Is the Free Syrian Army revolutionary or who is fighting against Syria?
At a time when the Western press presents the Free Syrian Army as an armed revolutionary organization, for more than a year, Tierry Meyss has not ceased to state that, on the contrary, we are talking about a counter-revolutionary formation. According to him, this organization gradually passed from the hands of the reactionary monarchies of the Persian Gulf under the control of Turkey, acting in the interests of NATO. Such an assertion requires substantiated evidence ...During the 18 months, Syria is in the grip of distemper, which does not cease to increase and develops into an armed conflict, causing the death of almost 20000 people. There are no disagreements on this issue, and as for rumors and opinions, they differ greatly.
Western countries and their media make it clear that Syrians allegedly want to live in a European way, that is, in a market democracy. Following the example of Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, they rose to fight with their dictator Bashar al-Assad. The latter suppressed the demonstrations in the blood. At a time when the Western powers want to intervene and put an end to these killings, Russia and China, for the sake of their own interests and disregarding the lives of people, are opposed to this.
On the contrary, all states that are not converted to vassals of the United States and their media believe that the United States has launched a pre-planned military operation against Syria. First, through the mediation of their allies in this region, and then directly themselves, they introduced armed gangs into the country, which destabilized the situation in it by analogy with the Contra gangs in Nicaragua. However, the latter found only weak support from the population and were defeated, while Russia and China prevented NATO from destroying the Syrian army and thus did not allow to change the balance of forces in the region.
Who is right and who is wrong?
Armed units in Syria do not protect democracy, they fight against it
First, the presentation of the Syrian events as an episode of the “Arab Spring” is nothing more than an illusion, since this “spring” has no valid reason. This is just a propaganda move, the purpose of which is to profitably present the disparate facts. If in Tunisia, Yemen and Bahrain indeed there have been popular demonstrations, then this has not happened in either Egypt or Libya. Street demonstrations took place only in the capital and only the capital bourgeoisie participated in them, and the Egyptian people never considered themselves to be involved in a theatrical performance on Tahrir Square [1]. There was no political disagreement in Libya. There was a Cyrenaica separatist movement against the power of Tripoli, followed by a NATO military invasion that cost the lives of 160 000 people.
The NourTV station in Lebanon successfully conducted a series of programs by Hassan Hamad and George Rahme entitled "The Arab Spring from Lawrence Arabi to Bernard-Henry Levy." The authors develop in them the idea that the "Arab Spring" is a new version of the performance of the "Arab uprising" 1916-1918, organized by the British against the Ottoman Empire. This time, the Western powers manipulated the situation and brought the Muslim brothers to power. Indeed, the "Arab Spring" provides for the creation of false public opinion. Now Morocco, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt and the Gaza Strip are ruled by a single brotherhood, which, on the one hand, establishes the same moral principles, and on the other hand, it supports Zionism and pseudo-liberal capitalism, that is, the interests of Israel and the Anglo-Saxons. The illusion cleared. Some authors, such as the Syrian Said Hilal Alsharifi, mockingly call it "the NATO spring."
Secondly, the leaders of the National Syrian Council (NSS), who are at the head of the Free Syrian Army (PAS), can in no way be considered democrats in the sense that they support "the government of the people, with the help of the people and for the people" in accordance with the wording of Abraham Lincoln, borrowed from the French constitution.
For example, the first president of the NSS was Burkhan Shaliun, who graduated from the University of Paris. He was not at all "the Syrian opposition, persecuted by the regime", as he came and moved freely in his own country. He was also not, as he claims, a “secular intellectual”, since he was a political adviser to Algerian Abbasi Madani, president of the Islamic Liberation Front (IPF), who is now in exile in Qatar.
His successor, Abdel Basset Cid [2], came into politics just a few months ago and immediately showed himself to be a simple executor of American orders. After he was appointed head of the NSS, he did not undertake to defend the will of his people, but began to fulfill the “road map” that Washington developed for Syria: The Day after.
The fighters of the Free Syrian Army are by no means fighters for democracy. They recognize the spiritual authority of Sheikh Adnan al-Arura, a Takfirist preacher, who calls for the overthrow and assassination of Bashar al-Assad not for political reasons, but only because he is an Alawite, that is, a heretic in his view. All FSA commanders are Sunni, and all FSA brigades bear the names of Sunni historical persons. The "revolutionary tribunals" of the FSA condemn to death their political opponents (and not only the supporters of Bashar al-Assad) and the wicked, whom they execute in public by cutting their throats. The FSA program envisages ending the secular regime established by the Baath Party, the PSNP and the Communists, and establishing a purely Sunni confessional regime.
Syrian conflict was deliberately provoked by Western powers.
The intention of the Western powers to end Syria is known to all, and it fully explains the events taking place there. Here we recall a few facts that leave no doubt about the intentional nature of these events [3].
The decision to unleash a war in Syria was made by President George W. Bush during a meeting at Kemp David 15 September 2001, just after the spectacular events in New York and Washington. However, it was decided to carry out a military invasion in Libya, to show the ability to fight simultaneously in two theaters of military operations. This decision was witnessed by the testimony of General Wesley Clark, the former Supreme Commander of NATO, who did not agree with him.
After the fall of Baghdad in 2003, the US Congress passed two laws, representing the President of the United States on how to prepare one war against Libya and the other against Syria (Syria Accountability Act).
In 2004, Washington accused Syria of storing stocks in its territory. weapons mass destruction, which was never found in Iraq. This accusation completely failed when it was recognized that these weapons never existed and served only as a pretext for conquering Iraq.
In the 2005 year after the assassination of Rafik Hariri, Washington tried to enter the war with Syria, but he failed because Syria withdrew its troops from Lebanon. The United States fabricated false evidence against President al-Assad of organizing the assassination and created an extraordinary international tribunal to try him. However, in the end, they were forced to drop their false accusations after their manipulations became clear to everyone.
In 2006, the United States began to prepare the "Syrian revolution", creating the Syria Democracy Program. It was about creating and financing pro-Western opposition groups (such as the Justice and Development Movement). Secret funding for the CIA through the California Democracy Council has been added to official state department funding.
In the same year 2005, the United States agreed with Israel to start a war with Lebanon in the hope of drawing Syria into it in order to start a war with it. However, Hezbollah’s lightning win thwarted the plan.
In 2007, Israel attacked Syria by bombarding a military facility (Operation Orhard). But Damascus this time kept his composure and did not allow himself to be drawn into the war. The latest revisions of the International Atomic Energy Agency showed that we are not talking about nuclear facilities, as claimed by the Israelis.
In a 2008 year at a meeting that NATO annually organizes under the name of the Bilderberg Group, Arab Reform Initiative director Basma Kodmani and Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik director Volker Perthes briefly outlined the economic and political advantages of Alliance’s possible European military intervention to the American-European club of influential people. Syria.
In 2009, the CIA launched such propaganda tools against Syria as the BaradaTV channel in London and OrientTV in Dubai.
Add to this meeting, which was held in Cairo at the end of the first half of February, with the participation of John McCain, Joe Lieberman and Bernard-Henry Levy, the Libyans of Mahmoud Jibril (then the second person in the Jamahiriya government), the Syrians of Malik al-Abdeh and Amar Kurabi . This meeting was the signal for the simultaneous start of secret operations in Libya and Syria (February 15 in Benghazi and 17 in Damascus).
In February, the Department of State Department of Defense and the Department of Defense created the working group The Day After. Supporting a democratic transition in Syria (next Day. Supporting democratic transformations in Syria), which developed a new constitution for the Syrian government and a government program [2012].
In May 2012, NATO and the countries of the Persian Gulf created the Syrian People’s Brothers Working Group on Economic Support and Development, chaired by Germany and the United Arab Emirates. Syrian-British economist Ossam al-Qadi suggested then sharing Syrian wealth among the three member countries of the coalition for use on The Day After (that is, the day after the overthrow of the current government by NATO and the Persian Gulf) [5].
Revolutionaries or counterrevolutionaries?
Armed groups are not the result of the peaceful demonstrations that took place in February 2012. These demonstrations actually condemned corruption and demanded greater freedom, while the armed groups, as we have seen above, have Islamic roots.
The deep economic crisis that has broken out in recent decades has hurt the village hard. It was due to poor harvests, which were mistakenly perceived as temporary difficulties, whereas they were the result of long-term climate change. They were supplemented by errors in the conduct of economic reforms that disorganized the primary sector of the economy. This was followed by a massive outflow of the rural population, which the government was able to resist, and the departure of a part of the peasants to sects, to which the government did not attach much importance. In many regions, the rural population was not concentrated in the villages, but lived on isolated farms, and no one gave these phenomena proper importance until the victims of them united.
Ultimately, despite the fact that Syrian society embodied the paradigm of religious tolerance, the movement of takhiris originated in it. It created the ground for the emergence of armed groups. The latter were generously funded by Wahhabi monarchies (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Sharjah) [6].
This triggered the arrival of new militants, among which you can find relatives of victims of mass repressions of the failed bloody coup of Muslim Brotherhood in 1982. Often they are guided not by ideological principles, but by personal moods. They are based on revenge.
They were joined by many gangsters and convicted persons attracted by easy money: the salary of each “revolutionary” is seven times higher than the average salary in the country.
Finally, professional militants are arriving from Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya and Iraq. In the forefront among them are the people of Al Qaeda from Libya under the personal guidance of Abdelhakim Belhadj [7]. The media represents him as a jihadist, which does not apply to him, because Islam has nothing to do with the war with the Muslim Brotherhood. First of all, they are just mercenaries.
The media of the Western powers and the countries of the Persian Gulf have been tirelessly reiterating the presence of deserters in the SSA. Of course, they are there, but it is not true that they deserted after they refused to participate in the suppression of political demonstrations. The deserters in question are almost always in such cases. In the end, in the army, numbering 300000 people will definitely find their religious fanatics and their gangsters.
Armed groups use the Syrian flag with a green stripe (instead of red) and three stars (instead of two). The Western press calls it the “flag of independence” because it was the national flag during the country's independence in 1946. In fact, we are talking about the national flag in the period from 1932 to 1958, when France granted the country a formal independence. Three stars symbolize the three confessions of the colonial period (alawits, Druze and Christians). Using this flag does not mean waving a revolutionary symbol. On the contrary, this means the desire to continue the colonial project, that is, to implement the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 and to carry out the restructuring of the “expanded Middle East”.
Over the 18 months of hostilities, these armed groups were structured and became more or less manageable. At this stage, the vast majority came under Turkish command under the trademark of the Free Syrian Army. In reality, they turned into an appendage of NATO, and the headquarters of the SSA even located on the territory of the NATO air force base in Insirl. The most ardent Islamists formed their own formations or joined al-Qaida. They are controlled by Qatar or the sidedeer branch of the Saudi royal family [8]. De facto they are associated with the CIA.
This gradual transition from the impoverishment of peasants to the influx of mercenaries into the country resembles the well-known events in Nicaragua when the CIA organized the Contras to overthrow the Sandinistas or when the CIA organized a military operation on the coast of Cuba in the Bay of Pigs to overthrow the supporters of Fidel Castro. This model is today guided by armed Syrian groups: in May 2012, in Miami, Cuban Contras organized training seminars for Syrian colleagues to conduct counter-revolutionary operations [9].
The CIA methods are the same everywhere. The Syrian Contras, for example, concentrated their actions, first, on creating the main bases (but none of them could resist, even the Islamic Emirate Baba Amr), then on economic sabotage (destruction of infrastructures and fires at large factories) and, finally, terrorism (the crash of passenger trains, terrorist acts in crowded places with the help of cars filled with explosives, the killing of religious political and military leaders).
As a result, a part of the Syrian people, which could have sympathy for the armed groups at the beginning of the events, believing that they represented an alternative to the existing government, gradually broke off any connection with them.
Not surprisingly, the goal of the Battle of Damascus was to bring into the capital of 7000 militants scattered throughout the country, and mercenaries in full combat readiness in the border areas. Numerous columns of pickups, preferring the desert roads, tens of thousands of Syrian Contras tried to penetrate into the country. Some of them were stopped by aerial bombardment and were forced to go back. Others, having seized the border posts, reached the capital. But there they did not find the popular support they had hoped for. On the contrary, the residents themselves helped the soldiers of the national Army to identify and destroy them. As a result, they were forced to retreat and declare that, in the absence of an opportunity to seize Damascus, they would capture Alep. On top of that, this suggests that they are neither rebels of Damascus, nor Alep, but foreign militants.
Contra penetration through the desert near Dera
Speaking of the unpopularity of the armed groups, one should dwell on the popularity of the regular Syrian Army and the militia self-defense units. The National Syrian Army is an army in which one serves by conscription, therefore, it is a people's army, and it is impossible to imagine that it could serve as a means of political repression. More recently, the government allowed the creation of quarterly police units. Citizens were given weapons, and they pledged to devote 2 daily hours of personal time to protecting their quarter under military control.
Confuse the gift of God with scrambled eggs
At one time, President Reagan faced certain difficulties in trying to present his Contras as "revolutionaries." To do this, he had to create a whole propaganda structure, the Bureau of Public Diplomacy, which Otto Reich [10] was charged with leading. The latter bribed journalists in most of the media in America and Western Europe and began to stuff people with poisoned information. He launched, in particular, rumors that the Sandinists allegedly have chemical weapons and are about to start using them against their own people. Today, White House propaganda comes from the assistant to national security adviser for strategic relations, Ben Rhodes. Using well-forgotten old methods, he again spreads rumors about chemical weapons in order to discredit President Bashar al-Assad.
In cooperation with the British MI6, Rhodes managed to impose a ghost structure on the Western press agencies as the main source of information - the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SNS). The media have never wondered about the credibility of this structure, despite the fact that this council’s assertions have been repeatedly refuted by Arab League observers and UN observers. Moreover, this ghostly structure, which has neither room, nor personnel, nor expertise, has also become a source of information for European offices after the White House persuaded the withdrawal of their diplomatic staff from Syria.
Live correspondent Al-Jazeera Khaled Abu Saleh talking on the phone with the editors. He claims that Baba Amr was attacked by air and spreads this slander all over the world. Mr. Abu Saleh was invited by Francois Hollande to the 3 Conference of the Friends of Syria as an honored guest.
Ben Rhodes also organized a series of performances for journalists seeking thrills. Two television stations were installed, one in the office of Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan, and the other in the office of former Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora. The journalists, if they wanted to, were illegally transported, accompanied by guides, to the territory of Syria. For several months, they traveled from the Turkish border zone to a village in the mountains. There, they could produce videotapes with the participation of "revolutionaries" and "share their daily fate with the militants." To top it all, the most athletic of them could have visited, passing through the Lebanese border, the Islamic Emirate of Baba Amr.
It is very strange that many journalists themselves observed these monstrous falsifications, but did not draw any conclusions from this. So, one well-known photo reporter filmed "revolutionaries" Baba Amr, burning automobile tires, in order to squeeze in more black smoke and depict the bombardment of the city block. He distributed these images via Channel4 [11], claiming to have witnessed the bombing of Baba Amr, about which the Syrian Observatory on Human Rights told.
Or one more example. The New York Times reported that the photographs and video footage presented by the press service of the Syrian Free Army with images of gallant fighters are in fact fakes [12]. Military weapons turned out to be fake or, quite simply, it turned out to be children's toys. But this newspaper, nevertheless, continues to assure readers of the existence of an army of deserters numbering about 100000 people.
Reading the statements of the Syrian Free Army. Proud "deserters" are armed with children's toys.
According to the established rules, journalists prefer to lie once more than to admit that they are being manipulated. And if they know that they are being manipulated, it means that they consciously participate in spreading a lie, which is obvious to them. I want to know, dear reader, whether you want to close your eyes or decide to support the people of Syria in their fight against foreign aggression.
Information