Historic Hypocrisy: UN-Backed Rogue States Plan Syria's Slaughter

by Felicity Arbuthnot

"The greatest crime since World War II has been U.S. foreign policy."

(Former US Attorney General, Ramsey Clark.)

On the 4th of May 2012, UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, chaired a Security Council meeting, "Highlighting the Changing Nature, Character and Scourge of Terrorism." (i) This followed a ministerial-level meeting on "threats to international peace and security posed by terrorism."

Ban Ki-moon's opening address underlined the importance of unity in tackling the problem, "By working together - from strengthening law enforcement to tackling the underlying drivers of extremism - we can greatly reduce this major threat to peace and security," he stated.

Presumably he did not encourage Permanent Members of the Security Council and other UN Member nations in funding terrorism, or "extremism" since he continued, "The Security Council reiterates its strong and equivocal condemnation of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, committed by whomever and where ever and for whatever purposes (stressing) that any terrorist acts are criminal and unjustifiable regardless of their motivation."

The thirteen page final document further states that, "The Security Council recognizes the continued need to take measures to prevent and suppress the financing of terrorism and terrorist organizations (reiterating) Member States' obligations in this regard ..."

Also that " ... Member States shall refrain in their international relations from the threat of use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State ..."

Moreover, "The Security Council reiterates the obligation of Member States to refrain from providing  any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in or associated with terrorist acts, including by suppressing recruitment of members of terrorist groups ..." (emphasis mine)

US Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, said that, "The threat of terrorism continued ... in spite of the death of Osama bin Laden" (a US state sponsored act of terrorism of enormity which had apparently escaped her).

The US "condemned all terrorism" and would, she said, use all its powers "including the power of our values ... to combat terrorism" - as children collecting firewood, farmers, families, youthful shepherds and goat herders, funeral and wedding parties, die under US drones in numbers in the thousands, on orders  now directly from the President.  Death by computer games from "operatives" thousands of miles away. Some "values." Quite some terrorism.

Ambassador Raza Bashir Tarar, Pakistan's Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN said that, "No country has suffered as much from terrorism as Pakistan." An ironic understatement given this US ally is attacked, often daily, by the US.

Sir Mark Lyall Grant, for rogue state UK, pledged his country's support in the fight against terrorism, and thanked Saudi Arabia for its efforts - who, as the US and UK, is allegedly heavily backing terrorists in the sovereign nation of Syria.

Ban Ki-moon was also worried about rising militancy in the Sahel region of Africa, "in part because of the fallout from developments in Libya."  A destruction, massacre and another lynching of a sovereign leader, he had apparently forgotten the UN - avowed to: "Save succeeding generations from the scourge of war" - under his stewardship and compliance, had given the green light to.

To read the whole document is to enter a world populated with people for whom reality has apparently long vanished.

So much  for fighting terrorism and the protection of the sovereign State.

On the 3rd of August, the Times of India and others confirmed an open secret: "President Obama has signed a secret order authorizing US support for rebels seeking to depose Syrian President Assad's government ... Obama's order, approved earlier this year and known as an intelligence 'finding' permits the CIA and other US agencies to provide support that could help the rebels oust President Assad."

On the same day, Britain's Foreign Secretary, William Hague, (another day, another poodle) announced, using near identical words, an increase in support for the Syrian "opposition forces" including the cash to train "citizen journalists" to get the word out about (government) atrocities in Syria. Translation: learn convincing lies and propaganda, photoshop and add a few film sets to stage "demonstrations" and "atrocities" - remember the Libya ones, filmed in India, for (just one) example?

The Daily Mail (UK) ominously quoted former British Army Commander, Richard Kemp, a former member of the government's Joint Intelligence Committee, as saying, "The UK Government cannot give practical support to the rebels without a presence inside Syria, and any Foreign Office officials seeking to liaise with the opposition leaders would require close protection from Special Forces."

On the 5th of August,  Senators John McCain (Arizona), Lindsey O. Graham (South Carolina) and Joseph I. Lieberman (Connecticut) advised the US government to directly and openly provide assistance, including weapons, intelligence and training, to the Syrian insurgents.

On the 7th of August, Secretary of State Hillary ("We came, we saw, he died") Clinton, hurtling pointlessly round the world like the proverbial headless chicken, threatening, lecturing, ranting, talked of the urgency of planning for a "post-Assad Syria."

Today, William Hague announced he is committing "an additional" five million pounds to the terrorists. (ii) Which begs the question how much was the British government providing already?

Another open secret has also come out: Turkey is training terrorists to go to Syria. (iii) Turkey, of course a NATO Member, but desperate to get into the pretty well doomed European Union with its near certainly dying currency,  appears to be prepared to do anything to curry favour - and in doing so appears to be the first figurative Turkey to vote for Christmas - clamoring to leap in the economic oven and be roasted.

Veteran Russian politician, Yevgeny Primakov, is under no illusions:

"Mercenaries and volunteers from other states are fighting (Assad) jointly with violent internal forces. Most Syria opponents are nonviolent. They want peaceful conflict resolution. Washington has other ideas.  President Obama has given a direct order to the CIA to support the Syrian opposition.  That is flagrant interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state, which does not endanger the United States or anyone else.  Saudi Arabia and Qatar are funding militants. Turkey is giving them active support." So are other regional countries. (iv)

This would appear to be borne out by photographer, John Cantile, and his colleague Dutch journalist, Jeroen Oerlemans, kidnapped by "rebels" on the 19th of July and who escaped a week later.

Cantile told the BBC he was held in a camp by 30 foreign extremists, including some from Britain and Pakistan, stating that some of his captors were "young men with south London accents."

He asserted that some of the insurgents could not even speak Arabic, with around a dozen of his captors speaking English, out of whom nine spoke with London accents.

"Not a Syrian in sight. This wasn't what I had expected," Cantile added.  "Two of them were so anglicised they couldn't speak Arabic."  This was confirmed by Oerlemans who also said there were Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Chechens and other nationalities.

Seemingly, Britain does not just fund terrorists, it exports them. The Foreign Office confirmed the kidnapping, but declined to confirm there were British amongst the criminals. Well, they wouldn't, would they?

"The Security Council recognizes the urgent need for additional efforts to be made at national, regional and international levels in order to prevent the illicit proliferation (of) materials of all types (which could) fuel terrorist activities," states the Security Council document. An utterly meaningless thirteen pages, as Security Council Member Countries fund terrorism against a sovereign nation and government.

The Syrian Ambassador to the UN, Bashar Jafari, as the usual suspects railed about his government's human rights abuses, reminded of Prime Minister Cameron's reaction to last year's UK riots: "(Cameron) said that 'when it is related to national security, don't talk to me about human rights We care about the human rights of our people ...' There are third parties in the domestic crisis in Syria," added Mr Jafari. Sir Mark Lyall Grant called his remark "utterly grotesque." (Daily Telegraph, the 20th of June 2012).  Another flight from reality.

In the same article, eminent British-based cardiac surgeon, Fawaz Akhras, President Assad's father in law, made a similar point. "When the London riots burst out, Mr. Cameron said he would bring the army out, now would you compare (the riots) to Homs?  What would you do? Just watch them killing? There is a responsibility to ensure the security of your people." In Professor Akhras's profession, he is used to dealing with people who are incapacitated, of course.

As I write, I do so where, because of the Olympics, not a war, we have ground to air missiles on domestic buildings, war ships with an array of armaments at all venues, 20,000 soldiers, armed police. Any of the lethal weaponry deployed in arguably Britain's most populated region which, if used, could wipe thousands of us out.

We are residents, not insurgents.  We are not in a war zone, but we are potential Olympic cannon fodder; collateral damage. And the US-UK axis and others fund terrorists and blame Syria's government.

To end where this started, mad, bad and very dangerous to know.

Oh, and by the way, in 1980, the US boycotted the  Moscow Olympics because the then USSR had invaded and occupied Afghanistan. Think about it.







Prepared for publication by:

Lisa Karpova

Subscribe to Pravda.Ru Telegram channel, Facebook, RSS!

Author`s name Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey