By Justin Raimondo
Tall Tales in Tremseh
July 16, 2012 "Antiwar" -- For what seems like months we have been
inundated with reports of "massacres" carried out by Syrian government
troops against defenseless villagers. The sourcing for these reports is
always Syrian "activists," sometimes named but often not, and the
details are always quite horrific: There was the "massacre" at Houla,
touted by the BBC in a story that included a photo of a boy jumping
over the shrouded bodies of the victims. The report claimed Syrian
forces had murdered children and women in a house to house rampage in
the village of Houla: it was all very dramatic. There was just one
problem with the story: it wasn't true. The photo used by the BBC to
illustrate this tall tale was taken in Iraq, not Syria, and it had been
pilfered by the Syrian "activists" who palmed it off to the Zioconned BBC as
"evidence" of atrocities committed by the regime.
That wasn't the first hoax these "activists" tried to pull, and - in
spite of being repeatedly exposed as frauds - it certainly wasn't
meant to be the last. Now we have another such attempt: in Tremseh, a
village near the city of Hama, the rebels claim, hundreds of civilians
were wantonly slaughtered in a full-scale military operation by the
Syrian army and air force. Kofi Annan is citing this alleged massacre as
a reason for the UN Security Council to issue a serious warning: UN
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon denounced the Syrian action as "an
outrageous escalation of violence," and went on to "condemn, in the
strongest possible terms, the indiscriminate use of heavy artillery and
shelling of populated areas, including by firing from helicopters."
Except the firing wasn't indiscriminate. As the New York Times reports:
"New details emerging Saturday about what local Syrian activists called
a massacre of civilians near the central city of Hama indicated that it
was more likely an uneven clash between the heavily armed Syrian
military and local fighters bearing light weapons."
The UN sent a team into Tremseh and "their initial report said the
attack appeared to target 'specific groups and houses, mainly of army
defectors and activists.' It said a range of weapons had been used,
including artillery, mortars, and small arms."
Given the rhetoric coming from top UN officials, however, one can safely
assume the UN observers' initial report will be considerably "revised"
in a pro-rebel direction when the final version is released.
The title of the Times story - "Details of a Battle Challenge Reports
of a Syrian Massacre" - succinctly encapsulates the issue at hand: the
Syrian government is engaged in a battle with armed opponents. The
propaganda of the rebels, freely broadcast by the US government and its
allies, seeks to depict every act of self-defense on the part of the
regime as an atrocity. Our complicit media, which routinely takes the
word of "activists" as gospel, is an essential element in establishing
the right narrative, one that will justify intervention by the Western
powers under the guise of the UN.
The real meaning of this propaganda campaign is clear enough: nations
targeted for regime change that dare mount a military defense are
engaging in "war crimes." This is the first law of the New World Order,
one that Bashar Assad and his like defy at their peril.
It isn't enough for regime-changers to topple defiant governments: they
must also delegitimize them posthumously by dragging their leaders to
Moammar Gadhafi was only spared that because he knew too much about his
persecutors, who had once profited from their relationship with the
Assad knows he is fighting to avoid such a fate, and that makes a
negotiated peace nearly impossible. The intransigence of the rebels, who
expect Western-backed military intervention at some point, is another
stumbling block to even a cease-fire. That intransigence is generated by
those who are backing the rebels, financially and militarily, i.e. the
US and its regional allies. Zioconned Hillary Clinton declares Assad must step
down before any talk of a settlement: only Russia and China are
preventing the UN from sanctioning another Libyan-style military
operation to take the Syrian leader out.
The American people didn't support the Libyan escapade, and they will
hardly rush out in to the streets cheering if and when we intervene in
Syria, but, then again, that won't matter much. This President maintains
he doesn't even have to consult Zioconned Congress before going to war.
Perhaps he'll repeat his Libyan performance, in the course of which he
maintained - in all seriousness - it wasn't a real war because
Gadhafi failed to mount an effective resistance and there were no
While starting another unpopular war may seem counterintuitive in an
election year, this really isn't about Syria - it's about Iran.
While the American public is not in the mood for another war, the power
elite is of quite a different mindset. As General Wesley Clark head of NATO
pointed out, big donors to the Democratic party are avid
supporters of Israel - the major agitator for war with Iran. Israel's
lobby in the Zioconned US exercises a decisive influence on both major parties,
and so while the public is generally opposed to more military
adventurism in the Middle East - or anywhere else, for that matter
- the political class is more favorably disposed....
The Syrian "crisis" - one brought on by the Western powers and their
sock-puppets in Zioconned Qatar and Zioconned Saudi Arabia - is but a prelude to the main
event: the strangulation of Iran, via economic blockade, and eventual
all-out war. What is happening in Syria today reflects, in miniature,
the regime-change crowd's plan for the entire region: unleashing Sunni
fanatics in a religious war against all other sects, one that will
liquidate the Christian and other minority communities. The ultimate
target of this Sunni onslaught: the Shi'ites of Iran.
In an election year, tightening the vise on the Iranians is going to
make Zioconned President Obama look "tough" against a candidate who criticizes him
for being too soft. Any discussion of foreign policy is likely to be a
pissing match to see who's the real Tough Guy. And there's nothing like
a major war to divert attention away from a rapidly sinking economy and
attribute, say, rising prices to those evil Eye-ranians.
Expect the Syrian civil war to escalate to the point where either the UN
or Israel intervenes - in which case the prospects for war with Iran
by election day,
November 2012, are a good bet.
Fact or fiction ?
China Gave Nuclear Weapons to Saudi Arabia :CIA Contractor//Fact or
CIA Contractor's Self-Published Online Book Brings U.S. Lawsuit...