who can we trust - to tell us the truth?
  (AusBC vs. Syria/Assad)

[update, 13Mar'12 (sub-section added; minor changes (red font))]


Trigger article:

Snipers bring terror to Syrian streets
Updated March 01, 2012 11:27:59
  «Every sunrise over Idlib sets off a deadly soundtrack - the crack of snipers' bullets that hail down from roofs and hillsides and kill indiscriminately.
The locals of the northern Syrian city have become grimly familiar with their unseen enemies - called qanas, the Arabic name for snipers - whose bullets cut through the air long after nightfall, often until midnight.
Their victims seem chosen at random. During the two weeks I just spent there, I witnessed the funerals of three children who were shot on Idlib's streets in broad daylight.»

Comment: Of course, IF Assad was shooting his own innocent citizens dead by random sniper-fire, THEN he certainly would be a vile monster. BUT: That's a known and well-used propaganda technique called 'demonisation.' The US deployed similar 'stories' in 1991 against Saddam (babies dumped out of incubators), again in 2003 (people-shredders, mobile bio-labs, non-existent WMDs) and then US-proxies F+UK/NATO ditto in Libya recently. Recall that 'belief' is mainly done in the absence of evidence, and there is every reason to suspect the AusBC/AFP article contains whopping lies presented as 'evidence' by a possibly self-interested and self-involved journo - an example of the 4th-estate conduiting and actively assisting lying propaganda.

Q: With 'the West' breathing down Assad's neck, how realistic would it be for him to deliberately paint himself as a random-murdering tyrant? Especially since the same type of 'narrative' was deployed against Gaddafi? Recall the story of Viagra-assisted mass-rapes? Same m.o., same conduit = corrupt&venal MSM + AusBC, same type of lies. Lies with 'impact;' lies designed to shock people into revulsion. Recall "Why, of course, the people don't want war... [but] it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, ..."


Update, 13Mar'12, 10:21:

Consider: "Public support is a critical aspect of military action ..."

Contrast that with "It is always a simple matter to drag the people along, ..."

IF we are lied to (vis-à-vis war, say), THEN we can never offer *properly informed* support. No properly won public support means any resulting actions by rulers (US-led attack on Iraq, say, or US/F+UK/NATO rape of Libya etc.) - are undemocratic, and therefore without the permission extended by the sovereign-voters (= we, the people) - which in turn are offences against us, truth & justice.

A prime-propaganda technique is "the big Lie," try this google-search (at time of writing about 221 results) - a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously." (Proof: From Obama 'down,' current official US view is that Iran is *not* building a bomb, let alone wants one.)

It's easy enough to prove that the US-led smashing of Iraq (100s of 1000s dead, if not 1.4mio+) was illegal; even Kofi Annan said so: then added unequivocally: "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and from the charter point of view it was illegal." (About 72,100 results)

I could go on... but time is fleeting. Try this, vis-à-vis the current 'Western' (by proxy, mercenary invaders, whatever) attack on Syria:

Middle East
Mar 9, 2012
Syria: Straining credulity?
By Alastair Crooke
  « ... for "we are already masters of information warfare ... Hollywood is 'preparing the battlefield' ... Information destroys traditional jobs and traditional cultures; it seduces, betrays, yet remains invulnerable. How can you [possibly] counterattack the information [warfare] others have turned upon you?
"Our sophistication in handling it will enable us to outlast and outperform all hierarchical cultures ... Societies that fear or otherwise cannot manage the flow of information simply will not be competitive. They might master the technological wherewithal to watch the videos, but we will be writing the scripts, producing them, and collecting the royalties. Our creativity is devastating."»

Comment: as usual, you should read it all. Some links at end of article are not well done; I intend to 'correct' them in a new comment below.

Then: "No war crimes regarding Iraq have even been raised or addressed by the International Court of Justice."

Comment: No court case does *not* mean not guilty, only an obviously corrupt justice system.

My point here: The US (plus snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on = SQSH-O) regimes do their dastardly deeds = murdering for spoil, in the name of democracy and oil-security, amongst other 'spurious' (= lying) excuses, when 'in truth' it's for $s, US-hegemony & Zs = both massive theft and destroying competition (Arab/Muslim Israel-neighbours, China, Iran & Russia).

None of the above are good reasons to kill&steal (there are no good reasons) - where is the effective (with good morals) opposition?



Contrast article 1:

The Saga Of Bradley Manning, Julian Assange, And Wikileaks, To Be Put To Ballad And Film
By William Blum
06 March, 2012
  «Since at least 2006 the United States has been funding political opposition groups in Syria, including a satellite TV channel that beams anti-government programming into the country.» 


Contrast article 2:

Stratfor Emails: Covert Special Ops Inside Syria Since December
A private conversation with Pentagon officials suggested US and allied troops were on the ground in Syria
by John Glaser, March 07, 2012
  «An analyst from Stratfor claimed in December 2011 that officials at the Pentagon clued him in on covert military operations taking place in Syria. “After a couple hours of talking, they said without saying that SOF [Special Operations Forces] teams (presumably from US, UK, France, Jordan, Turkey) are already on the ground focused on recce [reconnaissance] missions and training opposition forces,” the email said.» 


Contrast article 3:

The Bloody Road to Damascus: The Triple Alliance’s War on a Sovereign State
by Prof. James Petras
March 10, 2012
  «There is clear and overwhelming evidence that the uprising to overthrow President Assad of Syria is a violent, power grab led by foreign-supported fighters who have killed and wounded thousands of Syrian soldiers, police and civilians, partisans of the government and its peaceful opposition.
The outrage expressed by politicians in the West, Gulf States and in the mass media, about the ‘killing of peaceful Syrian citizens protesting in justice’ is cynically designed to cover up the documented reports of violent seizure of neighborhoods, villages and towns by armed bands, brandishing machine guns and planting road-side bombs.
The assault on Syria is backed by foreign funds, arms and training. Due to a lack of domestic support, however, to be successful, direct foreign military intervention will be necessary. For this reason a huge propaganda and diplomatic campaign has been mounted to demonize the legitimate Syrian government. The goal is to impose a puppet regime and strengthen Western imperial control in the Middle East. In the short run, this will further isolate Iran in preparation for a military attack by Israel and the US and, in the long run, it eliminates another independent secular regime friendly to China and Russia.»


You may decide, but a word of caution: Bad things can happen, when good people say/do nothing.


PS Some 'more of the same':

  «The Western governments' and mainstream media’s narrative of a one-sided humanitarian crisis in Syria is rapidly unwinding to reveal a self-serving deception to justify a re-run of Libya-style NATO conquest. In reality, it is the Western powers and their Israeli and Arab henchmen who are fuelling a humanitarian crisis and creating the conditions for all-out war. All of which, it should be said, constitutes criminality comparable to Nazi Germany’s wars of aggression.
Despite the mainstream media’s self-serving smokescreen, the fact is that the Western governments have been calculating for years on the subversion of Syria from within. For the past 12 months, their plans for regime change in Damascus have gone into overdrive with clandestine, criminal military action on the ground and using Arab and Israeli proxies as conduits for weapons. The latest leak from the Pentagon’s favourite private-sector think-tank, Stratfor, is just one more proof of an already established fact on the ground. But don’t expect the Western mainstream propaganda machine, or even some of the so-called progressive media, to alter the mood music of “humanitarian crisis” in its efforts to groom the Western public to accept yet another criminal war, even when it becomes patently clear that the narrative is nonsense.
There is too much at stake for truth to be allowed to interfere. Syria is a preordained piece on the chessboard that the Western powers want to take out in their grand scheme for bolstering dominance over the oil-rich Middle East – with Iran as the next piece. The Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria... Iran sequence stretches Western government and media credibility to well beyond breaking point. Believe the “responsibility to protect” or “weapons of mass destruction” fairytale if you want. Meanwhile, in the real world Prince Charming is shafting international law and human lives by the millions.»

Some proof: "We're going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran" (Wesley Clark, reporting a US post-9/11 boast.)

More proof: Anything Netanyahu says vis-à-vis Iran, anything the IDF does to hapless Palestinians, starting latest with Plan Dalet/Deir Yassin - and right down to 'the current moment:' "Israeli air strikes on Gaza killed 15 Palestinians, including a top militant, medics said on Saturday, ..." - recall that Israel does *not* have clear legal title to *any* of Palestine.

Even more proof: The US, F+UK/NATO have 'form' = criminal history, also right down to 'the current moment.'


  1. The AusBC continues catapulting the propaganda:

    "47 bodies found after 'massacre' in Homs"

    From their report: "... the opposition and activists said on Monday."

    Q: How does the AusBC contact 'opposition and activists,' and why are such reports so heavily biased in favour of these 'opposition and activists?'

    Q: Who is more likely to rape and bash then slaughter innocent and presumed unarmed women and children?

    A1: Domestic defenders, or

    A2: Invading aliens?


    "New Israeli air strikes on the Gaza Strip killed three Palestinians on Sunday, raising the death toll in a latest round of violence to 18 ..."


    "Residents of three villages in the Panjwai district of Kandahar Province described a terrifying string of attacks in which the soldier, who had walked more than a mile from his base, tried door after door, eventually breaking in to kill within three separate houses. The man gathered 11 bodies, including those of 4 girls younger than 6, and set fire to them, villagers said."

    Try this:

    "Syrians involved in a popular uprising against Mr Assad say there can be no meaningful dialogue with a leader who has inflicted such violence and suffering on his own people."

    Q1: What "popular uprising?" The Syrian people just voted - in very large majority - in a referendum. Q: Were they forced to the polls at gunpoint? If so, where is the *proof*?

    Q2: Why "no meaningful dialogue?"- recall ditto in Libya, also an armed alien invasion (Al Qaeda and other mercenaries - then US-cruise missiles followed by ~26000 F+UK/NATO 'sorties' = smashed infrastructure and many civilian deaths, damage largely unknown to us because no credible reports = corrupt&venal MSM + AusBC.)

    Q3: Where do the opposition and activists' guns come from, the ones turned *against* the legitimate defenders of Syria = the Syrian army, and the innocent populace both?

    "This sovereign right [that of the legitimate defenders of Syria] is all the more founded given burgeoning evidence that the subversion is being fomented and furnished by foreign governments and their special forces. Turkey, Israel and Saudi Arabia have emerged as key backers of the self-styled armed opposition, the so-called Syrian Free Army. Most of the weaponry supplied to the oppositionists is reportedly emanating from Israel."

    You decide - balance of probabilities, past form; Afghanistan (invaded, still occupied), Iraq (invaded, smashed, still occupied - Oh, but 'only' by world's biggest embassy = occupied public-administration (incl. oil ministry)), Libya, (invaded, smashed), Syria 'on the boil' and Iran to be next?

  2. 'Snip' + references from:

    Middle East
    Mar 9, 2012
    Syria: Straining credulity?
    By Alastair Crooke

    The UN Secretary General was reported on March 3 saying that he had received "grisly reports" that Syrian government forces were arbitrarily executing, imprisoning and torturing people in Homs after retaking control of the Baba Amr district from insurgents. Did he really believe this; or was he just "saying it"?

    [me: Almost all 'reports' we are getting are from *non-independent* sources, namely 'activists' and their ilk. No 'lie-filter' is ever applied?]

    "One of the defining bifurcations of the future will be the conflict between information masters and information victims" the US officer assigned to the Deputy Chief of Staff (Intelligence), charged with defining the future of warfare, wrote in the US Army War College Quarterly in 1997.


    But does anyone really believe American and European objectives in Syria were ever purely humanitarian? Is it not the case - given that the turnout of events in the Middle East are taking such an ominous and dangerous turn - that it has now becoming somewhat awkward openly to admit that their info-war was never primarily about reforming Syria, but about "regime change", and that it was that even from before the first protest erupted in Dera'a?

    [me: well spotted]

    In his recent interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic, [5] given in advance of President Obama's American Israel Public Affairs Committee speech, the president, inter alia, was questioned about Syria. His response was very clear:

    GOLDBERG: Can you just talk about Syria as a strategic issue? Talk about it as a humanitarian issue, as well; but it would seem to me that one way to weaken and further isolate Iran is to remove or help remove Iran's only Arab ally.

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Absolutely.

    Do these Western interventionist proselytizers really believe that the onslaught on Syria is only about democracy and reform? Obama said it plainly. It was always about Iran. And, as Europe and America increasingly become bystanders to a Qatari and Saudi frenzy to overthrow a fellow Arab leader by any means it takes, do these "apostles" truly think that these absolute Arab monarchies simply share the Guardian's or Channel Four's nice humanitarian aspirations for Syria's future? Do these reporters really believe that the armed insurgents that Gulf states are financing and arming are nothing more than well-intentioned reformists, who have simply been driven to violence through Assad's incalcitrance? Some perhaps do, but others perhaps are simply "saying these things" to prepare the battlefield?

    1. Constant Conflict, Parameters, Summer 1997, pp. 4-14.

    2. The United Nations Accuses Syria of "Crimes against Humanity"

    3. The danger of reporters becoming 'crusaders', spiked-online.com, Feb 27, 2012.
    {Me: See also: [http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/3850566.html]}

    4. See 'How Avaaz Is Sponsoring Fake War Propaganda From Syria', March 3, 2012.

    5. Obama to Iran and Israel: 'As President of the United States, I Don't Bluff'

    Alastair Crooke is founder and director of Conflicts Forum and is a former adviser to the former EU Foreign Policy Chief, Javier Solana, from 1997-2003.