Comments
from Kevin Hester -
The
War in SYRIA and the unfolding one in UKRAINE are different tentacles
of the same serpent, it's body the U.S. with a Zionist brain
The
use of Agent Provacateurs has a very long history and present in both
Syria and now the Ukraine.
Don't
jump to conclusions presented via the MSM Narrative as it's nothing
short of in this case, State Department disinformation
"Discussion
about the role of provocateurs in stirring up conflict has made some
headlines since Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet’sleaked phone
conversation with the EU’s Catherine Ashton disclosed suspicions
that pro-west snipers had killed both Ukranian security forces and
civilians during the Euromaidan protests."
"Instead
of writing these things off as “conspiracy theories,” the role of
provocateurs against targeted governments suddenly appears to have
emerged in the mainstream discourse. Whether it is the US’s leaked
plan to create a “Cuban twitter” to stir unrest in the island
nation – or – the emergence of “instructional”leaflets in
protests from Egypt to Syria to Libya to Ukraine, the convergence of
just one-too-many “lookalike” mass protest movements that turn
violent has people asking questions and digging deeper today."
Syria: The hidden massacre
The
attack took place shortly after the first stirrings of trouble in the
southern Syrian city of Daraa in March 2011.
RT,
7
May, 2014
Several
old Russian-made military trucks packed with Syrian security forces
rolled onto a hard slope on a valley road between Daraa al-Mahata and
Daraa al-Balad. Unbeknown to the passengers, the sloping road was
slick with oil poured by gunmen waiting to ambush the troops.
Brakes
were pumped as the trucks slid into each other, but the shooting
started even before the vehicles managed to roll to a stop. According
to several different opposition sources, up to 60 Syrian security
forces were killed that day in a massacre that has been hidden by
both the Syrian government and residents of Daraa.
One
Daraa native explains: “At
that time, the government did not want to show they are weak and the
opposition did not want to show they are armed.”
Beyond
that, the details are sketchy. Nizar Nayouf, a longtime Syria
dissident and blogger who wrote about the killings, says the massacre
took place in the final week of March 2011.
A
source who was in Daraa at the time, places the attack before the
second week of April.
Rami
Abdul Rahman, an anti-government activist who heads up the Syrian
Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), the most quoted Western media
source on Syrian casualties, tells me: “It
was on the first of April and about 18 or 19 security forces – or
“mukhabarat” – were killed.”
Syria’s
Deputy Foreign Minister Dr. Faisal Mekdad is a rare government
official familiar with the incident. Mekdad studied in Daraa, is from
a town 35 kilometers to the east called Ghasson, and made several
official visits to Daraa during the early days of the crisis. The
version he tells me is similar, down to the details of where the
ambush took place – and how. Mekdad, however, believes that around
24 Syrian army soldiers were shot that day.
Why
would the Syrian government hide this information, when it would
bolster their narrative of events – namely that “armed
groups” were
targeting authorities from the start, and that the uprising was not
all“peaceful”?
In
Mekdad’s view, “this
incident was hidden by the government and by the security for reasons
I can interpret as an attempt not to antagonize or not to raise
emotions and to calm things down – not to encourage any attempt to
inflame emotions which may lead to escalation of the situation –
which at that time was not the policy.”
April
2011: The killing of soldiers
What
we do know for certain is that on April 25, 2011, nineteen Syrian
soldiers were gunned down in Daraa by unknown assailants. The names,
ages, dates of birth and death, place of birth and death and
marital/parental status of these 19 soldiers are documented in a list
of military casualties obtained from Syria’s Defense Ministry.
The
list was corroborated by another document – given to me by a
non-government acquaintance involved in peace efforts – that
details 2011 security casualties. All 19 names were verified by this
second list.
Were
these the soldiers of the “Daraa
massacre?” April
25 is later than the dates suggested by multiple sources – and
these 19 deaths were not exactly “hidden.”
But
even more startling than actually finding the 19 Daraa soldiers on a
list, was the discovery that in April 2011, eighty-eight soldiers
were killed by unknown shooters in different areas across Syria.
Keep
in mind that the Syrian army was mostly not in the field that early
on in the conflict. Other security forces like police and
intelligence groups were on the front lines then – and they are not
included in this death toll.
The
first Syrian soldiers to be killed in the conflict, Sa’er Yahya
Merhej and Habeel Anis Dayoub, were killed on March 23 in Daraa.
Two
days after those first military casualties, Ala’a Nafez Salman was
gunned down in Latakia.
On
April 9, Ayham Mohammad Ghazali was shot dead in Douma, south of
Damascus. The first soldier killing in Homs Province – in Teldo –
was on April 10 when Eissa Shaaban Fayyad was shot.
April
10 was also the day when we learned of the first massacre of Syrian
soldiers – in Banyas, Tartous – when nine troops were ambushed
and gunned down on a passing bus. The BBC, Al Jazeera and the
Guardian all initially quoted witnesses claiming the dead soldiers
were “defectors” shot
by the Syrian army for refusing to fire on civilians.
A protester in the flahspoint central
Syrian city of Homs throws a tear gas bomb back towards security
forces, on December 27, 2011. (AFP photo)
The
SOHR’s Rami Abdul Rahman says of the “defector” storyline: “This
game of saying the army is killing defectors for leaving – I never
accepted this because it is propaganda.” It
is likely that this narrative was used early on by opposition
activists to encourage divisions and defections among the armed
forces. If military commanders were shooting their own men, you can
be certain the Syrian army would not have remained intact and united
three years on.
After
the Banyas slayings, soldier deaths in April continued to pop up in
different parts of the country – Moadamiyah, Idlib, Harasta,
al-Masmiyah (near Suweida), Talkalakh and the suburbs of Damascus.
But
on April 23, seven soldiers were slaughtered in Nawa, a town near
Daraa. Those killings did not make the headlines like the one in
Banyas. Notably, the incident took place right after the Syrian
government tried to defuse tensions by abolishing the state security
courts, lifting the state of emergency, granting general amnesties
and recognizing the right to peaceful protest.
Two
days later, on April 25 – Easter Monday – Syrian troops finally
moved into Daraa. In what became the scene of the second mass slaying
of soldiers since the weekend, 19 soldiers were shot dead that day.
This
information also never made it to the headlines.
Instead,
all we ever heard was about the mass killing of civilians by security
forces: “The
dictator slaughtering his own people.” But
three years into the Syrian crisis, can we say that things may have
taken a different turn if we had access to more information? Or if
media had simply provided equal air-time to the different, contesting
testimonies that were available to us?
Facts versus fiction
A
report by Human Rights Watch (HRW) relies entirely on 50 unnamed
activists, witnesses and“defected
soldiers” to
set the scene for what was taking place in Daraa around that time.
HRW
witnesses provided accounts of “security
forces using lethal force against protesters during
demonstrations” and “funeral
processions.” In
some cases, says HRW, “security
forces first used teargas or fired in the air, but when the
protesters refused to disperse, they fired live ammunition from
automatic weapons into the crowds…From the end of March witnesses
consistently reported the presence of snipers on government buildings
near the protests who targeted and killed many of the protesters.”
The
HRW report also states: “Syrian
authorities repeatedly claimed that the violence in Daraa was
perpetrated by armed terrorist gangs, incited and sponsored from
abroad.”
Today
we know that this statement is fairly representative of a large
segment of Islamist militants inside Syria, but was it true in Daraa
in early 2011 as well?
There
are some things we know as fact. For instance, we have visual
evidence of armed men crossing
the Lebanese border into Syria during April and May 2011, according
to video footage and testimony from former Al Jazeera reporter Ali
Hashem, whose video was censored by his network.
There are other things we are still only now discovering. For instance, the HRW report also claims that Syrian security forces in Daraa “desecrated (mosques) by scrawling graffiti on the walls” such as “Your god is Bashar, there is no god but Bashar” – in reference to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
Just
recently a Tunisian jihadist who goes by the name Abu Qusay, told
Tunisian television that his“task” in
Syria was to destroy and desecrate mosques with
Sunni names (Abu Bakr mosque, Othman mosque, etc) in false-flag
sectarian attacks to encourage defection by Syrian soldiers, the
majority of whom are Sunni. One of the things he did was scrawling
pro-government and blasphemous slogans on mosque walls like “Only
God, Syria and Bashar.” It
was a “tactic” he
says, to get the soldiers to “come
on our side” so
that the army “can
become weak.”
Had
the Syrian government been overthrown quickly – as in Tunisia and
Egypt – perhaps we would not have learned about these acts of
duplicity. But three years into this conflict, it is time to
establish facts versus fiction.
A
member of the large Hariri family in Daraa, who was there in March
and April 2011, says people are confused and that many “loyalties
have changed two or three times from March 2011 till now. They were
originally all with the government. Then suddenly changed against the
government – but now I think maybe 50% or more came back to the
Syrian regime.”
The
province was largely pro-government before things kicked off.
According to the UAE paper The National, “Daraa
had long had a reputation as being solidly pro-Assad, with many
regime figures recruited from the area.”
But
as Hariri explains it, “there
were two opinions” in
Daraa. “One
was that the regime is shooting more people to stop them and warn
them to finish their protests and stop gathering. The other opinion
was that hidden militias want this to continue, because if there are
no funerals, there is no reason for people to gather.”
“At
the beginning 99.9 percent of them were saying all shooting is by the
government. But slowly, slowly this idea began to change in their
mind – there are some hidden parties, but they don’t know
what,” says
Hariri, whose parents remain in Daraa.
HRW
admits “that
protestors had killed members of security forces” but
caveats it by saying they “only
used violence against the security forces and destroyed government
property in response to killings by the security forces or…to
secure the release of wounded demonstrators captured by the security
forces and believed to be at risk of further harm.”
We
know that this is not true – the April 10 shootings of the nine
soldiers on a bus in Banyas was an unprovoked ambush. So, for
instance, was the killing of General Abdo Khodr al-Tallawi, killed
alongside his two sons and a nephew in Homs on April 17. That same
day in the pro-government al-Zahra neighborhood in Homs, off-duty
Syrian army commander Iyad Kamel Harfoush was gunned down when he
went outside his home to investigate gunshots. Two days later,
Hama-born off-duty Colonel Mohammad Abdo Khadour was killed in his
car. And all of this only in the first month of unrest.
In
2012, HRW’s Syria researcher Ole Solvag told me that he had
documented violence “against
captured soldiers and civilians” and
that “there
were sometimes weapons in the crowds and some demonstrators opened
fire against government forces.”
But
was it because the protestors were genuinely aggrieved with violence
directed at them by security forces? Or were they “armed
gangs” as
the Syrian government claims? Or – were there provocateurs shooting
at one or both sides?
Provocateurs in “Revolutions”
Syrian-based
Father Frans van der Lugt was the Dutch priest murdered by a gunman
in Homs just a few weeks ago. His involvement in reconciliation and
peace activities never stopped him from lobbing criticisms at both
sides in this conflict. But in the first year of the crisis, he
penned some
“From
the start the protest movements were not purely peaceful. From the
start I saw armed demonstrators marching along in the protests, who
began to shoot at the police first. Very often the violence of the
security forces has been a reaction to the brutal violence of the
armed rebels.”
In
September 2011 he wrote: “From
the start there has been the problem of the armed groups, which are
also part of the opposition…The opposition of the street is much
stronger than any other opposition. And this opposition is armed and
frequently employs brutality and violence, only in order then to
blame the government.”
Certainly,
by June 5, there was no longer any ability for opposition groups to
pretend otherwise. In a coordinated attack in Jisr Shughur in Idlib,
armed groups killed 149 members of the security forces, according to
the SOHR.
But
in March and April, when violence and casualties were still new to
the country, the question remains: Why would the Syrian government –
against all logic – kill vulnerable civilian populations
in “hot” areas,
while simultaneously taking reform steps to quell tensions?
Who
would gain from killing “women
and children” in
those circumstances? Not the government, surely?
Discussion about the role of provocateurs in stirring up conflict has made some headlines since Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet’sleaked phone conversation with the EU’s Catherine Ashton disclosed suspicions that pro-west snipers had killed both Ukranian security forces and civilians during the Euromaidan protests.
Says
Paet: “All
the evidence shows that people who were killed by snipers from both
sides, among policemen and people from the streets, that they were
the same snipers killing people from both sides…and it’s really
disturbing that now the new (pro-western) coalition, they don’t
want to investigate what exactly happened.”
A
recent German TV investigation the
sniper shootings confirms much about these allegations, and has
opened the door to contesting versions of events in Ukraine that did
not exist for most of the Syrian conflict – at least not in the
media or in international forums.
Instead
of writing these things off as “conspiracy
theories,” the
role of provocateurs against targeted governments suddenly appears to
have emerged in the mainstream discourse. Whether it is the US’s
leaked plan to create a “Cuban
twitter” to
stir unrest in the island nation – or – the emergence
of“instructional”leaflets in
protests from Egypt to
Syria to Libya to Ukraine, the convergence of just
one-too-many “lookalike” mass
protest movements that turn violent has people asking questions and
digging deeper today.
Since
early 2011 alone, we have heard allegations
of “unknown” snipers targeting crowds
and security forces in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria and Ukraine. What
could be more effective at turning populations against authority than
the unprovoked killing of unarmed innocents? By the same token, what
could better ensure a reaction from the security forces of any nation
than the gunning down of one or more of their own?
By
early 2012, the UN claimed there were over 5,000 casualties
in Syria –
without specifying whether these were civilians, rebel fighters or
government security forces. According to government lists presented
to and published by the UN’s Independent International Commission
of Inquiry on Syria, in the first year of conflict, the death toll
for Syrian police forces was 478, and 2,091 for military and security
force casualties.
Those
numbers suggest a remarkable parity in deaths between both sides in
the conflict, right from the start. It also suggests that at least
part of the Syrian “opposition” was
from the earliest days, armed, organized, and targeting security
forces as a matter of strategy – in all likelihood, to elicit a
response that would ensure continued escalation.
Today,
although Syrian military sources strongly refute these numbers, the
SOHR claims there are more than 60,000 casualties from the country’s
security forces and pro-government militias. These are men who come
from all parts of the nation, from all religions and denominations
and from all communities. Their deaths have left no family untouched
and explain a great deal about the Syrian government’s actions and
responses throughout this crisis.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.