Syrian government officials could face war crimes charges in the light of a huge cache of evidence smuggled out of the country showing the "systematic killing" of about 11,000 detainees, according to three eminent international lawyers.
...The authors are Sir Desmond de Silva QC, former chief prosecutor of the special court for Sierra Leone, Sir Geoffrey Nice QC, the former lead prosecutor of former Yugoslavian president Slobodan Milosevic, and Professor David Crane, who indicted President Charles Taylor of Liberia at the Sierra Leone court.
...The 31-page report, which was commissioned by a leading firm of London solicitors acting for Qatar, is being made available to the UN, governments and human rights groups. Its publication appears deliberately timed to coincide with this week's UN-organised Geneva II peace conference, which is designed to negotiate a way out of the Syrian crisis by creating a transitional government.
[source : Evidence of 'industrial-scale killing' by Syria spurs call for war crimes charges, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/20/evidence-industrial-scale-killing-syria-war-crimes, 20th January 2014]
Having skimmed through the report, it does look professionally produced with some harrowing photographs of torture and abuse, but it cannot be proved that Assad ordered it all.
But let us muse for a while, head on hand in deep thought, like Rodin's Thinker, and ask :
WHY IS THERE A WAR IN SYRIA IN THE FIRST PLACE?!
These smart arse lawyers are the sort who think it is perfectly OK to allow banks to create money out of thin air, lend it to us, charge interest on it, and then demand repayment in hard physical goods when it isn't paid back!
They just can't see, or don't want to see, the bigger picture.
So, why is there a war in Syria in the first place which drives men into allegedly committing such crimes against humanity?
It was planned decades ago, assumed by Israel in A Clean Break. They, with Saudi Arabia, did 9/11. They planned to enrage The United States of Warmerica into attacking Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Libya, Sudan and Somalia.
Approaching one million died during and after the invasion of Iraq in 2003, and half that before after Saddam was tricked into invading Kuwait in 1990. There was something really suspicious about all that, which has nearly been copied today in Syria. We encouraged a rebellion against Saddam. The rebels had congregated for an attack, having been led to believe that we would support them, but when the time came, we betrayed the rebels and Saddam wiped out whatever rebellion there was against him inside Iraq, leaving Saddam more powerful and untouchable inside Iraq. Now does that sound suspicious or does that sound suspicious?
Let's muse again.
Iraq : we betrayed a rebellion against Saddam in 1991, placed sanctions on Iraq that killed hundreds of thousands of children, Iraqi oil was sold on the black market (so profits couldn't be traced), then in 2003 we invaded Iraq and found someone hiding in a hole who looked like Saddam and apparently hung him. But before all this, Saddam was CIA!! Doesn't that make you go, hmmm, maybe he was CIA all along, all the way to the time they hung his double while he escaped with his millions from the sale of Iraqi oil on the black market? You don't really know with these dodgy scheming bastards. After all, we are talking about control of the world's second largest proven oil reserves...Perhaps A Clean Break is just smoke and mirrors?
War against Hezbollah in 2006 is the war that implies the wars since 9/11 are Israeli-instigated and related to A Clean Break, but it could just be a red herring.
And as for Libya? Why did Russia and China abstain on UN SCR 1973? That seems really, really dodgy to me. But to add to this, Gaddafi was allegedly our ally in the Global War on Terror, giving names of al Qaeda to CIA and MI6, torturing rendition suspects, and investing his personal fortune in The City of London with Goldman Sachs. But somehow GS managed to 'lose' millions of Gaddafi's money. And didn't Gaddafi have doubles too?
And now onto Syria. As with Gaddafi, Assad was our ally in the war on terror. Suspects were renditioned to Syria for torture. And then there is that famous photo of Kerry and Assad at dinner. What were they discussing? But as with Iraq in 1991, we encouraged a rebellion and we now seem to be betraying that too.
I'm just looking at all this from a different angle, incorporating other stuff we know. That Iraq/CIA/Saddam stuff looks very, very suspicious to me. And if what happened in Iraq was all a scam, then perhaps everything after it is too...
But back to these alleged crimes against humanity committed by Syrian government officials. Let's put them into perspective. If it is true that these crimes were committed then, yes, the perpetrators should be held accountable.
But so should the likes of William Hague, David Cameron, Tony Blair and Bandar bin Sultan for going to war on Iraq and encouraging the rebellion in Syria. But these are just the front men, the ugly faces of evil. Before March 2011 Syria was peaceful. But after British officials smuggled the rebels into Syria (as suggested by Roland Dumas)...
Who is more guilty: those who follow orders, or those who give orders?
And what if those crimes are committed in self defence?
It is the real but anonymous perpetrators who need to be brought to justice: those who ordered and/or agreed to the killing of hundreds of thousands of Iraq children through sanctions; those who ordered and/or agreed to 9/11; those who ordered and/or agreed to implement the plan for war on seven nations in five years; those who ordered and/or agreed to the killing of approaching a million Iraqis in 2003; and all the rest who order and/or acquiesce to mass genocide.
But who gives a f...?
Anybody?
Is there anybody out there?
No comments:
Post a Comment