Showing posts with label Corporate Media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Corporate Media. Show all posts

Thursday, May 5, 2011

Lauren Booth: ‘Jewishness’, scare tactics, and a sense of humour

Cloak and dagger antics outside a campus in central London, Tuesday night. As, the University of Westminster, caved into threats of disturbance, from UK based Zionists. Why? Because, Gilad Atzmon, world renowned saxophonist, author and anti Zionist racconteur had put together a panel to debate the following; ‘Jewishness and Israeli criminality.’

To a packed venue just round the corner from the campus the discussion, began with breathtakingly robust opening statements.

Consider, as you read, the immense pressure not to take part placed on each panellist. The threats against the university of Westminster of disturbance or even violence if the talk took place. And, should you read a hackneyed report (in the Jewish Chronicle or some such useless organ). Return to this page to revisit the precise nature of the debate.

Alongside Gilad Atzmon, the panel consisted of Alan Hart, author, former Middle East Chief Correspondent for Independent Television News and former BBC Panorama presenter, specialising in the Middle East. And Karl Sabbagh, author, TV producer and publisher.

Gilad began his talk by reminding the audience that causing Zionists to feel outraged; ‘Makes me cheerful’. He has not struggled with his own identity he says accepting with a shrug of his irascible shoulders titles such as ‘proud self-hating Jew.’ His first riff, for that is how he talks, in dramatic sequences, was on the nitty question ‘What is Judaism?’

This, in literal terms is the religion of the Jews. Although, this cannot aptly define the large number of secular Jews.

What is Zionism then?
Zionism, Atzmon contends is NOT a colonial enterprise. It is a tribal setting.
It has nothing whatever to do with Jewish traditions nor Judaism. It is a political cause which cynically uses faith for its ends. Thus Zionism dupes followers of Judaism and secular ‘Jews’ who identify with these traditions, by getting them to emotionally invest into a violent expansionist project, which they would otherwise find repugnant.

Atzmon plunged headlong into a question that few others would consider anything but career suicide.
‘Is Zionism what it is. Because ‘Jews’ are what they are?’ Gilad Atzmon, comes from a secular Jewish family. He was born and raised in Israel. Until his late teens his big dream was to have a shining career in Israeli Defence Force. What he saw in his time in the army as a teenager serving in Lebanon, was enough, he has said, to make him ‘change sides completely.’ He is uniquely placed to ask the unaskable and to say the unsayable.

‘Judaism,’ he said ‘I don’t deal with this as religion. ‘It’ (Judaism) doesn’t kill. People kill in the name of religions’.

‘But what is Jewishness? It is a supremacy. A Chosenness.’

A decade ago, Gilad remembers being something of a ‘darling’ of the UK anti Zionist movement. But he refused to play what he calls ‘the good Jew’. Namely, to become an anti Zionist ‘lite’; A Jewish person willing to condemn certain acts of the Israeli state. Whilst contradictorily arguing the right of ‘Jews’ to have a homeland. On Palestinian land. Such activists often avoid making or worse still retract, important, statements due to social pressure on their families. This works in Israel’s favour and to the detriment of the anti Zionist movement as a whole.

Think Goldstone.

As Gilad continued to insist on his right, as a former Israeli, an academic and a member of a democracy, to look into the darker psychological recesses of the Israeli Jewish mindset, he went from darling to demon. For going on ten years, a number of Jewish anti Zionist (softly, softly) types, have been campaigning hard to black ball Atzmon from events and debates. Atzmon puts this effort squarely down to the topic of this evening, his contention, his amuse bouche; that Jewishness itself means a presumption of superiority that can only inevitably lead to violent tribal expansionism. And Apartheid.

A member of a Palestinian solidarity group made an interesting point telling the hall that,
‘Jews For Justice for Palestinians, wanted to be called; Jews for Justice for Palestine. They binned that idea when members found the word Palestine ‘too difficult’.

Atzmon vehemently denies the accusation that he is an anti-semite. In no small part because he denies the existence of anti-semitism. In 2003, he wrote in an essay; ‘There is no anti-Semitism any more. In the devastating reality created by the Jewish state, anti-Semitism has been replaced by political reaction’. This is a point he returns to this evening.

‘How do you become and anti Semite? Easy upset a Jew. They don’t even need to tell you how you upset them. ‘Anti semitism’ what does it mean? The dictionary tells us its a loathing of Jews, just because they are Jews.’

In all his years, speaking on the subject of Jewishness, Israeli war crimes, Zionism, he has, he has ‘Never met an anti-semite.’ How is this possible you may ask? Atzmon seeks to put clear intellectual water between the actions of ‘race’ hatred (Jews are not a race), and an oppostion to Israeli Apratheid policies that lead to frustrated acts of say, grafitti.

Atzmon continues; ‘ Yes I have met those who object to Israeli policy. To those who objected to Lord (cashpoint) Levi and his role. But this is not anti- semitism.’

What is it then?

“It is an objection to political lobbying.’

Recent figures seem to bare this stance out. Tel Aviv University researchers has released some startling new figures. These reveal that 2010 saw a 46 percent drop in the number of violent incidents targeting Jews relative to 2009 — from 1,129 to 614. Clearly, attacks on Jewish property or persons in 2009 can be seen, not as actions related solely to followers of an Abrahamic faith. But, in response to the violence of Israeli Zionism; A frustrated backlash against a criminal, political movement. Such findings, instead of reassuring Jewish communities, act as an unsettling factor to the pro Israel lobby within them. For without Jewish victimhood, how can the human rights violations of the Jewish State be justified?

On the question of identity for secular Jews, Atmon had this to say;
‘Ask a secular Jew what (does) it mean to be Jewish. They will list what they aren’t. It leads to strange ideas that all come down to chicken soup!’ The audiences laughs.

Some academics, find Gilad’s playfulness troubling. Audiences like the one this evening, enjoy his cerebral shadow boxing.

He continues.
‘Like the Muslims, who have ‘salam’ as a greeting, the Jews greet one another with Shalom – also a greeting of peace.
Says Atzmon
‘Shalom doesn’t mean peace though. It means security. For Jews’. That peace, (it means) peace for them only’.

“Jewishness tends towards segregation. Living in a ghetto. Look at the (Israeli Apartheid) wall. Is it really for security? No it’s to keep Jew and gentile separate’.
‘If you are not Jewish, you are not due the same treatment. You are lesser.’

Atzmon moves onto the controversial ‘hate crime’ of talking of a Jewish world wide conspiracy. So does one exist? Gilad is semi serious when he says; “No Jews do not run the world. They get others to do it for them.’

As for who stops the media from fully exploring the real situation for the Palestinian people. From revealing crimes against humanity such as the massacre in Deir Yassin. Gilad rejects the idea of media executives refusing to engage with news from Middle East- to a degree.

‘The world’ he says, ‘self-censors. ‘Jews’ are not forcing the end of debate. We (the rest of the world) do it ourselves!” Goyim tolerance is seen as weakness. As stupidity yes!’

This argument is not without example. In 2001 Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, made unguarded comments, about relations with the United States and the peace process.

“I know what America is,” he told a group of terror victims, apparently not knowing his words were being recorded. America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction. They won’t get in their way.”


The Israeli leader went on to boast about how he undercut the peace process when he was prime minister during the Clinton administration. “They asked me before the election if I’d honour [the Oslo accords],” he said. “I said I would, but … I’m going to interpret the accords in such a way that would allow me to put an end to this galloping forward to the ’67 borders. How did we do it? Nobody said what defined military zones were. Defined military zones are security zones; as far as I’m concerned, the entire Jordan Valley is a defined military zone. Go argue!’ This is a fine example, Gilad would contend, in which, Israeli negotiators, playing political games, find the ‘Goys’ in the White House, easily tricked and manipulated.
Alan Hart doesn’t blame Zionism for having global power either. He blames America for being intellectually weak at its heart (land) and easily financially manipulated in its political terrain.

Whilst Atzmon sums up the entire multi billion dollar Christian Zionist movement, in his usual pithy way.

‘Goys are stupid’.

Can Atzmon have his Kosher cake and eat it too? He began the evening by stating squarely that Israel was a state NOT built on Jewish principles, but on the expansionist lusts of a secular movement from Eastern Europe. Why, then in relation to what is going on, say in Gaza, does he return time and again to the question of ‘Jewishness’?
‘Because the bombs that fall on Gaza night after night, are all decorated with Jewish symbols.’
The concept of ‘Jewish’ labelled, pro Palestinian groups, really gets under Atzmon’s skin. Why again, he argues, this need to be ‘special’ or ‘separate’ from other solidarity groups. The idea has been, he contends that words of condemnation against Israel, are stronger coming from ‘Jews.’ That Jewish outrage holds more weight than any other. Isn’t this itself a supremacist concept, elevating Jewish suffering and understanding of pain above all others? The irony, which Atzmon relishes sharing, is that a Palestinian wishing to protest against Israeli policies in his homeland, would be excluded from joining Jews for Justice for Palestinians, on racial or ethnic grounds.

Alan Hart, author of an epic trilogy on the nature and history of Zionism, finds a pause in which to interject; ‘Nakba denial is as offensive as Holocaust denial.’ This is the comment of the evening which is met with a unanimous cheer.

Karl Sabbagh has a deep knowledge of modern Palestinian history upto and including the Nakba of 1948. He has come to the debate to discuss such tetchy issues as who ‘owns’ the land of Historic Palestine
Sabbagh prefers historical facts to rhetoric.

However, he too relates his frustration, as a historian, when he has made efforts to talk facts with Jewish colleagues and friends.

‘You cannot argue with people from a position of logic when they come from a position of no logic.’ For an example he describes the old lie that the Nakba was in fact the time, in 1948, when a small group of brave Jewish Holocaust survivors, fought against the might, cruelty and brutality of the surrounding Arabs. In fact, Sabbagh who specialises in this era of history reports that when the British mandate ended in ignominy;

‘Ninety thousand well-armed, highly trained Jews, went against, twenty thousand, poorly motivated, badly trained ill equipped Arabs! You tell them this (British Jews who support Israel) and they say it didn’t happen’.
 
The hall then heard from Sameh Habeeb. A young man from Gaza in his twenties. The founder and editor of the online newspaper the Palestine Telegraph, says he finds it hard to cope with the way his efforts to share his first hand experience of life under Israeli occupation has been met with attempts to frighten him from speaking out.

‘I Come from the Middle East’ he says, ‘A region which has been authoritarian. I looked forward to living In a democracy. But once you discuss Israel you are called an anti semite and you no longer can enjoy democracy and free speech’.

The Palestine Telegraph published articles apparently linking Israeli groups with organ theft. Some of these sources were taken from the Israeli Ha aretz newspaper. Yet he was targeted by aggressive UK Zionist groups, he and his family threatened with violence and court cases.

‘I was immediately accused of being an anti Semite. Although I am very semite’ he says. of his Palestinian semitic, roots.

Gilad ends the night with his trade mark frippery.

‘The real genius of the Jews’ he says ‘Is that they made God into an estate agent and the Bible into a land registry’.

The debate about whether or not this sort of language constitutes anti-Jewishness should continue. What must also continue, freely and without hindrance are debates into the British Jewish communities role in funding the ethnic cleansing of the West Bank and East Jerusalem via such bodies as the Jewish National Fund (patron, one D.Cameron).

The question hanging in the air for the British Jewish community at the end of the event, was this ‘ Do you know what is really being done by the Jewish State in the name of the ‘Jewish People’. And do you care?’

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

Media Lies and Misinformation on Bin Laden


Corporate media manipulators love a big story they can hype, distort and falsify to attract large audiences, unaware they're getting managed news, not truth.

Moreover, the bigger the event, the worse the reporting, and no matter how often they're fooled, madding crowds rely on proved unreliable sources like US cable and broadcast TV, as well as corporate broadsheets and popular magazines publishing rubbish not fit to print.

After Obama's May day announcement, round-the-clock coverage now features "story one" ad nauseam, cheerleading the death of a dead man with no one allowed on to refute it.

A previous article did, accessed through the following link:

http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/05/lies-damn-lies-and-bin-ladens-death.html

Separating fact from fiction, it explained:

(1) Significant facts from David Ray Griffin's important book titled, "Osama Bin Laden: Dead or Alive?" In it, he provided objective and testimonial evidence of his December 2001 death, likely from kidney failure, not a special forces hit squad getting their man then or now.

(2) Forensic evidence that post-9/11 videos and audios were fake.

(3) Bin Laden's role as a CIA asset, as well as called "Enemy Number One," using him advantageously both ways.

(4) Also, reports of his 2001 hospitalizations in Pakistan and Dubai where (in July) the emirate's CIA station chief visited him in his hospital room. Why not if he was a valued asset, his likely status until his natural, not violent, death.

Nonetheless, Western politicians and media, notably America's, never miss a chance to report fiction, not fact, especially on headline news like bin Laden's death, a decade after it happened.

Examples of Media Misreporting

Several May 2 New York Times articles provide painful reading, including Mark Mazzetti, Helene Cooper and Peter Baker's headlined, "Behind the Hunt for Bin Laden," saying:

"For years, the agonizing search for (him) kept coming up empty. Then last July, Pakistanis working for the (CIA) drove up behind a white Suzuki navigating the bustling streets near Peshawar, Pakistan," and discovered, after checking its license, that it belonged to his "most trusted courier...."

Claiming he lead them to bin Laden's location, it said:

"79 American commandos in four helicopters descended on (it). Shots rang out....Of the five dead, one was a tall, bearded man with a bloodied face and a bullet in his head."

Bin Laden's manhunt ended, said the writers, when he was identified, then quickly buried at sea to hide the evidence, though under English common law most often, no body means no killing or crime. In other words, without proof, prosecutorial allegations are baseless.

Nonetheless, Mazzetti, Cooper and Baker recounted a decade-long fantasy, including detainee interrogations in secret Eastern Europe prisons, widespread surveillance, wiretaps, satellite images and more before tracking bin Laden to a Abbottabad, Pakistan compound and killing him.

No matter that none of it was true and much more. International and constitutional law prohibit sending uninvited military forces to another country for any reason.

Moreover, no one suspected of any crime may be summarily executed with no arrest, no due process, no no judicial fairness, and no trial. Just a bullet, bomb or slit throat, Washington's version of summary judgment besides torture and imperial wars as official policies.

These topics were ignored in major media reports, focused solely on killing a decade earlier dead man.

On May 2, Times writers Scott Shane and Robert Worth headlined, "Even Before Al Qaeda Lost Its Founder, It May Have Lost Some of Its Allure," saying:

Bin Laden had "long been removed from managing terrorist operations and whose popularity with Muslims worldwide has plummeted in recent years," calling him a "violent extremis(t) without saying he was replaced after his 2001 death so, of course, his influenced waned. Out of sight, out of mind, especially when dead.

A May 2 Times editorial headlined, "The Long-Awaited News," saying:

"The news that (he'd) been tracked and killed by American forces filled us, and all Americans, with a great sense of relief....(but we must) remember that the fight against extremists is far from over."

Noting years of painstaking "vigilance and persistence," it praised Obama for "show(ing) that he is a strong and measured leader. His declaration on Sunday night that 'justice has been done' was devoid of triumphalism."

In fact, he affirmed continuity of America's war on terror - state terror, including four imperial wars and numerous proxy ones, expending enormous sums while popular needs go begging.

Ignoring truth, he repeated lies endorsed shamelessly by America's media, notably by Times correspondents, op-ed contributors, and editorial writers with comments like:

"Bin Laden's death is an extraordinary moment for Americans and all who have lost loved ones in horrifying, pointless acts of terrorism."

Unmentioned was decades of US and Israeli-sponsored state terrorism responsible for millions of deaths, destruction and human suffering. Earlier, noted scholar/activist Eqbal Ahmad (1934 - 1999) called it:

"illegal violence, (including) torture, (attacking and bombing) villages, destruction of entire peoples, (and) genocide," adding, "Who will define the parameters of terrorism, or decide where terrorists lurk? Why, none other than the United States, (its leading practitioner) which can from the rooftops of the world set out its claim to be the sheriff, judge and hangman, all at one and the same time."

So while rhetorically supporting equal justice and democratic values, Washington spurns international and constitutional law, using brute force to assert might over right, all the while proclaiming just cause reasons for its actions.

No wonder Ahmad called America "a troubled country," sowing "poisonous seeds" globally, saying "(s)ome have ripened and others are ripening (with no) examination of (what they've) sown," adding that "(m)issiles won't solve the problem." In other words, violence assures more of it, but don't expect America's media to explain.

On May 2, Washington Post writers Greg Miller and Joby Warrick headlined, "Bin Laden discovered 'hiding in plain sight,' " recounting the same fantasy as Times writers, saying:

"The commandos swept methodically through (his) compound's main building, clearing one room and then another" until they got their man. Sounding more like bad fiction, they said the operation was secretly planned for months, culminating with Sunday's assault, adding bin Laden wasn't hiding in a cave after all.

A WP editorial headlined, "Possible consequences of the bin Laden coup," saying:

"There are multiple reasons to celebrate" his death, including loss of Al Qaeda's leader, the prowess of US intelligence and military, and that the "prime (9/11) author (finally was) brought to justice."

It brought "a rare moment of common celebration and relief in a divided America. But (it's) not clear to what degree al-Qaeda's operations will be affected by the loss of its leader." It may, in fact, strengthen its resolve. History shows dead militants often inspire followers.

Ignoring illegal operations on foreign soil, it worried most about ending or curtailing them prematurely, no matter the toll in human life and neglect for popular domestic needs. For now, celebratory joy takes precedence, even for false reasons.

A Wall Street Journal editorial headlined "Victory in Abbottabad," saying:

Killing bin Laden "doesn't end the war against Islamic terror (note the racism), but it is a crucial and just victory that is rightfully cause for celebration."

Ignoring daily US war crimes, including killer drones murdering civilians, it railed against "combatants who hide in the world's dark corners, who rarely fight in the open and who attack innocents far from any conventional battlefield."

Praising Obama, it called it "a moment to salute George W. Bush....a vindication of (his war on terror, intelligence, and) interrogation policies," torturing innocent victims to extract false confessions and information about things they know nothing about, including bin Laden's alleged whereabouts.

His death, said the writer, "is a measure of justice for the thousands he killed (and) a warning to others who would kill Americans that they will meet the same fate, no matter how long it takes or where they try to hide."

This and other accounts like it, sadly, is what passes for corporate opinion in America, endorsing state terror and vilifying those against it.

Huffington Post contributor Michael Calderone headlined "Network Anchors Head to Ground Zero for Bin Laden Coverage," saying:

They never miss a chance to misreport major news, including the three broadcast anchors: NBC's Brian Williams, ABC's Diane Sawyer, and CBS' Katie Couric (an entertainer impersonating a newsperson) "host(ing) an expanded, one-hour May 2 edition of their nightly broadcasts from" Ground Zero.

Several cable channels joined them, including CNN and Fox, reporting fiction about a decade earlier dead man.

Time magazine's cover story featured bin Laden's full-page image with a pronounced red X crossing him out, highlighting what didn't happen to the detriment of readers believing inaccurate reporting.

Al Jazeera was just as bad with stories like one headlined, "Obama says world safer without Bin Laden," saying:

He "claimed responsibility for planning the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington," providing no corroborating evidence. In fact, in David Ray Griffin's writings, he said:

"(T)here is no good evidence that bin Laden had planned or even specifically authorized the 9/11 attacks." Those believing it cite his misinterpreted September 2001 Al Jazeera interview, rejoicing in the attacks but denying knowledge or responsibility.

Griffin said one of his aides confirmed that he had "no information or knowledge about the attack(s)" but he "thanked Almighty Allah and bowed before him when he heard this news." Days later he told Al Jazeera:

"I stress that I have not carried out this act, which appears to have been carried out by individuals with their own motivation."

During two subsequent October 2001 interviews, he praised the "vanguards of Islam (who) destroyed America," but again admitted no knowledge or responsibility.

Al Jazeera now claiming it is a lie.

BBC aired the same misinformation as did America's National Public Radio (NPR) and Public Broadcasting (PBS), calling his death a blow to Al Qaeda. So did Democracy Now, ignoring bin Laden's decade earlier natural, not violent, death.

Nation magazine editor Katrina vanden Heuvel also swallowed the big lie, headlining her article, "With Osama bin Laden Dead, It's Time to End the 'War on Terror,' " that was entirely bogus from inception, saying:

"Today, President Obama and his team have a chance to reset our fight against terrorism," vanden Heuvel not condemning its lawlessness, America's imperial wars, a president with no credibility, a falsely reported 9/11 event, and that the only relevant terror is what Washington unleashes globally against nonbelligerent nations.

Instead, she praised Obama's "humane and sober" position, calling it "a relief to hear in his words reminders of" a brief post-9/11 period before America went to war in Afghanistan, then Iraq, undertakings Nation magazine supported at the time and still stops short of rejecting.

A Final Comment

On May 2, Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting's Peter Hart headlined, "Bush's Palpable Persistence in Pursuit of bin Laden," suggesting he stopped looking, knowing he died, quoting him saying in March 2002:

"Who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not. We haven't heard from him in a long time....I don't know where he is. I really just don't spend that much time on him, to be honest with you."

Washington Monthly's Steve Benen offered more evidence of no interest in pursuing him, saying:

"In July 2006, we learned that the Bush administration closed its unit that had been hunting bin Laden," reported also by New York Times writer Mark Mazzetti on July 4, saying the CIA ceased all efforts last year pursuing him.

Along with David Ray Griffin's important work, it's more proof of bin Laden's 2001 death, putting a lie to Obama's announcement and shameless journalists repeating it.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
posted by Steve Lendman @ 1:17 AM

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Tuesday, May 3, 2011

MAZIN : WESTERN MEDIA FRENZY ABOUT OSAMA BIN LADEN

- 03. May, 2011

Bin Laden’s assassination and the continued state terrorism practiced by the US government and its allies, especially Israel, attempt to entrench the idea of violence as an answer.

By Mazin Qumsiyeh / My Catbird Seat

There is a western media frenzy about the reported “taking-out” of Osama Bin Laden (the previous ally turned enemy). Israeli papers reported a high level US security official as saying his instruction was not to capture Bin Laden alive but to liquidate him.  But everyone already knew this would be the case,  since it would be a messy business if the US soldiers captured such a person alive (he may even spill the beans on his US and Pakistani  intelligence links).  Most people went about their daily lives of apathy.  Even the stock market did not go up as pundits predicted.  Soon the dollar will resume its downward spiral.

The US military may feel vindicated and Pakistanis will feel their country’s sovereignty challenged. Some may choose to retaliate with violence giving the Neocons and Neoliberals their excuse to pursue their policies.  After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the military-industrial complex needed a new enemy to sustain its massive structure and conveniently the “Islamic terrorism” materialized. Of course there are fanatical Muslims (and Jews and Christians and Hindus) who are willing to kill. Yet, the US did not have to invade Iraq and Afghanistan and create more such fanatics.  But a more sober analysis shows that things will change. Bin Laden was killed a while ago not physically perhaps but as an idea! The idea suffered significant blows by the Arab Spring revolutions which showed that it does not take violence to change our societies and remove US/Israeli backed dictators.

Bin Laden’s assassination and the continued state terrorism practiced by the US government and its allies, especially Israel, attempt to entrench the idea of violence as an answer.


The brutal assault on Syrian, Yemeni, Saudi and Bahraini demonstrators and the US continued military attacks in countries around the world are part of this human foolishness.  They represent that wing of our global society that believes violence is the answer: the win-lose scenario. The hopeful ideas of popular resistance, freedom, democracy and end to exploitation successfully challenged the notions of “clash of civilization” and “might makes right”.
We thus remain hopeful despite all the false news planted around us and all the false-flag operations, and despite the 1 million Iraqis and 50,000 Afghans killed by these wars.

Here in Palestine, most people went about their lives focusing on how to find the next loaf of bread under Israeli colonial occupation.  Hardly a mention was made of Bin Laden.  If we take just one village called Izbet Al-Tabib, a tiny village of 247 residents (60% of them children), we see one example of what was on people’s minds.  The Israeli decision to take their land was met with building a protest tent on the threatened land and trying to make their story known.

Sandra Quintano, A 60 year-old American Activist
The Israeli military came and attacked the villagers and the international volunteers severely, injuring an elderly American woman and arresting three other internationals (see here).

At night more than 200 soldiers invaded the village terrorizing its population to try and stem the growing popular resistance. Please join the villagers this Thursday for solidarity starting at 1 PM.

Last night, the Israeli army arrested several Palestinians in major cities including Bethlehem (this happens regularly in defiance of the Oslo accords and with knowledge of “Palestinian security” forces).
In a few days, there will be events and commemorations surrounding the Nakba day.  The Nakba is the Palestinian catastrophe etched into every living Palestinian mind.  It is the fact that from January 1948 to the end of 1949, more than 2/3rd of our people who lived in the land that became the (Jewish) state of Israel were ethnically cleansed.  63 years later, nearly 7 million Palestinians are refugees or internally displaced people. This is the largest and most tragic and persistent post world war II atrocity.

For information, visit http://PalestineRemembered.com

Israeli Apartheid and The Nakba

By Anthony Lawson



It is important that we all join in activities to challenge colonialism on this anniversary of the Nakba.

In the US, you can also get some printed material (a Nakba Pak) from here

Below are some events but do look for events in your area or organize your own events:
From Lebanon and Jordan, see details here http://returntopalestine.blogspot.com/
Hellerup, Kobenhavn, Denmark http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=221525124531256
Israëlische ambassade, Sterrewachtlaan 40 1180 Ukkel – Avenue del’Observatoire 40 1180 Brussel

(UCCLE) http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=200013603371184
Madrid. C/ Velázquez 150, 7º http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=180589978657757
Ambassade d’Israel – Paris http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=179953362056178
Bern (Bern, Switzerland) http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=168998889823873
Houston, TX http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=123540217721453
Consulate General of Israel, 6380 Wilshire blvd. Suite 1700, Los Angeles CA, 90048 & Consulate General of Israel, 456 Montgomery Street, San Francisco, 94104 http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=140344946036616
Israeli Embassy 122 Pembroke Road, Ballsbridge Dublin, Ireland
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=205349512829240

Ambasciata d’Israele, via Michele Mercati 12, Roma
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=178215672227437

Israelische Botschaft Auguste-Viktoria-Str. 74-76 14193 Berlin
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=118993821513426

Boston Israeli Consulate
20 Park Plaza
Boston, MA
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=210024405683124

Israeli Embassy, 2 Palace Green, London W8 4QB
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=197040297000383


Mazin Qumsiyeh teaches and does research at Bethlehem and Birzeit Universities in occupied Palestine. He previously served on the faculties of the University of Tennessee, Duke and Yale Universities. He served on the board/steering/executive committees of a number of groups including Peace Action Education Fund, the US Campaign to End the Occupation, the Palestinian American Congress, Association for One Democratic State in Israel/Palestine, and BoycottIsraeliGoods.org. He is now president of the Palestinian Center for Rapprochement Between People. He advised many other groups including Sommerville Divestment Project, Olympia-Rafah Sister City Project, Palestine Freedom Project, Sabeel North America, and National Council of Churches of Christ USA. He is an active member of a number of human rights groups (Amnesty, Peace action, Human Rights Watch, ACLU etc.). He published several books of which the most acclaimed “Sharing the Land of Canaan: human rights and the Israeli/Palestinian Struggle” which was also translated to spanish. For more about his work go to: http://qumsiyeh.org
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Osama bin Laden’s Second Death

May 2, 2011 posted by Veterans Today

This morning’s headline has the odor of a staged event. The smell reeks from the triumphalist news reports loaded with exaggerations, from celebrants waving flags and chanting “USA USA.” Could something else be going on?

By Paul Craig Roberts

If today were April 1 and not May 2, we could dismiss as an April fool’s joke this morning’s headline that Osama bin Laden was killed in a firefight in Pakistan and quickly buried at sea. As it is, we must take it as more evidence that the US government has unlimited belief in the gullibility of Americans.


Think about it. What are the chances that a person allegedly suffering from kidney disease and requiring dialysis and, in addition, afflicted with diabetes and low blood pressure, survived in mountain hideaways for a decade? If bin Laden was able to acquire dialysis equipment and medical care that his condition required, would not the shipment of dialysis equipment point to his location? Why did it take ten years to find him?
Consider also the claims, repeated by a triumphalist US media celebrating bin Laden’s death, that “bin Laden used his millions to bankroll terrorist training camps in Sudan, the Philippines, and Afghanistan, sending ‘holy warriors’ to foment revolution and fight with fundamentalist Muslim forces across North Africa, in Chechnya, Tajikistan and Bosnia.” That’s a lot of activity for mere millions to bankroll (perhaps the US should have put him in charge of the Pentagon), but the main question is: how was bin Laden able to move his money about? What banking system was helping him? The US government succeeds in seizing the assets of people and of entire countries, Libya being the most recent. Why not bin Laden’s? Was he carrying around with him $100 million dollars in gold coins and sending emissaries to distribute payments to his far-flung operations?

This morning’s headline has the odor of a staged event. The smell reeks from the triumphalist news reports loaded with exaggerations, from celebrants waving flags and chanting “USA USA.” Could something else be going on?

No doubt President Obama is in desperate need of a victory. He committed the fool’s error of restarting the war in Afghanistan, and now after a decade of fighting the US faces stalemate, if not defeat. The wars of the Bush/Obama regimes have bankrupted the US, leaving huge deficits and a declining dollar in their wake. And re-election time is approaching.

The various lies and deceptions, such as “weapons of mass destruction,” of the last several administrations had terrible consequences for the US and the world. But not all deceptions are the same. Remember, the entire reason for invading Afghanistan in the first place was to get bin Laden. Now that President Obama has declared bin Laden to have been shot in the head by US special forces operating in an independent country and buried at sea, there is no reason for continuing the war.

Perhaps the precipitous decline in the US dollar in foreign exchange markets has forced some real budget reductions, which can only come from stopping the open-ended wars. Until the decline of the dollar reached the breaking point, Osama bin Laden, who many experts believe to have been dead for years, was a useful bogyman to use to feed the profits of the US military/security complex.


Source: Information Clearing House

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS Hon. Paul Craig Roberts has had careers in scholarship and academia, public service, and journalism. He served in the Congressional staff and as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration. He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Saturday, April 30, 2011

Arab revolutions and uprisings: Beware of media disinformation

 
Posted by realistic bird on May 1, 2011


{Disinformation} by Juan Kalvellido
The case of Syria and Bahrain

by realistic bird

The role of the media is to inform and to present events as they are. However, this role has been hijacked to use media networks for other purposes. One of the reasons I blog is to present people with information many media might not focus on so in this light I wanted to share some points I was able to compile over a period of few weeks. The amount of disinformation and inconsistencies in the media has been systematic to the degree that it has become obvious there is an aim to shift our views to believe certain things. I was shocked with the amount of people who were led astray by this disinformation. People I used to see as “thinkers” and have knowledge of geopolitics were taken by a few media tricks. So, the main question to ponder is if these media were really telling us exactly what is happening then why all these distortions?

Syria

Let’s start with the “eye witnesses” and the “activists” who are being used in the media as a source of updates and information. One could argue that these networks can’t get information if the government doesn’t allow journalists on the ground then in these situations alternative sources have to be used but at least if the source says something nonsensical or off somehow this person will not be used again, right? For example a witness on a Arab station claimed he is in Dara’a and capable of seeing and hearing everything; first he claimed there is mutiny within the ranks of the army and second he can hear the army orders even when he is hundreds of meters away as he said himself. Does this man have bionic eyes and ears? The rumor that the army is breaking up is not new and there is a previous report about Western media stating the same thing which turned out to be false. If we assume for the sake of argument that the soldiers are being shot by other security men in this situation we are talking about tens of deaths and some with mutilated bodies but Syria has institutions and the government would have no apparatus to gain control if it did that, so the whole argument is absurd to begin with. This means that the army and police are being targeted then not all the protests are peaceful. A second “witness” called ‘Abdullah’ talks to Al Arabiya from Dara’a then on Al Jazeera from Duma, it seems the man can’t stay put in one place. A third example of a witnesses who keeps claiming there is no electricity, fuel or phones in Dara’a yet he tells the anchor that he saw things on the TV and he is able to call every day. These are just examples of many of the illogical ramblings of some “witnesses”. These channels take the word of these “witnesses” and immediately put it as a fact. Where are the fact checkers? Where is the professionalism? On the other hand there are reports (Western media lie about Syria – eyewitness reports) that contradict these “eye witnesses”:
RT: What’s happening in Syria? What have you seen? And that are the Syrians saying?
Anhar Kochneva: Not even once did I come across anyone who would in any way support these riots; and mind you, in the line of my job, I deal with all sorts of people. There are many vehicles with the president’s portraits driving the streets throughout the country – ranging from old, barely moving crankers to brand new Porsches and Hummers. You can’t force people into hanging up portraits. It means that people, irrespective of their status and income, support the president rather than the rebellion. I saw quite a number of young people walking or driving around with Syrian flags. How can you force a young person hanging out with friends to wave flags? I think it’s difficult too. If you understand the mentality of the Syrians you can tell there is a sincere impulse from a forced obligation.
On March 29, I saw a rally in Hama to support the president – indeed, many thousands of men and women, with their children, and entire families went out. The streets were flooded with people. It was quite a shock to see Al-Jazeera presenting rallies in support of the president as if they were protests against him. It was just as surprising to see the Israeli websites post photos and videos of supporters’ rallies with comments saying those were opponents of the regime. There you have people holding portraits of Bashar al-Assad and flags, and we’re told that these people are against him.
RT: The media reports mass anti-government rallies.
AK: There’s a powerful misinformation swell going on. On April 1, the media reported a large anti-governmental rally in Damascus. I was in Damascus on that day. This rally never happened – I didn’t see it, and neither did the locals.
On April 16, Reuters news agency wrote that 50,000 opponents of the regime took to the streets of Damascus, and that they had been dispersed with tear gas and batons. Damascus’ residents realize that such a rally could not take place in the city unnoticed. How many policemen would it take to disperse it? And how come nobody saw it except Reuters? Five hundred people in the streets of Damascus are a large crowd. Reuters broadcast their material around the world, including Russia. One source lies, and then this lie is like a snowball rolling downhill creating a fake reality, and picking up rumor and speculation…
/Presently, a lot of young unarmed policemen get killed. The media propaganda immediately labels them as victims of the regime. I repeat, policemen are unarmed. The Syrian police are not too good with guns, because nothing like this has happened here for a long time. But the killed rookies are reported as either victims among the protestors, or as policemen who refused to shoot at their fellow countrymen, depending on the editors’ preference. Goebbels’ words seem to be true: the bigger the lie, the more easily they believe it…
/ RT: What role are Syrian emigrants playing in the Syrian destabilization?
AK: It’s an open question. There was a leak claiming that Dan Feldman, Hillary Clinton’s special representative for the Middle East, met representatives of the Syrian opposition in Istanbul in mid-April and suggested the tactics for assassinations of civil and military officials. In less than three days, on April 19, several military officials had been brutally killed in Syria. Not only were they attacked and shot dead, some victims of the attacks, including three teenage children of a Syrian general, who were in a car with him, were cut to pieces with sabres.
Murders committed with a high degree of brutality are aimed at intimidating the population. The news that children had been cut to pieces served that purpose quite well. (Read all the report)
The videos also can’t be verified, I’m sure not all of them are false but at least don’t show a video if it doesn’t make sense. On Friday 29/4/2011 it was raining heavily in Syria, they even had hail yet in some videos the people are dry and no rain/water on the ground (the Syrian media is not up to standard but one channel made a point to compile the inconsistencies, documented here, there are many videos in Arabic).
Another odd occurance is the role of ones who say they are “islamists” and attack Bashar Al Assad by claiming he has an alliance with the Israelis. Even I saw odd posters held by some people in the streets putting a dollar sign on the head of the Syrian president. If anyone knows any history and politics the last thing one can accuse Al Assad with is that he is an American puppet or a Zionist collaborator. The countries that control the media in question are the ones who can be labeled in that manner. Another rumor said that the Israelis want Al Assad to remain but two things were revealed from the Israelis themselves to put this to rest. First, just watching the Israeli media they are ecstatic about the unrest happening in Syria and they specifically said it regains what it lost in Egypt. Second, there is a false idea that the Israelis would have a problem if those “islamists” take the upper hand for I saw a program on Israeli TV in which they were discussing a video from a man who claims to be from the Syrian opposition  labeled as a “Sheikh” asking Netanyahu to stop supporting Al Assad and saying no one can get rid of “Israel”. The two Israeli youths of the program then hope that nothing happens to this man and add “insha’Allah” to it too. Moreover, a recent revealed wiki leaks cable from the US embassy in Lebanon about the former PM Sa’ed Al Hariri in which he suggested that the Syrian regime needs to be removed and replaced by a combination of Abdel Al Karim Khadam and the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood (who support peace with “Israel”).
13. (S/NF) If the regime were to fall in Syria, who would
be there to fill in the vacuum? Perplexed that the Alawites,
who make up only 7-8 per cent of Syria, could rule so
exclusively as “a family business” over a vast Sunni
majority, Saad suggested that the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood,
in partnership with ex-regime figures like Abdel Halim
Khaddam and Hikmet Shehabi (“though he’s still close to the
regime”), could step into the void. Saad claimed that the
Syrian Brotherhood is similar in character to Turkey’s
moderate Islamists. “They would accept a Christian or a woman
as President. They accept civil government. It’s like
Turkey in Syria. They even support peace with Israel.”
Saying that he maintains close contact with Khaddam (in
Paris) and Syrian Muslim Brotherhood leader-in-exile Ali
Bayanuni (in London), Saad urged us to “talk to Bayanuni.
See what he’s like. You will see wonders.”
One of the most shocking revelations was the way Al Jazeera Arabic dealt with the happenings in Syria and Bahrain. More of its credibility was lost when a video (in Arabic) of the “thinker” Azmi Bashara and an anchor discuss what uprisings to talk about and which ones to ignore. In the video Bashara tells the anchor not to ask him about Jordan and complains why he asked him about Bahrain, the anchor answers he had to clean up the network’s reputation regarding that (I assure the anchor it did not work) and they will take 40 min to focus on Syria. The second incident is the resigning of the well-known and truly professional head of Al Jazeera Bureau in Lebanon Ghassan Bin Jeddo. The reasons cited by him where about the lack of objectivity of the network (on Bahrain) and its incitement tactics (on Syria). In addition, a Syrian anchor on Al Arabiya resigned for the way the network is dealing with the events in Syria. Another issue to be raised is why are these networks not considering potential evidence about a role of Saudis royals in this presented by Lebanese politician Wi’amWahab? Wahab showed checks with hundreds of thousands of dollars given to key people (one being Lebanese MP Jamal Al Jarrah who belongs to Hariri bloc) accused by the Syrians of sending weapons to Syria. These networks will not focus on that because they belong to Saudi Arabia and Qatar who seem to have found common interests now. Here I must point out how ironic it is that these undemocratic countries support the wants of the people as long it is not on their lands or near them. Other reports (in Arabic) reveal messages from UAE, Qatar, Turkey, and some Europeans are being sent to Syria with a list of demands, the main one to detach from Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas. If that happens Syria will be given economic and social “help” from Gulf countries and any security related aid (yes we did see what they did in Bahrain, I will mention later on).

Everybody is in an uproar to save the Libyans and the Syrians but calling for help from the same ones who have killed/helped others to kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, Palestinians, Lebanese, Pakistanis, Afghanis, and many others around the world is nothing but insanity. Who in his/her right mind thinks the US gov. and some European governments will save the Libyans and Syrians? When in their whole history have these gov. did anything outside of their interests? In addition they have also supported the dictators the people are fighting. Do we have to wait until the Zionists are sitting right there on the table besides the new despots to wonder what went wrong? Do we need to reach that point? The US and its allies are basing their actions against Syria in the UN partly on false information; does that remind you of something? How about Iraq and its WMDs. Yes Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator and yes he killed his people but are the Iraqis well and happy now? Have we learned nothing from the woes of our brothers and sisters in Iraq?

Whatever is happening in Syria certain media has made a point of using  information which is not verified or lacks common sense for other reasons than just to support the supposed uprising of the Syrians. The people who follow closely these media need to take this into consideration.

Bahrain

Has anyone noticed any proper focus on the protests and uprising in Bahrain? Or how about the regime crimes: killings (Video, pictures (very graphic)), arrests, verdicts of execution, torture (1, 2), destruction of religious sites and mosques , intimidation of people , etc. (other crimes documented)? Don’t the people of Bahrain deserve freedom too? If anyone has an excuse that they don’t then this person doesn’t believe in freedom and is rather lying to him/herself. The reasons given by some not to support the people in Bahrain are nothing short of disgusting (sect related and being instigated by Iran). Whatever the reasons given there is no excuse for the actions of the regime and the GCC forces that invaded the country and violated numerous human rights laws. How about the destruction the mosques (some historical) and the burring/desecration of the Qur’an? This should be enough to make people flare up but where is the media when you need it? Al Jazeera, Al Arabiya, BBC Arabic, France 24, and a huge list of other media such as newspapers and websites are all owned by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, other gulf countries and their allies. The gulf countries are part of the GCC forces who invaded Bahrain with no good reason because that is not their purpose to begin with to interfere in an internal matter and aid the regime to do horrible crimes. Then it is clear why Bahrain is out of the picture and the anchors in these networks pretend nothing is happening over there, just mention what the Bahraini regime says or sometimes do reports not including all the information.

I support every call for reform and freedom, we all have to because they are a necessity and a human right. Yet, we can’t react to unreliable news. If those media were supporting the uprisings for real and not for some agenda for the country of origin then why the need to distort things? There is definably unrest in Syria and Bahrain, one is hyped and the other is hidden. We are damned if we don’t revolt because we will be left with the dictators and we are damned if we do because others will use it to push their plans. From a fellow Arab I really hope for a better tomorrow but being high on “freedom” doesn’t mean we close our eyes to what others are doing.
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian