is reporting from
rent-a-rebel runs riot in syria as russia stands firm
DrMarty | June 11, 2012 at 01:21 amby
68 views | 0 Recommendations | 0 comments
"The parties involved in the Syria conflict, including foreign opposition and the Syrian National Council do not want to sit down at the negotiating table with Bashar Assad. They are ready to continue the armed struggle until the UN Security Council gives a mandate for foreign intervention in Syria. I can guarantee that it won't give such a mandate," according to Voice of Russia.
As if in response, the new leader of the British-controlled Syrian National Council (run by the Muslim Brotherhood), the Kurd Abdel Basset Sayda, told AFP in pure flight forward the same day, "The regime is on its last legs. According to reports, the regime has lost control of Damascus and other cities." A spokesman for the Turkey-based "Free Syrian Army" said, "We call on Syrians to launch a general strike leading to mass civil disobedience. The hour of liberation and change has come."
Damascus, which has been relatively quiet, witnessed twelve hours of gunfire and fighting Saturday, the worst it has seen in the 15-month conflict. But film footage taken by (and of) UN observers and available at "Russia Today," shows what it really was.
It shows that the "rebels" fired rocket-propelled grenades at a local power plant, damaging parts of it, and incinerated six buses and many cars in the process, while burning tires in the streets. All mostly to provoke counter-fire from Syrian troops and police against civilians.
From the direction of the British puppet-masters, Foreign Secretary William Hague would not rule out foreign military intervention, over-boasting to AFP of his own handiwork:
"We don't know how things are going to develop. Syria is on the edge of a collapse or of a sectarian civil war, and so I don't think we can rule anything out. But it is not so much like Libya last year, where we had, of course, a successful intervention to save lives. [!] It is looking more like Bosnia in the 1990s, of being on the edge of a sectarian conflict in which neighboring villages are attacking and killing each other."
"DOUBLE, DOUBLE TOIL AND TROUBLE": THE THREE WITCHES OF TONY BLAIR
The aptly-named Ann-Marie Slaughter, one of Tony Blair's "Three Witches" of so-called humanitarian warfare (with Susan Rice and Cass Sunstein's wife Samantha Power), took to the pages of the Washington Post on June 8 to try to refute Henry Kissinger's June 3 op-ed attack on Blair (whom he didn't name), and Blair's campaign since 1999 to repeal the 1648 Westphalia Doctrine of national sovereignty and international law,-- to bring back a thermonuclear version of the preceding Thirty Years War, which Kissinger wrote killed off one-third the population of central Europe.
Kissinger had warned against foreign military intervention in Syria; Slaughter, of course insists on it.
As she has for many months, Slaughter insists on a humanitarian war, but tries to make such humanitarianism more saleable at home, by promising that the "little brown brothers," as the British call them, will take all the casualties of that war. Or in her words,
"a U.N. Security Council resolution with clear parameters about a limited use of force... which would have to follow a request by the Arab League, should resolve to protect the establishment of no-kill zones by local Syrian authorities by whatever means necessary, short of foreign troops on the ground. These means would include the provision of intelligence and communications equipment, antitank and anti-mortar weapons, and, crucially, air support against Syrian government tanks and troops that seek to enter or overrun a zone. The provision of such support would also require the disabling of Syrian air defenses."
If Americans are stupid enough to fall for Slaughter's fevered fantasy of a Syria war where only the "natives" bear all the casualties, it is they themselves who will be exterminated in the thermonuclear exchange with Russia which results.
Slaughter lies outright that Blair's so-called "responsibility to protect," R2P, is already law, replacing the UN Charter. "Kissinger claimed that the Russian and Chinese governments are upholding the foundations of a world order that the United States should not lightly cast aside, an order in which sovereignty gives a government the right to rule its people and territory without intervention from other states and a corresponding obligation not to intervene in the affairs of others. It is true that this principle is enshrined in the United Nations Charter, but four years after the charter was passed U.N. members also adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. By the end of the 20th century, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan--now the United Nations special envoy for Syria--was arguing that states existed to serve their people, rather than the other way around. [!] And by 2005 all the world's states, on the 60th anniversary of the U.N. Charter's passage, adopted the doctrine of the responsibility to protect, which effectively adopted a definition of sovereignty as responsibility. Sovereigns bear responsibility to not only their fellow sovereigns but also their own people, to protect them from genocide, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, and grave and systematic war crimes."
The UN General Assembly did indeed unwittingly vote for a document which included that phrase, but that is a far thing from an actual treaty which would somehow replace international law and repudiate centuries of legitimate treaties including the UN Charter.
Slaughter ends her little piece by establishing a new international law on her own account, writing,
"President Obama believes in sovereignty as responsibility. Standing up for that principle will result in a world that will be more stable, prosperous and consistent with universal values--the values Americans know as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It will be a far better world for the United States as well as for Syrians, Egyptians, Tunisians, Libyans and billions of others. But bringing it into being requires demonstrating firmly and quickly that when governments cross the line of genocide, or engage in crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, or grave and systematic war crimes against their own people,
THE WORLD WILL ACT--WITH FORCE IF NECESSARY AND WITH THE APPROVAL ONLY OF A REGIONAL ORGANIZATION AND A MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE U.N. SECURITY COUNCIL. Only then will murderous dictators begin to think twice."
These members have powered this story: