Tuesday, March 11, 2014

Syrian elections, house cleaning and the need for the US to get tough. Again

WP Editorial- The U.S. needs to get more aggressive on Syria
It still looks as if a narrative is being promoted

Talking points:

1- The impending elections which Assad will win handily
2- Advances made by the Syrian Army
3- The claims of non compliance with chemical weapons destruction/removal
4 - The claims of Russia invading Ukraine as a justification or cover for that long planned for spring offensive including a possible no fly zone
5- The possibility that rather then a full out onslaught there will be an attempted assassination of Assad which serve two purposes a- undermine the election and b- demoralize the Syrian people and her army

WP- “WASHINGTON’S SEEMING inability to focus on more than one international crisis at a time “
Utter bullocks! Washington has been fully engaged in the Ukraine and in Syria, simultaneously.

Thought?- Could the US spin of Russia invading Crimea  be used to justify a US invasion of Syria?
Invasion is a loaded term and of course it is highly debatable whether or not Russia actually did invade Crimea- From my perspective  it appears an invitation was extended to persons already present and on the ground. But spin is spin. And as I have mentioned the narrative is building

Getting back to that WP editorial claim. The Obama administration has been fully engaged in Syria, supplying arms, fighters training and much, much more- As stated - Fodder, consumable but inferior. As mentioned in yesterday’s post and here is yet another news item from the Guardian- Syria war: new push against Assad being planned, So much for the nonsense from Washington Post about an inability to focus on more then one issue

The initiative, as reported in the region, is set against a backdrop of secret talks in the US last month between Susan Rice, Barack Obama's national security adviser, and Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, the Saudi interior minister in charge of covert action programmes in Syria.
 Spy chiefs from Jordan, Turkey, Qatar and other regional countries (ISRAEL) also attended the discussions, focused on making a "stronger effort" to help the rebels.
According to various reports mostly based on rebel statements or official or semi-official leaks, the aim of the offensive is to push back government forces in the Daraa, Quneitra- (Israel) and As-Suwayda governorates in south-west Syria, so opening the road to Damascus.
The offensive has been dubbed Geneva Horan, a reference to the plains near the Jordanian border and Israeli frontier.

The election angle-Syria readies for Assad election win.
Assad supporters out in full force

 An election this year, 2014,  in Syria. And Assad is going to win, quite handily.
The US and UN know this. It seems there had been pressure on Iran to ‘convince’ Assad to forget about elections. UN Fears Assad win in free Syrian Elections
(Think about the Iranian embassy bombing in Lebanon?)

Ambassador Roknabadi:

    [U.N. Undersecretary-General for Political Affairs Jeffrey] Feltman, during a visit to Iran last summer, asked officials to convince Assad not to run in the elections. The Iranian officials asked him: ‘What’s the problem if he runs,’ to which Feltman responded: ‘If he runs, he will win the elections.’
As I have stated on numerous occassions the UN is the “shiny happy face’ of the NATO global war machine. So, it should come as no surprise that the UN would be so disingenuous. No surprise at all.

 If Ambassador Roknabadi is accurate in his account, this confirms much about the US government’s cynical regime-change ploy in Syria. Not that it is any surprise to those paying attention. It is in keeping with US ambivalence toward actual electoral democracy in those places which it purports to democratize. From Gaza to Egypt to Afghanistan to Libya to Iraq, it seems what US democratization efforts fear most is actual democracy.
US ambivalence towards democracy. Like in Ukraine.

 Non compliance regarding chemical weapons?-  As karin mentioned in her comment, previous post, Syria has until the end of June 2014 to comply so why the sudden push? Syria did ask for an extension. Not sure if they got it or not
But, according to all reports, Syria has until June 30 2014 to comply- we are still more then 3 months away from that deadline- so why push the chemical weapon non-compliance button this many months in advance?
"Completion of removal (of the weapons) and destruction by June 30, 2014, is indeed achievable if action is taken by Syria now...

"said the delay would have to be approved by the OPCW and would essentially nullify the June 30 deadline set by the United Nations Security Council"

Clearly Syria has until June 30/14 to comply and yet I keep catching indicators of non compliance claims and dates that don’t quite apply

“likely violate a March 15 requirement for” March 15/14 that is just 4 days away from today......
March 15 is not June 30th/2014- so why the media keeps pushing this March date????

And finally- Invasion of Syria as the US alleges was done by Russia in Crimea?- There is no comparison.
However an assassination attempt, particularly a successful one, would 'kill two birds with one stone' for the NATO global war machine and Israel
Assad will not run in the election and the Syrian people/army will be in shambles

My heart goes out to the Syrian people always- they are braver then brave, at least that's how I see them :)

8 comments:

  1. “In accordance with the amendments introduced to the 1961 law (Foreign Assistance Act) a few years ago the provision of foreign assistance is prohibited to ‘the government of any country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup or decree’”, the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement. “Thus, by all criteria the provision of funds to the illegitimate [Kiev] regime, which seized power by force, is unlawful and goes beyond the boundaries of the US legal system.”
    http://rt.com/news/us-aid-ukraine-illegal-202/

    ReplyDelete
  2. History is repeating itself. The US and its allies support fascists in Europe again. Just like when they supported the Nazis in Germany to target the Soviet Union, they are now supporting ultra-nationalist fascists in Ukraine with the aim of targeting Russia.

    Anglo-American elites supported the Nazi Third Reich with the aim of manipulating a war between the Germans and the Soviets with the aim of getting both Berlin and Moscow to mutually destroy one another. This is the same strategy that Washington used against Baghdad and Tehran when it encouraged Saddam Hussein to invade Iran and launch the Iran-Iraq War.

    The appeasement policy of Britain was really designed to create a common border between the Germans and Soviets as a means of perpetrating a violent military clash between the two powerhouses.

    The Nazis were viewed with the highest respect by Anglo-American officials and business leaders while the Soviets were reviled. Many US corporations and banks supported the Nazis and financed them. Mackenzie King, the union busting advisor of the Rockefeller family and tenth prime minister of Canada, even admired Hitler and the Nazis. Moreover, many of the royal families of Western Europe were pro-Nazi. Edward VIII, who abdicated from the British throne in favour of his brother, was a supporter of Hitler, for example. http://reclaimourrepublic.wordpress.com/2014/03/12/history-is-repeating-itself-russia-stands-against-fascism-again-crimea-votes-for-independence/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hi brian- yes Mackenzie King- the son of a traitor to the fledgling Canada whose ugly face I have to look at on Canadian money
      Rockefellers other PR man, who aided in the cover up of mass killings of workers in Ludlow
      I have done to posts on this man hoping Canadians will understand how far the Rockefeller tentacles have always reached into this country
      disgusting

      As for WW2- Indeed Germany was after Russia the entire time
      the casualty stats on the eastern front tell the story
      horrific fighting and sooooo many dead Russians
      brutality afterwards by the CIA's new man about town- Gehlen
      and more

      The rest is greatly embellished so that a number of agendas can be advanced

      Delete
  3. Syricide ‏@Syricide 11h
    In #UK, families are reporting members to the police who they fear are planning to fight in #Syria
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/syria-civil-war-police-hail-uk-arrests-of-wouldbe-jihadis-9184082.html … #jihad #terrorism

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Penny
    With sidelining Russia in the removal and destruction of the Syrian CW there is an opportunity for some to be misplaced for the purpose of an "accident", read, rebel CW attack which can be traced back to Syrian CW stock. Just a thought mind you ... never happen, as the opposition to Syria is so honorable and honest it would never enter their mind to do such a thing,,,,, would it???

    Cheers

    KamNam

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi KamNam

      definite possibility, I broached that in an earlier post
      a potential for another false flag to justify this obviously planned incursion in Syrian territory

      Delete
  5. OSCE (which has no power in ukraine) which has been refused entry to crimea till the referendum is having a fit: OSCE @OSCE 15h
    OSCE Chair @SwissOSCE2014: Crimea referendum in current form is illegal, calls for alternative ways to address issue http://www.osce.org/cio/116313 ....they seem to overlook the illegality of the COUP and the fascist street gangs roaming ukraine....and anyway, Crimea is no longer part of Ukraine
    ===============
    OSCE says the crimea referendum is illegal...its not but who are OSCE have they an agenda?
    Following an unprecedented period of activity in the 1990s and early 2000s (decade), the OSCE has in the past few years faced accusations from the CIS states (primarily Russia) of being a tool for the Western states to advance their own interests. For instance, the events in Ukraine in 2004 (the "Orange Revolution") led to allegations by Russia of OSCE involvement on behalf of the pro-Western Viktor Yushchenko. At the 2007 Munich Conference on Security Policy, Vladimir Putin made this position very clear:
    "They [unnamed Western States] are trying to transform the OSCE into a vulgar instrument designed to promote the foreign policy interests of one or a group of countries. And this task is also being accomplished by the OSCE's bureaucratic apparatus, which is absolutely not connected with the state founders in any way. Decision-making procedures and the involvement of so-called non-governmental organizations are tailored for this task. These organizations are formally independent but they are purposefully financed and therefore under control".[29][30][31][32]
    Also, following the Belorussian Presidential election of 2001, the OSCE denounced the election, claiming it to be neither 'free nor fair'; however, the OSCE had actually refused to observe the vote, and still made the aforementioned claim, despite Gérard Stoudmann of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) of the OSCE acknowledging that there was "no evidence of manipulation or fraud of the results".
    Russia and its allies are advancing the concept of a comprehensive OSCE reform, which would make the Secretariat, institutions and field presences more centralized and accountable to collective consensus-based bodies and focus the work of the Organization on topical security issues (human trafficking, terrorism, non-proliferation, arms control, etc.), at the expense of the "Human Dimension", or human rights issues. The move to reduce the autonomy of the theoretically independent OSCE institutions, such as ODIHR, would effectively grant a Russian veto over any OSCE activity. Western participating States are opposing this process, which they see as an attempt to prevent the OSCE from carrying out its democratization agenda in post-Soviet countries.
    Following the 2008 U.S. presidential election, OSCE's ODIHR was accused of having double standards by Russia's lawmaker Slutsky. The point was made that while numerous violations of the voting process were registered, its criticism came only from within the United States (media, human rights organizations, McCain's election staff), while the OSCE known for its bashing criticism of elections on the post-Soviet space remained silent.[33][34]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organization_for_Security_and_Co-operation_in_Europe

    ReplyDelete

TROLLS & SPAM WILL BE DELETED WITHOUT HESITATION
KEEP IT RELEVANT. NO PERSONAL ATTACKS