Assad

Beware of the „breaking news“ regarding Syria on June 2nd or 3rd

radioyaran Syria, USA , , ,

On Tuesday the Syrian presidential election is supposed to take place.
There is a good chance that „by incident“ tomorrow or the day after „activists“ will report a chemical attack or another large scale atrocity in Syria.

This article is good:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/05/30/why-are-they-afraid-of-the-syrian-elections/

„Why are Kerry and the “Friends”  so upset and fearful of Syrian elections?  If they are such a farce, then much of the public will not participate in them. If the vote is seen by the public as meaningless,  then  voter turnout will be very low such as in Egypt this week.

As to the issue of holding an election during a time of conflict, this was done right here in the USA.  The 1864 election which re-elected Abraham Lincoln was held during the midst of the extremely bloody US civil war.“

 

When the US´ favorite gets 93% of the votes, the west won´t call elections a farce

radioyaran Saudi Arabia, Syria, Ukraine, USA , , , , , , , , ,

Look at this BBC article about Egypts Sisis landslide (93%) win of the presidential elections:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-27614776

Though the article mentions that turnout was low and the powerful Muslim Brotherhood was banned, it does not quote a single western (almost always an american president or foreign secretary or their british-french counterparts) calling the elections a farce, or a fraud or a „parody of democracy“ as UKs William Hague already did with regards to the upcoming Syrian elections.

Imagine Assad would get 93%. Western press and politicians would tear apart the event and ridicule the Syrian regime.
Not however in Egypt where the darling of the US  (and Saudi Arabia) has won.

Watch out for the reports coming after Assads electoral victory in a couple of days:
You will read about „irregularities“ and manipulation, reported by „activists“. You will read that each and every Syrian was bullied and observed by a Mukhabarat thug or the notorious „Shabiha“ to intimidate him towards voting for Assad. Local „activists“ will report about having witnessed how the same Alawites travelled from one village to the neighbouring one to vote for Assad multiple times while Sunnis were prevented from voting (against Assad) by pro-Assad militiamen. You will read about Assad having allegedly received 100% of votes even from rebel strongholds. All these „facts“ that will rain down on you from various – of course – totally reliable sources inside Syria will be intended to prove to you that – unlike the elections in Ukraine or Egypt – the Syrian election was a „joke“, an insult to „millions of Syrians“ who hate Assad and love the rebels and and and…

 

What? Syrian refugees want to vote FOR Bashar???

radioyaran Lebanon, Syria , ,

After 2-3 years of constantly hearing and reading biased and polemic anti-Assad reporting and comments in the media of their host countries you could expect the broad majority of Syrian refugees to either abstain from voting or use the event to express their opposition to Assad by explicitly voting for another candidate.
Instead it seems that quite a many refuguees appeared at the voting stations to vote for Assad:

„The massive turnout for the expatriate Syrian vote at the embassy above Beirut produced scenes rarely observed at any embassy or polling station in the world.

At times it turned into a rowdy support rally for the incumbent Bashar al-Assad, with none of the normal election decorum…

The strength and assertiveness of the vote may have reflected an underlying feeling among many Syrians abroad that the tide is running in the regime’s favour, and it is time to climb aboard. “
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-27599868

Did Bashar forget to „wipe Homs from the map“?

radioyaran Syria , , , , , ,

Back in early 2012 Nicolas Sarkozy was pressing for military intervention in Syria to prevent Bashar al Assad from massacring the people of Homs like Ghaddafi wanted to massacre the people of Benghazi. The following article is reminiscent of Sarkozys „warning“ back then:

„Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, said Sarkozy, “wants to wipe Homs from the map like Qaddafi wanted to wipe Benghazi from the map.”“
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/paul-pillar/wiping-out-6832
This was obviously quite a bizarre analogy referring to something (wiping off Benghazi) that actually never happened.

2 years after the allegedly imminent massacre of civilians or as Sarkozy said the wiping off the map of Homs, the Syrian Army drove out the rebels and retook control of the „capital of the revolution“, but interestingly two things occured of which one actually DID NOT happen despite predictions to the contrary:
1. The government forces did NOT massacre the people
2. Instead of fleeing to the „safety“ of „liberated“ rebel-held areas many of Homs´ inhabitants who had fled the city earlier started returning to Homs

Now a flashback to the original siege of Baba Amr in 2011/12:

The entire western news coverage of the siege of Homs´ Baba Amr district was deceptive and polemic serving merely the purpose of demonizing one side of the conflict.
Baseless claims were made to the effect that the Syrian Army was besieging and indiscriminately shelling entire Homs, Syrias 3rd biggest city. BBC ran a report quoting a rebel (or pro-rebel civilian) that in entire Homs only two bakeries were intact.
Taking a look at this map it becomes clear that Baba Amr is a peripheral district of Homs and putting it under siege is by far not tantamount to besieging entire Homs:
https://i0.wp.com/news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/58789000/gif/_58789122_syria_homs_624_v6.gif

 

Syria and the idiocy of western reporting and policies

radioyaran Syria , , , , , ,

Analyzing todays BBC report http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-27535380 of a deadly attack on (mainly) civilian Syrian government supporters during an election rally is quite insightful and yet another chapter in the series of shamelessly biased western reporting.

While the report almost entirely quotes two clearly anti-government and pro rebel sources, namely the „SOHR“ and „activists“, who are both supporters of the attacks perpetrators, not a single government official or pro-government civilian is allowed to speak and condemn the attacks, something that the BBC neither does directly nor indirectly (e.g. by explicitly avoiding to call the attack an act of terrorism or provide pictures).
One might contract this with reports of government shelling of rebel areas, in which cases at least one rebel or rebel sympathizer is quoted either accusing Assad of killing his own people or calling for western countries to supply (even more) weapons to the rebels. Plus, almost certainly such a report would feature a photo series showing debris, bloodied civilians, crying mothers and heroic rebels carrying the wounded.

Coming back to the BBC report, the most brazen aspect is that the BBC abuses the report to ridicule Assad and hence the victims with insulting comments about the Syrian elections: „UK Foreign Secretary William Hague called the elections a „parody of democracy“ and repeated its call for Bashar Assad to stand down.“

The „moderate“ FSAs cooperation with Al Qaeda in Syria

radioyaran Israel, Saudi Arabia, Syria , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Not only has the allegedly moderate, non-sectarian, pro-western and Israeli tolerated FSA been using the lethal combat efficiency of the Al Qaeda affiliated Nusra Front (JN), but they have also sold advanced anti-aircraft and anti-tank weapons to the even more radical Salafi Al Qaeda branch Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISUS/ISIL):

„He didn’t want to be filmed. But he told us: if we wanted to cut the supply lines it is easier for us to take the warehouses of the FSA. Anyhow we are buying weapons from the FSA. we bought 200 anti-aircraft missiles and Koncourse anti tank weapons. We have good relations with our brothers in the FSA. For us, the infidels are those who cooperate with the West to fight Islam. “
http://blogs.aljazeera.com/blog/middle-east/meeting-al-qaeda-syria

As usual Obama, Kerry and co. ignore or play down such embarrassing facts when they openly speak about funding and facilitating (through Saudi Arabia) the further arming of the FSA.

 

Iran 2009 vs. Syria 2011

radioyaran Iran, Syria , , , , , , , ,

The mass demonstrations and protests in Iran after the allegedly forged presidential elections of June 2009 were on a much bigger scale than what happened in Syria after Macrh 2011.
Despite the participation of up to 3 Million people on some days in Tehran alone and despite the disproportional use of lethal violence by the security forces the „green revolution“ ebbed away after a few weeks.

There are several reasons why the protests did not turn into an armed rebellion but the main factors differentiating Irans „green revolution“ from the Syrian version of the „arab spring“ were the following:
– The protesters were not armed and nobody armed them in the process either. There were few casualties among the riot police and the Bassij militia but not as a result of systematic guerilla like violence
– The protesters were not instigated by outside powers to fight against an autocratic regime that was tyrannizing and killing them on sectarian (or ethnic) grounds
– There is a persian saying „The knife has not reached the bone (yet)“ which basically means that despite many social injustices, reprisals, persecutions, economic inequalities and mismanagement and the governments constant interference in peoples private life…still daily life was very much on an acceptable level

In Syria, however, from early on there were deadly ambushes on army and police leaving to the deaths of dozens of security personell in the very first weeks. It is factually completely untrue that the protests were nothing but peaceful for months.
The protests were „contaminated“ quite early with anti-regime accusations and complaints on religious grounds. The state was accused of applying injustice and violence against its opponents because of the latters religious affiliation.
This was by and large utter nonsense but it was meant to serve a well-planned purpose, namely to defame a secular (although autocratic) government as sectarian. Not only there are many Sunnis in the highest political, economic and military ranks of Syrias elite, Bashar al Assad and his brother are married to Sunni women and their paternal grandmother was also Sunni. Now, one could check how many Saudi, Bahraini, Qatari or other „Gulf“ princes and „notables“ are married to Shia women…

The intention behind Syrias portrayal as an allegedly anti-Sunni regime was clearly to incite sectarian sentiment and play the majority card:
a) „Alawite“ Syria is between Sunni countries or border areas with high Sunni presence (Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, western Iraq). This itself makes it totally inconceivable to accuse the Assad regime of having made the conflict sectarian
b) The western-friendly Arab petrodollar monarchies of the Persian Gulf are all ruled by Sunni Kings and Princes. They control the two most influential media networks of the Arab world: Al-Jazeera and l-Arabiyya
c) Hundreds of Millions of North African Arabs are Sunni allowing for a recruiting potential of tens of thousands of „Jihadists“ from among vast numbers of unemployed or socially weak youth. In fact it has turned out that the Jihad idea has attracted even central asian and european Sunnis

The question is whether there was a movement aiming at more reforms, freedoms, human rights and democracy that was hijacked quite quickly or whether this short-lived „secular“ revolution was on a too small scale to be considered a mass movement.
At any rate the power driving the Syrian insurgency is clearly militant Salafi islamism. The forces fighting are not even distantly moderate, academic or technocratic. Their motivation is establishing a (probably sectarian) religious state, not a civil democracy adhering to human rights:

„In fact, the only rebel factions still strong enough to resist and fight the regime on the latest fronts are the radical Islamists. The town of Azizeh, just outside the Marjeh area in the east, the strategically vital Sheikh Najjar industrial zone, the old city and Aleppo’s central prison are all defended by al-Qaeda’s affiliate, Jabhat al-Nusra, as well as Salafist militants Ahrar al-Sham, a member of the Islamic Front.“
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/02/barrel-bombing-syria-aleppo-rebels-regime-war.html

Of course, the US, UK and France along with their Arab „partners“, Israel and Turkey still want to stick to the now grotesque narrative that Syrias war is between a hated, russian/iranian-held, sectarian minority regime and the majority of „it´s“ reform demanding, peaceful, secular, moderate, pro western, democracy minded…people.
So, no matter how much it turns that the „bad guys“ are not only ISIS and JN, but also the other Salafi Islamists who
– are either openly hailing Al Qaeda and its principles
– or closely cooperating with JN (and sometimes even ISIS) as Al Qaedas Syrian branch:
http://www.thenational.ae/the-syrian-rebels-who-have-no-problem-fighting-alongside-al-qaeda
See also: http://100wordz.wordpress.com/2014/01/24/islamic-front-no-answer-for-syria-conflict/

 

 

Macabre dynamics in „liberated“ Syria

radioyaran Syria , , , , , , , ,

„The Nusra Front has given ISIS until Saturday to accept mediation or face being expelled from Syria.“

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26390351

So, one group of sectarian Salafi beheader extremists is threatening to expel a slightly worse sister organization within Al Qaeda in Syria.
The BBC article leaves a bad taste as it comes along as a subtle advertisement in favor of the Al Nusra Front that demands that ISIS „accept arbitration within five days“.
The correct and not too far fetched interpretation is that Al Nusra hardly has any ideological-political issue with ISIS: „He demanded that ISIS halt all military operations against other rebels“.
This means that ISIS is welcome to remain on Syrian soil as long as they blow up Syrian army checkpoints and kill Alawites instead of „killing of an al-Qaeda emissary, Abu Khaled al-Suri“

 

Bombings in Lebanon and the hypocrisy of western media

radioyaran Lebanon, Syria , , ,

Whenever a bomb detonates in a Shia area of Lebanon western press is quick to call the place an „Hezbollah stronghold“ and explain/justify the perpetartors malicious action by stating that this was a reaction to Hezbollah fighting alongside the Syrian army.

Thus an indiscriminate act of terror by entirely sectarian motivated perpetrators is almost whitewashed as just an exotic version of the war against (alleged) Iranian terror since Hezbollah is affiliated with the Iranian regime.

In the most recent case the bombers detonated their deadly cargo near to an orphanage and hurt Children:
http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/beirut-orphanage-latest-victim-suicide-bombings

…but maybe these victims are also Assads „Shabiha“ and targetting them just another chapter in the very creative art of „freedom fighting“

 

 

Is Homs under siege?

radioyaran Syria , , , , , , ,

Reading the media about Syria one more than once reads about the city of Homs, „the cradle of the revolution“ being under siege by the Syrian army.
Taking a closer look it turns out that not the entire city, but only a relatively small portion of it, the „old city“ is under regime siege:
BBC map of besieged areas in Homs

No question, such a siege is a horror for the ordinary population and certainly it is an unjust act of collective punishment, but one should also keep in mind that the siege is not the result of an evil government simply hating its citizens. Rather the siege is a direct consequence of armed rebels abusing the local population by effectively taking them hostage and turning their houses to firing grounds, hideouts, tunnels, weapons depots and bomb making fabrics.