Syria: Russian Intervention Exposes Coalition Lies

"Oh what a tangled web we weave,

When first we practice to deceive."

(Walter Scott, 1771-1832, "Marmion.")

How speedily the lies of the "international community" in general and those of the US and UK in particular about the Syrian situation are unraveling since the participation of Russia.

Take UK Prime Minister David Cameron. On 24^th September last year he addressed the United Nations, committing British aircraft to targeting IS/ISIL/ISIS in Iraq adding unequivocally that there would be no similar action in Syria and absolutely no "boots on the ground."

Felicity Arbuthnot

Referring to Iraq he added that the West should not be frozen by "past mistakes." If Iraq is a "mistake" Heaven alone knows what a catastrophe would look like.

Cameron of course was being economical with the truth. In 2013 Parliament voted not to be involved in Syria, making Cameron the first Prime Minister in 200 years to lose a Parliamentary war vote. It would anyway have been another illegal action, since they had not been invited by the Syrian President or government and had no UN mandate. However, in July this year it transpired that pilots of Britain's Air Force have been "embedded" with US and Canadian Air Squadrons and been involved in flying: "intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and strike missions ..." according to the Ministry of Defence.

On 7^th September Cameron also announced that a British drone strike in Syria had killed two UK citizens fighting with ISIS. What an irony, the UK has enjoined wiping out entire nations having accused their leaders of "killing their own people", terrorists or not, now Cameron kills his "own people" in what Michael Clarke, Director General of London's hawkish Royal United Services Institute has called a "targeted assassination."

Those killed were : "... targeted in an area that the UK does not currently regard, legally, as an operational theatre of war for UK forces", Clarke commented, adding: "The government insisted that, unlike CIA drones, they were never used for targeted assassinations in territories where we were not militarily engaged." Another government lie pinned.

As for "no boots on the ground", another seemingly whopping untruth. As Stephen Lendman has written: "On 2^nd August The Sunday Express revealed: 'SAS dress as ISIS fighters in undercover war on jihadis' expanding that:

" 'More than 120 members belonging to the elite regiment are currently in the war-torn country' covertly 'dressed in black and flying ISIS flags' engaged in what is called Operation Shader - attacking Syrian targets on the pretext of combatting ISIS."

A mirror image of Basra, Iraq, exactly ten years ago, September 2005, when British Special Forces, dressed in Arab clothing, were arrested by Iraqi police in an explosive laden car. Had the car detonated, "Iraqi insurgents" would, of course, have been blamed. The British military demolished the police station in order to free the would-be bombers. How many were not caught and "insurgency" for which Iraqis were blamed, killed, tortured, was actually "made in Britain" and the US, as Syria now?

British troops in US uniforms?

In August it was reported that SAS troops in Syria "dressed in US uniforms, joined US special forces" in the assassination of alleged ISIS financier Abu Sayyaf and the kidnapping of his wife (Independent, 10^th August.) It appears the British government only ever acts with, or at US behest, whilst sidelining its own Parliament.

Moreover: "Around 800 Royal Marines and 4,000 US counterparts were on standby to intervene on short notice if ordered", wrote Lendman.

No wonder the Russians are being castigated for targeting the wrong kind of terrorists. In addition to being non-discriminatory and regarding a terrorist as simply that, they might also take the black flag waving SAS soldiers in fancy dress as terrorists. A "tangled web", indeed.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov is anything but selective about the head chopping, culture erasing monsters besieging Syria - CIA trained or not - stating last week: "If it looks like a terrorist, if it acts like a terrorist, if it walks like a terrorist, if it fights like a terrorist, it's a terrorist, right?"

In a response which stunningly illuminated Washington's selective stance towards terrorism US Secretary of State, John Kerry stated: "What is important is Russia has to not be engaged in any activities against anybody but ISIL", he said: "That's clear. We have made that very clear." Breathtaking, it is for the Syrian government to specify the parameters.

The US and UK of course are both bombing and supporting insurgents entirely illegally in Syria, having no UN mandate and no request from the country's governing body. Did Kerry even blush when Lavrov remarked - over the unspoken questions as to whether Russia would extend it's air coverage to terrorist groups in Iraq - that they had no such plans: "We are polite people, we don't come if not invited", he said.

Fighting against terrorists

Vladimir Putin had said: "We have ... an invitation and we intend to fight against terrorist organizations and them only", possibly referring to allegations that the US has been targeting Syrian government sites and military personnel.

Russia's diplomatic envoys were reasonably polite to the US too. Before embarking on air strikes, according to US State Department spokesman John Kirby: "A Russian official in Baghdad this morning informed US Embassy personnel that Russian military aircraft would begin flying anti-ISIL missions today over Syria.

"He further requested that US aircraft avoid Syrian airspace during these missions." Russia had, in effect given the US one hour's notice to leave Syria.

The US speedily responded with a report of Russian attacks causing civilian casualties. Sadly it transpired that at the time of the reported attacks, Russian 'planes had not yet left the ground.

By 2^nd October, it seems panic has set in amongst the "US led coalition" which: " ... released a joint statement calling on Moscow to immediately cease attacks on the Syrian opposition and to focus on fighting ISIS." (Guardian 2^nd October 2015.)

The statement was issued by France, Turkey, the United States, Germany, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Britain.

However the US cat had already escaped from the Pentagon bag and made it's way to no less than the Wall Street Journal which, the previous day had a header: "Russian Airstrike in Syria Targeted CIA-Backed Rebels, U.S. Officials Say.

"One area hit was location primarily held by rebels receiving funding, arms, training from CIA and allies." Oooops.

Michel Chossudovsky has succinctly unraveled the unholy morass of the various groups coupling his piece with the WSJ story:

"Affiliated to Al Qaeda, Al Nusra is a US sponsored  "jihadist" terrorist organization which has been responsible for countless atrocities. Since 2012, AQI and Al Nusra - both supported by US intelligence- have been working hand in glove in various terrorist undertakings within Syria.

"In recent developments, the Syrian government has identified its own priority areas for the Russian counter-terrorism air campaign, which consists essentially in targeting Al Nusra.  Al Nusra is described as the terrorist arm of the Free Syrian Army (FSA).

"While Washington has categorized Al Nusra as a terrorist organization (early 2012), it nonetheless provides support to both Al Nusra and it's so-called 'moderate rebels' in the form of weapons, training, logistical support, recruitment, etc. This support is channeled by America's Persian Gulf allies, including Qatar and Saudi Arabia as well as through Turkey and Israel.

"Ironically, The UN Security Council in a May 2012 decision 'blacklisted Syria's al-Nusra Front as an alias of al-Qaeda in Iraq', namely the ISIL ..."

At the Russian intervention, US Ambassador to the UN, Samantha Power took to Twitter, stating: "We call on Russia to immediately cease attacks on Syrian opposition and civilians." Such action, she warned: "will only fuel more extremism and radicalization." Chutzpah outdone - until 2003 and the US-UK blitzkrieg there were no US sponsored organ eating, dismembering lunatics. Syria and Iraq were of the most secular countries in the region.

Syria, from lies, to heartbreak, to cultural destruction has become a microcosm of the demented, ridiculous "war on terror." The lies and subterfuge to justify the horror have become more desperate but only the most obtuse can avoid noticing that terrorists R US.

Felicity Arbuthnot