Syria: The Questions That Must Be Answered Before Any Aggression

Syria: The Questions That Must Be Answered Before Any Aggression

Syria: The Questions That Must Be Answered Before Any Aggression

by Felicity Arbuthnot and Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey / August 27th, 2013

Below we pose several questions, the basis of this article, which intends to reveal the whole truth behind the issue of the Syrian civil war. These questions have been sent to the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the US State Department. Their answers, if they have any, will be revealed to our readers.

Question 1: Why has the west been supporting Syrian terrorist forces for two years?

Question 2: Do you not entertain the notion that to solve the Syrian issue, it would suffice for the west to cease arming, financing and aiding the Syrian terrorist forces fighting President Assad?

Question 3: Are you, or are you not, aware that in supporting forces hostile to President Assad, you are also supporting sources loyal to al-Qaeda?

Question 4: Do you now admit that your respective authorities lied regarding the issue of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq? Should the answer be negative, then please inform us as to where these weapons are.

Question 5: Regarding the previous attacks with chemical and biological weapons (CBW) in Syria by the rebels you support, and confirmed by the UNO’s Carla del Ponte, what are your comments?

Question 6: Under international law it is illegal to take sides in an internal conflict. How do you justify your actions in (a) Libya and (b) Syria in this context?

Question 7: The following accusation was sent to the European Court of Human Rights and the International Criminal Court at The Hague.

Why did it not receive the courtesy of a reply?

Question 8: Under what authority does British Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary William Hague state/insinuate that the Government of President Assad was responsible for the recent chemical attack in rural Damascus, without an iota of evidence?

Question 9: Why were the videos of the so-called “chemical attack” uploaded to the Internet before the so-called “chemical attack” took place?

Question 10: Did you or your services know that the said “chemical attack” was going to take place beforehand? If negative, then how would you respond to the following evidence?

Question 11: What is your response to evidence that such weaponry was fired from rebel-held areas using improvised missile technology?

Question 12: Do you deny that your special forces are involved in the field in Syria and if the answer is negative how would you respond to images providing evidence that such persons had been captured? Would you also deny that such personnel would have been able to provide to the terrorists the possibility of delivering such weaponry?

Question 13: Why did your leadership commit a mission creep in Libya which breached the terms of the UNSC Resolutions 1970 and 1973 (2011)?

Question 14: Are you aware that due to the American, French and British governments’ successive lies in the last two decades, due to your continued war crimes and crimes against humanity, due to your illegal and unethical foreign policy, NATO in general and the FUKUS Axis (France-UK-US) in particular, have lost any moral high ground they once claimed?

Question 15: Why do you not explain to your citizens that President Assad has the support of the vast majority of the population of his country and would you please draw up a list of the popularity ratings of the 30-odd terrorist/opposition groups fighting against the State?

Question 16: If groups of armed terrorists took up weapons against the authorities in your countries, what would you do? Remember what Cameron said after the August 2011 riots in London? ”WHEN IT COMES TO RIOTS, HUMAN RIGHTS GO OUT OF THE WINDOW.” Imagine what he would do with thousands of armed terrorists running amok, slicing the heads off children and the breasts off women.

Question 17: What do you have to say about the murder of several thousand Syrian police officers and army personnel by the terrorists you support? Do you therefore agree that your own security personnel are legitimate targets?

Question 18: Back to Syria and the claims that the Government of President Assad was responsible for the “chemical attacks” what do you have to say in response to the following article?

Question 19: Given the previous attacks with chemical weapons by the terrorist forces you support, do you honestly believe that anyone is going to believe your allegations that President Assad, a doctor, is going to deploy such weaponry on the outskirts of his capital city the same day the UN weapons inspectors arrive to ascertain the facts about previous attacks (by your terrorists)? Do you seriously think he is that stupid?

Question 20: Has anyone in a position of authority in your countries issued the courtesy of an apology for the murder of the Gaddafi grandchildren in 2011 and the lynching of Libya’s sovereign leader at the hands of NATO backed terrorists?

Question 21: There are allegations that SOF teams are already on the ground in Syria on recce missions and programmes to train terrorists to attack the Syrian authorities. What is your comment?

Question 22: Do you deny that senior military and political personnel in the United States of America and the United Kingdom are aware of the active campaign by NATO forces in Syria to commit assassination attacks, to break the back of the Alawite forces and to carry out terrorist activity?

Question 23: What is your answer to this evidence that the USA and the UK were indeed behind the recent chemical attack in Syria?

Question 24: At Nuremberg, the United States and Britain pressed the prosecution of Nazi leaders for planning and initiating aggressive war. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, the head of the American prosecution staff, asserted “that launching a war of aggression is a crime and that no political or economic situation can justify it.” He also declared that “if certain acts in violation of treaties are crimes, they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them, and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us.” What is your response?

Question 25: On the issue of chemical weapons, why did the forces you integrated deploy Depleted Uranium in several theatres of war and this being the case does this not render you guilty of using chemical weaponry against civilians? In case you are considering stating that DU is not a chemical weapon then how would you reply to this excerpt from Page 101 of the June 1995 paper June 1995 “Health and Environmental Consequences of Depleted Uranium Use in the US Army”, (US) Army Environmental Policy Unit:

“If DU enters the body it has the potential to generate significant buy Levitra online medical consequences. The risks associated with DU are both chemical and radiological.” ?

Question 26: Remember this? “We’re going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran” – General Wesley Clark. Retired 4-star U.S. Army general, Supreme Allied Commander of NATO during the 1999 War on Yugoslavia

Oh and Question 27: Is it true that Israel has granted GENIE ENERGY exploration rights for shale gas inside Syrian territory, major shareholders of this company being Rupert Murdoch and Lord Jacob Rothschild?

Felicity Arbuthnot is a journalist with special knowledge of Iraq. Author, with Nikki van der Gaag, of Baghdad in the Great City series for World Almanac books, she has also been Senior Researcher for two Award winning documentaries on Iraq, John Pilger’s Paying the Price: Killing the Children of Iraq and Denis Halliday Returns for RTE (Ireland.) Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey is the European editor of Pravda. Read other articles by Felicity Arbuthnot and Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey.


Reports: U.S.-led Rebels Sent into Syria Before Chemical Attack

Reports: U.S.-led Rebels Sent into Syria Before Chemical Attack

Alex Newman
August 26, 2013

syriamapTwo reports in recent days have suggested that establishment-backed Syrian “rebel” forces trained and led by American, Israeli, and Jordanian commanders entered Syria and began pushing toward the capital city of Damascus this month. According to sources cited in the international reports, the foreign-led opposition fighters began the latest offensive in mid-August, prior to the reported chemical-weapon attack in the Ghouta region of Syria widely said to have claimed hundreds of civilian lives so far.

Sources seeking to blame the Bashar al-Assad regime for the August 21 massacre have seized on the reports to claim that the dictator, despite repeated vows not to use weapons of mass destruction absent a foreign invasion, resorted to such desperate measures to beat back the latest offensive. Those suggesting the attack was a so-called “false-flag operation” perpetrated by opposition fighters to blame on the regime, meanwhile, have pointed to the news as yet another indicator that the rebels were indeed responsible for deploying the chemical weapons.

According to a report dated August 21 by DEBKAfile, an Israeli intelligence and analysis service, the first contingent of 250 foreign-trained “rebel” fighters entered Syria from Jordan on August 17 under foreign command. The opposition fighters were trained in “special operations tactics” by U.S. and Jordanian instructors and armed with Russian-made weapons supplied by the Obama administration and the Islamist rulers of Saudi Arabia, the report continued. “They are fighting under U.S. and Jordanian commanders based in the Hashemite Kingdom,” DEBKAfile reported referring to Jordan, adding that additional rebel fighters were standing by ready to be deployed.

“According to our military sources, the rebel units are advancing at speed along the Syrian-Israeli border. They have forced the Syrian brigades posted there into retreating from positions inside a strip of 1-25 kilometers from the border, and captured the villages of Raihaniya, Breiqa and Beer Ajam,” the Israeli service reported, saying that the rebels were trying to create a “buffer zone” inside Syrian territory. “This Jordan-based rebel offensive was launched shortly after Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint U.S. Chiefs of Staff, visited U.S. forces in Jordan and inaugurated the underground U.S. war room near [the Jordanian capital] Amman for commanding the operation in Syria.”

The other major report about the foreign-run rebel operation, published on August 22 by Le Figaro, a leading French newspaper, also cited “military sources” reporting that two groups of guerilla fighters trained and led by the U.S., Israeli, and Jordanian governments, crossed the border from Jordan into Syria. According to the article, the first 300 rebels crossed on August 17 in the Deraa region, with the second contingent following two days later. Hundreds of fighters from the so-called “Free Syrian Army,” trained and supervised by the CIA and other foreign intelligence services, are reportedly involved in the scheme, the paper reported. The FSA is one of the many “rebel” forces operating in Syria — more than a few of which have openly declared their allegiance to al Qaeda and other Islamic terror groups.

Turkey-based representative Khalid Hodja, speaking for an umbrella organization composed of some of the myriad rebel factions operating in Syria and known as the “Syrian National Coalition for Opposition and Revolutionary Forces” (SNC), promptly denied the two reports, claiming they were designed to raise suspicion about advances made by opposition forces. “The news report says the U.S. and Israel formed special groups made up of volunteers to prevent Syrian radical groups from having control over sophisticated weapons. This claim has no logical consistency,” he was quoted as saying by World Bulletin. “The mentioned areas are under the control of the Free Syrian Army, Syrian Islamic Front and Syrian Islamic Liberation Front. Such operations claimed by the newspaper are out of the question.”

According to the Istanbul-based news service, Hodja blasted what he called a “show of cheap heroism” by the West. “These claims aim to spread the idea that the West is the savior of Syrian people,” the SNC representative was quoted as saying, adding that cooperation with Israeli authorities by Muslim rebel fighters was out of the question. “If the West was sincere, it would allow the arming of the opposition,” he added.

Of course, as The New American and countless other media outlets have documented for well over a year, Western governments and Sunni Arab despots have been arming, funding, and training the opposition. The U.S. government has actually been supporting the opposition with millions of taxpayer dollars since long before open conflict erupted in Syria, according to official documents released by WikiLeaks.

As The New American has also been reporting for a year, the Obama administration set up camp in Jordan close to the Syrian border to train rebel fighters in the use of advanced military weapons and tactics. U.S. personnel are also in Turkey engaged in similar operations. Meanwhile, there are still hundreds of American troops all along Syria’s borders, as well as Patriot missiles, fighter jets, and other military equipment. With the latest allegations about chemical weapons, the usual chorus of interventionists has become increasingly vocal in demanding that Obama launch a full-blown military assault on Syria.

Suggesting CIA personnel were on the ground in Syria working alongside rebel forces, Le Figaro claimed that the operation may have been among the reasons for Assad’s alleged deployment of chemical weapons last week. However, as The New American reported, numerous independent experts and even foreign governments have expressed skepticism over claims that the regime was responsible for the attack — especially considering the fact that United Nations inspectors recently arrived in Syria. For now, what really happened remains unclear, but rebels have been caught perpetrating atrocities and blaming them on the regime on more than a few occasions.

There has not yet been any official confirmation by the U.S., Israeli, or Jordanian governments about the reported incursion by foreign-led fighters into Syria. Still, the two reports promptly made headlines around the world, with various governments and analysts citing the allegations to support widely divergent views about what happened on August 21 outside of Damascus.

Western governments have argued that “evidence” points to the Assad regime being responsible for the attack, with U.S. officials cited in news reports even claiming recently that they were almost certain the Syrian dictatorship was behind the attack. An unnamed “senior Obama administration official” was quoted saying that, “based on the reported number of victims, reported symptoms of those who were killed or injured, witness accounts and other facts gathered by open sources, the U.S. intelligence community, and international partners, there is very little doubt at this point that a chemical weapon was used by the Syrian regime against civilians in this incident.”

Separately, top officials have indicated publicly that American forces are ready to intervene in Syria if Obama gives the order — apparently offering further evidence that the administration is under the mistaken belief that it can start a war without permission from Congress, which is required under the U.S. Constitution. “The Defense Department has a responsibility to provide the president with options for all contingencies,” said U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel. “That requires positioning our forces, positioning our assets to be able to carry out different options, whatever option the president may choose.”

On the other side, more than a few experts and multiple governments, including authorities from Russia, have suggested that the chemical-weapons attack may have been a “false flag” carried out by rebel forces as UN inspectors were arriving in the country — presumably to provide a justification for overt foreign intervention in the conflict by Western and Sunni powers seeking regime change. “All of this really looks like an attempt, at any cost, to create a reason to produce demands for the U.N. Security Council to side with the regime’s opponents and undermine the chances of convening the Geneva conference,” declared Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevi in a widely quoted statement. Officials from the Communist dictatorship ruling mainland China expressed similar concerns.

While the two most recent reports about foreign-led “rebels” entering Syria have not been officially confirmed, the news, if true, should hardly be surprising to anyone following the conflict closely. Despite the well-documented fact that the “rebels” are almost exclusively foreign-backed jihadists seeking to overthrow Assad’s secular dictatorship — the most effective opposition force even officially became a branch of al-Qaeda in April — the “regime change” effort has been nurtured by Western powers and Sunni despots for years. Regardless of the facts, it appears to analysts as though a wider war is fast approaching.

Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for The New American, is normally based in Europe. He can be reached at

This article was posted: Monday, August 26, 2013 at 12:00 pm

Tags: foreign affairs, terrorism, war
Related Articles

Syria Warns Rebels may use Chemical Weapons
Britain lays out plan for arming Syrian rebels amid fears of ‘likely’ chemical weapons attack
US-Trained Rebels Moved Towards Damascus Days Before ‘Chemical Attack’
Syria Rebels ‘Aided By British Intelligence’
Experts: Syria Chemical Weapons Attack “Suspicious”

Autor: Sir John

Jahrgang 1972, Politischer Werdegeng: Seit dem Jahr 1998 Beschäftigung mit Globalisierung, Neoliberalismus und Geopolitik - 2006 Versuch des Aufbaus einer Regionalwährung. Seit 2007 aktiv in der 9/11 Truth Bewegung. Seit 2008 Mitglied im IPPNW (Ärzte gegen den Atomkrieg) und in der Partei "Die Linke"