Monday, August 27, 2012

EVERYTHING YOU WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT THE DARAYYA MASSACRE BUT WERE AFRAID TO ASK

The NATO media has recently been leading their news bulletins with an alleged massacre of civilians at a small town near Damascus called Darayya (or Daraya). The totals of dead vary and are still rising. Virtually all reports state that most of the dead were men of fighting age. Images shown generally include many corpses in white blankets and some images of dead in the street. Some news items also include images of what appears to be about ten members of the Syrian military patrolling a street. This time the BBC does not (yet) appear to have used an image from Iraq!

But we have heard this kind of story before, of a massacre of civilians by the Syrian military just days before a meeting at the United Nations on Syria.

So what did happen at Darayya?

The NATO media narrative is that, for some still unexplained reason, the Syrian military bombarded Darayya and then went from house to house slaughtering everything and anything that moved, and all this just before a meeting at the United Nations on Syria.

But just like the massacre at Houla in May this year, this does not make any sense at all. For such barbarity would literally bring united international condemnation, even from Russia and China, and would very likely lead to the destruction of the Syrian government by NATO in the form of a No Fly Zone and weeks of bombing followed by a similar outcome to that in Libya last year.

So if this narrative is not credible, then what did really happen?

Some of the NATO media reports do repeat the Syrian government narrative, but to nowhere the detail that the activists say. The Syrian government say the town has been cleansed of terrorists. The NATO media do not offer any evidence to support this claim, but they do report accounts from alleged witnesses and residents of Darayya that support the NATO media allegation, that all the death is due to a bloodthirsty Syrian military who went on a wanton bloodlust. Some of this evidence is taken from 'activists' over the phone.

The most objective report in the NATO media I have seen of the Darayya massacre is from CNN! They have produced a video report[1] which at least refers to, and includes some very brief snippets from, a video report by the Syrian media company Al Addounia which shows a reporter walking the streets of Darayya and interviewing an injured woman who says she does not know who shot at her. But showing this brief interview is enough to bring the whole NATO media narrative crashing to the ground, because she is a survivor of this alleged massacre by the Syrian military but she says that she does not know who did it?! Surely if the Syrian military in their fatigues were roaming the streets shooting up everything and anything that moved she would say so, wouldn't she? But if it was a terrorist wearing ordinary clothing...then she couldn't say who it was, could she?

The same CNN report also states a very, very interesting fact that relates to the Houla massacre; Darayya was a confirmed FSA stronghold.

However, the CNN reporter makes the claim that the Al Addounia report does not give any evidence to support the Syrian government narrative. So where can you view this report by Al Addounia, to make up your own mind? This report and others can be viewed at the Syria 360 website[2]. The same site also repeats the news from the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) which I have not been able to access for weeks now, presumably because of DDoS attacks. Al Addounia has also been the subject of attacks by the rebs, including attacks on their HQ and on their reporters. The Al Addounia report is a little OTT towards the end, particularly with the dramatic music as the Syrian military is shown patrolling the streets cleansed of terrorists, but what cannot be denied is the relief on the faces of the civilians of Darayya as the Syrian military chase the terrorists out of Darayya onto farms on the edge of the town where the terrorists are defeated.

The civilians interviewed by Al Addounia state they had been too afraid to leave their houses for days, even to get food. Some were even chased or tricked out of their houses by the rebs, who said the Army was coming to kill them.

But where does this media management by the rebels come from? Earlier this year, as part of the package of 'non-lethal' aid, the rebs got British taxpayer money for training in media management, i.e. to hoodwink British taxpayers. And today The Daily Telegraph confirms this.
The schemes are overseen by the US State Department's Office of Syrian Opposition Support (OSOS) and Foreign Office officials. America has set aside $25 million for political opponents of President Bashar al-Assad while Britain is granting £5 million to the cause of overthrowing the regime.

Mina al-Homsi (a pseudonym) is one of the first graduates of the training.

She now spends her days plotting how to spread seditious messages throughout her homeland through her own network, named Basma.

One of its main activities is to repackage video shot by amateurs into a format that can be used by broadcasters.[3]


And what of UK media? Despite his denials, Robert Fisk does compare the Syrian Army with the Nazi Wehrmacht.
The attempted disconnect has already begun. Syrian troops are fighting at the request of their people to defend their country. The shabiha have nothing to do with them. And I have to say – and no, yet again, I am not comparing Bashar with Hitler or the Syrian conflict with the Second World War – that the German Wehrmacht tried to play the same narrative game in 1944 and 1945 and, then, in a much bigger way, in post-war Europe. The disciplined lads of the Wehrmacht never indulged in war crimes or genocide against the Jews in Russia, Ukraine or the Baltic states or Poland or Yugoslavia. No, it was those damned SS criminals or the Einsatzgruppen or the Ukrainian militia or the Lithuanian paramilitary police or the proto-Nazi Ustashe who besmirched the good name of Germany. Bulls***, of course, though German historians who set out to prove the criminality of the Wehrmacht still face abuse.[4]

Fisk has yet to report on the speech by General Wesley Clark at The Commonwealth Club of California in 2007 in which he relates how in 1991 Paul Wolfowitz told Clark that the USA had "5 or 10 years to clean up those old Soviet client regimes; Syria, Iran, Iraq.", and how Wolfowitz would become the focus of a Zionist cabal who wrote several warmongering documents, one of which stated the need for a "new Pearl Harbor", and who on 9/11 were in control of the US government, military and media as four alleged hijacked planes flew around the most protected airspace unimpeded for nearly two hours to eventually fly into the WTC and even The Pentagon, an event that was the catalyst for the recent wars on "those old Soviet client regimes; Syria, Iran, Iraq.". Over the last week Fisk has published a report on Syria every day. Even The Friends of Syria website has posted some of them, believing them to be genuine. You will notice that I have not posted these reports by Fisk.

Regarding Houla, we were initially told that the Shabiha and Syrian military did it. There was an immediate rush to judgement by many. But the facts began to emerge, and then the initial story did not make sense. Most of the dead at Houla belonged to just two families who were pro-Assad. Why would the Shabiha and Syrian military slaughter two pro-Assad families? The massacre occured just before a crucial vote at the UN. Why would the Shabiha and Syrian military slaughter two pro-Assad families and just before a crucial vote at the UN? Houla was a confirmed FSA stronghold. So how were the Shabiha able to walk the streets of a FSA stronghold unimpeded in their fatigues in broad daylight, and then why would they slaughter two pro-Assad families just before a crucial vote at the UN?

IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE!

But the Syrian government narrative made much more sense; terrorists came to the FSA stronghold of Houla and demanded that the pro-Assad families join their Jihad against Assad, but the families refused, so the terrorists slaughtered them, and the whole crime was covered up by the FSA, who gave 'evidence' to the UN in Geneva by phone. The FSA would later try to send C4 Alex Thomson into no-mans-land to get killed, after telling him a load of bulls***.

It is a similar story at Darayya. Only this time the terrorists were caught and killed by the Syrian military. The dead men of fighting age were terrorists. They killed most of any civilians among the dead (I am willing to concede that a very small number of civilians may have been killed by accident by Syrian military shelling).

Just a few weeks ago the FSA claimed to have killed a Russian General. That same day the same Russian General gave a press conference in Moscow to say he was not dead.

We cannot believe or trust the FSA, from sending reporters into no-mans-land to get killed, to claiming to have killed a Russian General.

From the evidence I have seen I once again believe the Syrian government on this alleged massacre at Darayya.
1. virtually every NATO media report states that most of the dead were men of fighting age. This would make sense if they were terrorists.
2. Syrian reports clearly show civilians traumatised and terrorised into not leaving their houses, with some saying how civilians were killed by the terrorists, and the civilians relieved at the Syrian military chasing the terrorists away.
3. why would the Syrian military kill so many 'civilians' just days before a meeting at the UN on Syria?

[1] http://edition.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t2#/video/world/2012/08/27/clancy-syria-violence-crackdown.cnn
[2] http://syria360.wordpress.com/2012/08/26/darayya-massacre-the-true-story/
[3] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9500503/Britain-and-US-plan-a-Syrian-revolution-from-an-innocuous-office-block-in-Istanbul.html
[4] http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-the-syrian-army-would-like-to-appear-squeaky-clean-it-isnt-8082070.html




No comments: