.. the UN tolerates ...
.. assists & even encourages ...
.. the equal worst rogue-regimes = US/Israel
Thesis/Subtitle: What I once disputed, I now embrace: The UN is as useless as an ashtray on a motorbike - but far more cancerous, and far, far more criminal.
UN chief renews attack on Assad, amid amnesty
Updated January 16, 2012 00:42:23
«"Today, I say again to president Assad of Syria: Stop the violence. Stop killing your people. The path of repression is a dead end," Mr Ban said in a keynote address at a conference in Beirut on democracy in the Arab world.»
Comment 1: Ban's "Stop killing your people" is based on allegations which almost every report, also from those 'stenographed' by 'our' AusBC, includes text such as: "reports [by self-interested 3rd parties?] cannot be confirmed."
Comment 2: Ban's imperative dovetails into and follows the same pattern as was recently deployed vis-à-vis the rape of Libya, another 'innocent' target 'obliterated' in the same way as Iraq was, namely many innocents killed and their infrastructure destroyed by US &/ NATO in the name of 'regime-change.' As if even the pushed-propaganda paradigm dumbed-down (ppp-dd'd) sheople don't notice?
From a recent article of mine:
«The Zs' infamy may be considered to begin with Herzl (1897), then via Balfour, Jabotinsky, the alien invading terrorists = Irgun, Lehi, Stern Gang, Haganah et al., leading to the Nakba ('47/8, genocidal ethnic cleansing of Palestine) and the regular if random continuation of more of the same terrorism right down to the current moment; amongst latest outrages Gaza '08/9 (~1400 mainly civilians slaughtered), high-seas murdering piracy against the peace-fleet = Israel flotilla raid '10, live-ammunition/sniper attacks on non-violent protesters in Golan Heights, '11.
The US' infamy is longer, try starting with a list of interventions for “regime change” here, which notes 1st such in 1893 against Hawaii.
Long-story short: The list of US+Zs' depredations is as long as it is filthy.»
Comment 1: The US started its criminality long before the UN, even before the League of Nations. Both of these latter 'international organisations' were predicated on 'no more war,' both have failed. Worse, the UN assists criminality; starting no later than its cynical approval of UNGA181; the UN has utterly failed to restrain the murdering-to-steal Zionists rampant in the ME (dispossessing the hapless natives of their land/property), let alone the US rampant ditto (dispossessing other hapless natives of their oil &/ sovereign resources), across the wider world (approaching 1000 military bases, no-one is safe.)
Comment 2: The UN did not 'approve' the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the UN (via Kofi Annan) belatedly declared the invasion of Iraq in 2003 as illegal, and the UN actually 'green-lighted' the 'no-fly invasion' = rape of Libya in 2011. (Shame!) Now Syria is on the line, possibly next Iran. The US is not the world's policeman, that job is assigned to the UN - failing = corrupt. 'Bottom line' is that the UN is ineffective; the UN/Ban Ki-moon has earned no right to lecture anybody. Sooo, Ban, STFU!
Fazit: IF some agent supports/argues for an erring ideology AND that erring ideology is engaged in some crime (worst = murder for spoil; Zs for soil & US for oil) THEN that agent is a prime perpetrator, accessory or apologist, depending on degree of involvement in the crime, and that agent makes her/himself equally guilty.
Corollary: IF some agent's task is to prevent some evil AND that evil is not prevented (let alone is tolerated, worse assisted or absolute worst encouraged) THEN that agent makes her/himself equally guilty - how do you plead, UN/Ban Ki-moon?
.. the UN tolerates ...
the curious incident of the dog in the night-time
the dog did nothing in the night-time
that was the curious incident
.. ME propaganda ...
.. without Anne Barker ...
.. I'm utterly desolated (not!)
Thesis/Subtitle: IF you don't like the message THEN shoot the messenger.
Arab body calls for monitors to leave Syria
Updated January 02, 2012 00:18:46
«In an online video a man who appeared to be a monitor in the southern town of Deraa said he saw snipers in the town.
"We saw snipers in the town, we saw them with our own eyes," the observer said in Arabic, visibly concerned.
"We're going to ask the government to remove them immediately. We'll be in touch with the Arab League back in Cairo."»
Comment 1: We have no way of knowing whether these jerky, out of focus videos, conveying little more than confusion, are genuine - or 'made in Hollywood' as lying propaganda. Rogue-regimes which mass-murder for spoil (= kill to steal, see Iraq etc., multi-mios dead) will hardly quibble about lying, in fact lies are a *requirement* of all crime. (Proof: No lies = truth, which would self-convict the crims.)
Comment 2: The 'business' of snipers is to shoot from cover - by definition [fire shots from hiding, usu. at long range [POD]]. It means that seeing a sniper in action would be *highly* unlikely, all the more so since these Arab League imposed interlopers are accused/assumed to be accompanied by 'helpful' government guides - the group being thusly as about as inconspicuous as dog's balls. Not only that, IF govt snipers were active THEN they'd be fully informed of the interlopers' progress, as a simple matter of 'standard operations.'
More from the same article:
«But Mr Dabi later told the BBC: "This man said that if he sees, by his eyes, those snipers, he will report them immediately and he will tell the government. But he didn't see."
He also infuriated some observers by suggesting he was reassured by first impressions of Homs, one of the main centres of unrest.»
Comment 1: This Mr Dabi is head of the Arab League observer mission.
Comment 2: The same Mr Dabi has already been attacked elsewhere:
Human Rights | 30.12.2011
Grave doubts hang over head of observer mission to Syria
«Human rights activists have criticized the choice of Sudanese General al-Dabi as head of the observer mission to Syria. Al-Dabi served under Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir and is linked to war crimes in Darfur.»
Comment 1: Deutsche Welle is like 'our' AusBC, tax-payer funded. Human rights activists lost their credibility latest in Libya, and allegations passed-on soon become 'factoids' = possibly still the original lies just 'massaged' by 'Chinese whispers.' Boo! The tax-payer funded broadcasters need to present us with *proof* (or else.)
Comment 2: Another thing such 'stories' contain are things like this: "International journalists are mostly barred from Syria, making it difficult to confirm accounts from conflict zones." So, Q: Where do all these reports originate? A: At least 3rd hand, via self-interested parties, so-called NGOs amongst them, then see previous comment and comments on lying further above.
Comment 3: The voters in a democracy need accurate information; how else are we the people to make informed choices - at the ballot-box, say? It is one of the functions of tax-payer funded 'news' organisations to so inform us. IF such broadcasters lie, THEN they are a) violating their remit and b) if by doing so, they assist criminals, then they make themselves criminals, by the accessory mechanism.
Fazit: US/NATO smashed Libya in 2011 based on precisely the same sort of lies as are now being spread through the corrupt & venal MSM, including and actively assisted by tax-payer funded 'news' organisations like 'our' AusBC and Deutsche Welle. Where are the reasonable people, truth & justice seekers like me but with the power to stop the criminals = anti-democratic tyrants, like B, B & H then and now Obama, Netanyahu, Cameron, Sarkozy & Gillard et al.?
PS Q: What's about dogs not barking? A: Perhaps there's actually nothing much for independent observers to see in Syria? After all, the Arab League is now long 'in bed' with US/NATO; why would such a sensitive observer position go to anyone not trusted to 'do the business' on Assad?
PPS As previously elsewhere mentioned, psychological propaganda may include 'trigger words' aimed at causing revulsion in the intended audience; such a trigger-word is 'snipers.' Other words are 'so-many killed, including children.' A new twist is adding +ve words; we now learn that the 'rebels,' 'militants,' 'activists' etc. from two competing anti-Assad factions have agreed to agree, and will now work for a 'democratic' outcome. Oh, how jolly - that would make them goodies, eh? But only if you believe the rubbish the likes of the AusBC are serving us up, recalling that belief is what many do in the absence of evidence.