squads
The recruitment of death squads is part of a well established US military-intelligence agenda. There is a long and gruesome US history of covert funding and support of terror brigades and targeted assassinations going back to the Vietnam war.
As government forces continue to confront the self-proclaimed “Free Syrian Army” (FSA), the historical roots of the West’s covert war on Syria –which has resulted in countless atrocities– must be fully revealed.
From the outset in March 2011, the US and its allies have supported the formation of death squads and the incursion of terrorist brigades in a carefully planned undertaking.
The recruitment and training of terror brigades in both Iraq and Syria was modeled on the “Salvador Option”, a “terrorist model” of mass killings by US sponsored death squads in Central America. It was first applied in El Salvador, in the heyday of resistance against the military dictatorship, resulting in an estimated 75,000 deaths.

The formation of death squads in Syria builds upon the history and experience of US sponsored terror brigades in Iraq, under the Pentagon’s “counterinsurgency” program.

The Establishment of Death Squads in Iraq

US sponsored death squads were recruited in Iraq starting in 2004-2005 in an initiative launched under the helm of the US Ambassador John Negroponte, [image: right] who was dispatched to Baghdad by the US State Department in June 2004.

Negroponte was the “man for the job”. As US Ambassador to Honduras from 1981 to 1985. Negroponte played a key role in supporting and supervising the Nicaraguan Contras based in Honduras as well as overseeing the activities of the Honduran military death squads.
“Under the rule of General Gustavo Alvarez Martinez, Honduras’s military government was both a close ally of the Reagan administration and was “disappearing” dozens of political opponents in classic death squad fashion.”
In January 2005, the Pentagon, confirmed that it was considering:
” forming hit squads of Kurdish and Shia fighters to target leaders of the Iraqi insurgency [Resistance] in a strategic shift borrowed from the American struggle against left-wing guerrillas in Central America 20 years ago”.
Under the so-called “El Salvador option”, Iraqi and American forces would be sent to kill or kidnap insurgency leaders, even in Syria, where some are thought to shelter. …
Hit squads would be controversial and would probably be kept secret.
The experience of the so-called “death squads” in Central America remains raw for many even now and helped to sully the image of the United States in the region.
Then, the Reagan Administration funded and trained teams of nationalist forces to neutralise Salvadorean rebel leaders and sympathisers. …
John Negroponte, the US Ambassador in Baghdad, had a front-row seat at the time as Ambassador to Honduras from 1981-85.
Death squads were a brutal feature of Latin American politics of the time. …
In the early 1980s President Reagan’s Administration funded and helped to train Nicaraguan contras based in Honduras with the aim of ousting Nicaragua’s Sandinista regime. The Contras were equipped using money from illegal American arms sales to Iran, a scandal that could have toppled Mr Reagan.
The thrust of the Pentagon proposal in Iraq, … is to follow that model …
It is unclear whether the main aim of the missions would be to assassinate the rebels or kidnap them and take them away for interrogation. Any mission in Syria would probably be undertaken by US Special Forces.
Nor is it clear who would take responsibility for such a programme — the Pentagon or the Central Intelligence Agency. Such covert operations have traditionally been run by the CIA at arm’s length from the administration in power, giving US officials the ability to deny knowledge of it. (El Salvador-style ‘death squads’ to be deployed by US against Iraq militants – Times Online, January 10, 2005, emphasis added)
While the stated objective of the “Iraq Salvador Option” was to “take out the insurgency”, in practice the US sponsored terror brigades were involved in routine killings of civilians with a view to fomenting sectarian violence. In turn, the CIA and MI6 were overseeing “Al Qaeda in Iraq” units involved in targeted assassinations directed against the Shiite population. Of significance, the death squads were integrated and advised by undercover US Special Forces.
Robert Stephen Ford –subsequently appointed US Ambassador to Syria– was part of Negroponte’s team in Baghdad in 2004-2005. In January 2004, he was dispatched as U.S. representative to the Shiite city of Najaf which was the stronghold of the Mahdi army, with which he made preliminary contacts.

In January 2005, Robert S. Ford’s was appointed Minister Counselor for Political Affairs at the US Embassy under the helm of Ambassador John Negroponte. He was not only part of the inner team, he was Negroponte’s partner in setting up the Salvador Option. Some of the groundwork had been established in Najaf prior to Ford’s transfer to Baghdad.

Robert Stephen Ford –subsequently appointed US Ambassador to Syria– was part of Negroponte’s team in Baghdad in 2004-2005. In January 2004, he was dispatched as U.S. representative to the Shiite city of Najaf which was the stronghold of the Mahdi army, with which he made preliminary contacts.
In January 2005, Robert S. Ford’s was appointed Minister Counselor for Political Affairs at the US Embassy under the helm of Ambassador John Negroponte. He was not only part of the inner team, he was Negroponte’s partner in setting up the Salvador Option. Some of the groundwork had been established in Najaf prior to Ford’s transfer to Baghdad.

John Negroponte and Robert Stephen Ford were put in charge of recruiting the Iraqi death squads. While Negroponte coordinated the operation from his office at the US Embassy, Robert S. Ford, who was fluent in both Arabic and Turkish, was entrusted with the task of establishing strategic contacts with Shiite and Kurdish militia groups outside the “Green Zone”.

Two other embassy officials, namely Henry Ensher (Ford’s Deputy) and a younger official in the political section, Jeffrey Beals, played an important role in the team “talking to a range of Iraqis, including extremists”. (See The New Yorker, March 26, 2007). Another key individual in Negroponte’s team was James Franklin Jeffrey, America’s ambassador to Albania (2002-2004). In 2010, Jeffrey was appointed US Ambassador to Iraq (2010-2012).
Negroponte also brought into the team one of his former collaborators Colonel James Steele (ret) from his Honduras heyday:
Under the “Salvador Option,” “Negroponte had assistance from his colleague from his days in Central America during the 1980′s, Ret. Col James Steele. Steele, whose title in Baghdad was Counselor for Iraqi Security Forces supervised the selection and training of members of the Badr Organization and Mehdi Army, the two largest Shi’ite militias in Iraq, in order to target the leadership and support networks of a primarily Sunni resistance. Planned or not, these death squads promptly spiralled out of control to become the leading cause of death in Iraq.
Intentional or not, the scores of tortured, mutilated bodies which turn up on the streets of Baghdad each day are generated by the death squads whose impetus was John Negroponte. And it is this U.S.-backed sectarian violence which largely led to the hell-disaster that Iraq is today. (Dahr Jamail, Managing Escalation: Negroponte and Bush’s New Iraq Team,., January 7, 2007)

“Colonel Steele was responsible, according to Rep. Dennis Kucinich for implementing “a plan in El Salvador under which tens of thousands Salvadorans “disappeared” or were murdered, including Archbishop Oscar Romero and four American nuns.”
Upon his appointment to Baghdad, Colonel Steele was assigned to a counter-insurgency unit known as the “Special Police Commando” under the Iraqi Interior Ministry” (See ACN, Havana, June 14, 2006)
Reports confirm that “the US military turned over many prisoners to the Wolf Brigade, the feared 2nd battalion of the interior ministry’s special commandos” which so happened to be under supervision of Colonel Steele:
“US soldiers, US advisers, were standing aside and doing nothing,” while members of the Wolf Brigade beat and tortured prisoners. The interior ministry commandos took over the public library in Samarra, and turned it into a detention centre, he said. An interview conducted by Maass [of the New York Times] in 2005 at the improvised prison, accompanied by the Wolf Brigade’s US military adviser, Col James Steele, had been interrupted by the terrified screams of a prisoner outside, he said. Steele was reportedly previously employed as an adviser to help crush an insurgency in El Salvador.” (Ibid, emphasis added)
Another notorious figure who played a role in Iraq’s counter-insurgency program was Former New York Police Commissioner Bernie Kerik [image: Bernie Kerik in Baghdad Police Academy with body guards] who in 2007 was indicted in federal court on 16 felony charges.

Kerik walks amidst a phalanx of bodyguards during visit to the Police Academy in Baghdad, July 2003.Kerik had been appointed by the Bush administration at the outset of the occupation in 2003 to assist in the organization and training of the Iraqi Police force. During his short stint in 2003, Bernie Kerik –who took on the position of interim Minister of the Interior– worked towards organizing terror units within the Iraqi Police force: “Dispatched to Iraq to whip Iraqi security forces into shape, Kerik dubbed himself the “interim interior minister of Iraq.” British police advisors called him the “Baghdad terminator,” (Salon, December 9, 2004, emphasis added)

Under Negroponte’s helm at the US Embassy in Baghdad, a wave of covert civilian killings and targeted assassinations had been unleashed. Engineers, medical doctors, scientists and intellectuals were also targeted.
Author and geopolitical analyst Max Fuller has documented in detail the atrocities committed under the US sponsored counterinsurgency program.
The appearance of death squads was first highlighted in May this year [2005], …dozens of bodies were found casually disposed … in vacant areas around Baghdad. All of the victims had been handcuffed, blindfolded and shot in the head and many of them also showed signs of having been brutally tortured. …
The evidence was sufficiently compelling for the Association of Muslim Scholars (AMS), a leading Sunni organisation, to issue public statements in which they accused the security forces attached to the Ministry of the Interior as well as the Badr Brigade, the former armed wing of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), of being behind the killings. They also accused the Ministry of the Interior of conducting state terrorism (Financial Times).
The Police Commandos as well as the Wolf Brigade were overseen by the US counterinsurgency program in the Iraqi Ministry of the Interior:
The Police Commandos were formed under the experienced tutelage and oversight of veteran US counterinsurgency fighters, and from the outset conducted joint-force operations with elite and highly secretive US special-forces units (Reuters, National Review Online).
A key figure in the development of the Special Police Commandos was James Steele, a former US Army special forces operative who cut his teeth in Vietnam before moving on to direct the US military mission in El Salvador at the height of that country’s civil war. …
Another US contributor was the same Steven Casteel who as the most senior US advisor within the Interior Ministry brushed off serious and well-substantiated accusations of appalling human right violations as ‘rumor and innuendo’. Like Steele, Casteel gained considerable experience in Latin America, in his case participating in the hunt for the cocaine baron Pablo Escobar in Colombia’s Drugs Wars of the 1990s …
Casteel’s background is significant because this kind of intelligence-gathering support role and the production of death lists are characteristic of US involvement in counterinsurgency programs and constitute the underlying thread in what can appear to be random, disjointed killing sprees.
Such centrally planned genocides are entirely consistent with what is taking place in Iraq today [2005] …It is also consistent with what little we know about the Special Police Commandos, which was tailored to provide the Interior Ministry with a special-forces strike capability (US Department of Defense). In keeping with such a role, the Police Commando headquarters has become the hub of a nationwide command, control, communications, computer and intelligence operations centre, courtesy of the US. (Max Fuller, op cit)
This initial groundwork established under Negroponte in 2005 was implemented under his successor Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad. Robert Stephen Ford ensured the continuity of the project prior to his appointment as US Ambassador to Algeria in 2006, as well as upon his return to Baghdad as Deputy Chief of Mission in 2008.

Operation “Syrian Contras”: Learning from the Iraqi Experience

The gruesome Iraqi version of the “Salvador Option” under the helm of Ambassador John Negroponte has served as a “role model” for setting up the “Free Syrian Army” Contras. Robert Stephen Ford was, no doubt, involved in the implementation of the Syrian Contras project, following his reassignment to Baghdad as Deputy Head of Mission in 2008.

The objective in Syria was to create factional divisions between Sunni, Alawite, Shiite, Kurds, Druze and Christians. While the Syrian context is entirely different to that of Iraq, there are striking similarities with regard to the procedures whereby the killings and atrocities were conducted.
A report published by Der Spiegel pertaining to atrocities committed in the Syrian city of Homs confirms an organized sectarian process of mass-murder and extra-judicial killings comparable to that conducted by the US sponsored death squads in Iraq.

People in Homs were routinely categorized as “prisoners” (Shia, Alawite) and “traitors”. The “traitors” are Sunni civilians within the rebel occupied urban area, who express their disagreement or opposition to the rule of terror of the Free Syrian Army (FSA):

“Since last summer [2011], we have executed slightly fewer than 150 men, which represents about 20 percent of our prisoners,” says Abu Rami. … But the executioners of Homs have been busier with traitors within their own ranks than with prisoners of war. “If we catch a Sunni spying, or if a citizen betrays the revolution, we make it quick,” says the fighter. According to Abu Rami, Hussein’s burial brigade has put between 200 and 250 traitors to death since the beginning of the uprising.” (Der Spiegel, March 30, 2012)
The project required an initial program of recruitment and training of mercenaries. Death squads including Lebanese and Jordanian Salafist units entered Syria’s southern border with Jordan in mid-March 2011. Much of the groundwork was already in place prior to Robert Stephen Ford’s arrival in Damascus in January 2011.
Ambassador Ford in Hama in early July 2011

Ford’s appointment as Ambassador to Syria was announced in early 2010. Diplomatic relations had been cut in 2005 following the Rafick Hariri assassination, which Washington blamed on Syria. Ford arrived in Damascus barely two months before the onset of the insurgency.

The Free Syrian Army (FSA)

Washington and its allies replicated in Syria the essential features of the "Iraq Salvador Option"‌, leading to the creation of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and its various terrorist factions including the Al Qaeda affiliated Al Nusra brigades.

While the creation of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) was announced in June 2011, the recruitment and training of foreign mercenaries was initiated at a much an earlier period.

In many regards, the Free Syrian Army is a smokescreen. It is upheld by the Western media as a bona fide military entity established as a result of mass defections from government forces. The number of defectors, however, was neither significant nor sufficient to establish a coherent military structure with command and control functions.

The FSA is not a professional military entity, rather it is a loose network of separate terrorist brigades, which in turn are made up of numerous paramilitary cells operating in different parts of the country.

Each of these terrorist organizations operates independently. The FSA does not effectively exercise command and control functions including liaison with these diverse paramilitary entities. The latter are controlled by US-NATO sponsored special forces and intelligence operatives which are embedded within the ranks of selected terrorist formations.

These (highly trained) Special forces on the ground (many of whom are employees of private security companies) are routinely in contact with US-NATO and allied military/intelligence command units (including Turkey). These embedded Special Forces are, no doubt, also involved in the carefully planned bomb attacks directed against government buildings, military compounds, etc.

The death squads are mercenaries trained and recruited by the US, NATO, its Persian Gulf GCC allies as well as Turkey. They are overseen by allied special forces (including British SAS and French Parachutistes), and private security companies on contract to NATO and the Pentagon. In this regard, reports confirm the arrest by the Syrian government of some 200-300 private security company employees who had integrated rebel ranks.

The Jabhat Al Nusra Front

The Al Nusra Front "which is said to be affiliated to Al Qaeda"“ is described as the most effective "opposition"‌ rebel fighting group, responsible for several of the high profile bomb attacks. Portrayed as an enemy of America (on the State Department list of terrorist organizations), Al Nusra operations, nonetheless, bear the fingerprints of US paramilitary training, terror tactics and weapons systems. The atrocities committed against civilians by Al Nusra (funded covertly by US-NATO) are similar to those undertaken by the US sponsored death squads in Iraq.

In the words of Al Nusra leader Abu Adnan in Aleppo: "Jabhat al-Nusra does count Syrian veterans of the Iraq war among its numbers, men who bring expertise" "especially the manufacture of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) "to the front in Syria."

As in Iraq, factional violence and ethnic cleansing were actively promoted. In Syria, the Alawite, Shiite and Christian communities have been the target of the US-NATO sponsored death squads. The Alawite and the Christian community are the main targets of the assassination program. Confirmed by the Vatican News Service:

Christians in Aleppo are victims of death and destruction due to the fighting which for months, has been affecting the city. The Christian neighborhoods, in recent times, have been hit by rebel forces fighting against the regular army and this has caused an exodus of civilians.
Some groups in the rugged opposition, where there are also jiahadist groups, "fire on Christian houses and buildings, to force occupants to escape and then take possession [ethnic cleansing] (Agenzia Fides. Vatican News, October 19, 2012)
“The Sunni Salafist militants – says the Bishop – continue to commit crimes against civilians, or to recruit fighters with force. The fanatical Sunni extremists are fighting a holy war proudly, especially against the Alawites. When terrorists seek to control the religious identity of a suspect, they ask him to cite the genealogies dating back to Moses. And they ask to recite a prayer that the Alawites removed. The Alawites have no chance to get out alive.”  (Agenzia Fides 04/06/2012)
Reports confirm the influx of Salafist and Al Qaeda affiliated death squads as well as brigades under the auspices of the Muslim Brotherhood into Syria from the inception of the insurgency in March 2011.

Moreover, reminiscent of  the enlistment of  the Mujahideen to wage the CIA’s jihad (holy war) in the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan war, NATO and the Turkish High command, according to Israeli intelligence sources, had initiated”
“a campaign to enlist thousands of Muslim volunteers in Middle East countries and the Muslim world to fight alongside the Syrian rebels. The Turkish army would house these volunteers, train them and secure their passage into Syria. (DEBKAfile, NATO to give rebels anti-tank weapons, August 14, 2011).
Private Security Companies and the Recruitment of Mercenaries
According to reports, private security companies operating out of Gulf States are involved in the recruiting and training of mercenaries.
Although not specifically earmarked for the recruitment of mercenaries directed against Syria, reports point to the creation of  training camps in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
In Zayed Military City (UAE), “a secret army is in the making”  operated by Xe Services, formerly Blackwater.  The UAE deal to establish a military camp for the training of mercenaries was signed in July 2010, nine months before the onslaught of the wars in Libya and Syria.
A Secret Army of Mercenaries for the Middle East and North AfricaIn recent developments, security companies on contract to NATO and the Pentagon are involved in training “opposition” death squads in the use of chemical weapons:
The United States and some European allies are using defense contractors to train Syrian rebels on how to secure chemical weapons stockpiles in Syria, a senior U.S. official and several senior diplomats told CNN Sunday. ( CNN Report, December 9, 2012)
The names of the companies involved were not revealed.

Behind Closed Doors at the US State Department

Robert Stephen Ford was part of a small team at the US State Department team which oversaw the recruitment and training of  terrorist brigades,  together with Derek Chollet  and Frederic C. Hof, a former business partner of Richard Armitage, who served as Washington’s “special coordinator on Syria”. Derek Chollet has recently been appointed to the position of Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs (ISA).
This team operated under the helm of  (former) Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman.

Feltman’s team was in close liaison with the process of recruitment and training of mercenaries out of Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Libya (courtesy of the post-Gaddafi regime, which dispatched six hundred Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) troops to Syria, via Turkey in the months following the September 2011 collapse of the Gaddafi government).
Assistant Secretary of State Feltman was in contact with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal, and Qatari Foreign Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim. He was also in charge of a  Doha-based office for “special security coordination” pertaining to  Syria, which included representatives from Western and GCC intelligence agencies well as a representative from Libya. Prince Bandar bin Sultan. a prominent and controversial member of Saudi intelligence was part of this group. (See Press Tv, May 12, 2012).

In June 2012, Jeffrey Feltman (image: Left) was appointed UN Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, a strategic position  which, in practice, consists in setting  the UN agenda (on behalf of Washington) on issues pertaining to “Conflict Resolution” in various “political hot spots” around the world (including Somalia, Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Mali). In a bitter irony, the countries for UN “conflict resolution” are those which are the target of  US covert operations.
In liaison with the US State Department, NATO and his GCC handlers in Doha and Riyadh, Feltman is Washington’s man behind UN special envoy Lakhdar Brahmi’s “Peace Proposal”.

Meanwhile, while paying lip service to the UN Peace initiative, the US and NATO have speeded up the process of recruitment and training of  mercenaries in response to the heavy casualties incurred by “opposition” rebel forces.

The US proposed “end game” in Syria is not regime change, but the destruction of Syria as a Nation State.

The deployment of “opposition” death squads with a mandate to kill civilians is part of this criminal undertaking.
“Terrorism with a Human Face” is upheld by the United Nations Human Rights Council, which constitutes a mouthpiece for NATO “Humanitarian Interventions” under the doctrine of “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P).

The atrocities committed by the US-NATO death squads are casually blamed on the government of Bashar Al Assad. According to UN Human Rights Council High Commissioner Navi Pillay:

“This massive loss of life could have been avoided if the Syrian Government had chosen to take a different path than one of ruthless suppression of what were initially peaceful and legitimate protests by unarmed civilians,” (quoted in Stephen Lendman, UN Human Rights Report on Syria: Camouflage of US-NATO Sponsored Massacres, Global Research, January 3, 2012)

Washington’s “unspeakable objective” consists in breaking up Syria as a sovereign nation –along ethnic and religious lines– into several separate and “independent” political entities.
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!