illegal wars

One point we’ve been particularly keen on driving home since the beginning of Russian airstrikes in Syria is that The Kremlin’s move to step in on behalf of Bashar al-Assad along with Vladimir Putin’s open “invitation” to Washington with regard to joining forces in the fight against terrorism effectively let the cat out of the proverbial bag. That is, it simply wasn’t possible for the US to explain why the Pentagon refused to partner with the Russians without admitting that i) the government views Assad, Russia, and Iran as a greater threat than ISIS, and ii) Washington and its regional allies don’t necessarily want to see Sunni extremism wiped out in Syria and Iraq. Article by Tyler Durden dated 31 October 2015 republished from Zero Hedge http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-10-31/congresswoman-calls-us-effort-oust-assad-illegal-accuses-cia-backing-terroists

Admitting either one of those points would be devastating from a PR perspective. No amount of Russophobic propaganda and/or looped video clips of the Ayatollah ranting against the US would be enough to convince the public that Moscow and Tehran are a greater threat than the black flag-waving jihadists beheading Westerners and burning Jordanian pilots alive in Hollywood-esque video clips, and so, The White House has been forced to scramble around in a desperate attempt to salvage the narrative. 

Well, it hasn’t worked.

With each passing week, more and more people are beginning to ask the kinds of questions the Pentagon and CIA most assuredly do not want to answer and now,  US Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard is out calling Washington’s effort to oust Assad both “counterproductive” and “illegal.” In the following priceless video clip, Gabbard accuses the CIA of arming the very same terrorists who The White House insists are "our sworn enemy" and all but tells the American public that the government is lying to them and may end up inadvertently starting “World War III.” 

For more on how Russia and Iran's efforts in Syria have cornered the US from a foreign policy perspective, see "ISIS In 'Retreat' As Russia Destroys 32 Targets While Putin Trolls Obama As 'Weak With No Strategy'"

During the last days a large attack on the Syrian government supply line to Aleppo city was carried out by Jabhat al-Nusra (aka al-Qaeda in Syria) and the Islamic State seemingly in coordination with the U.S. military.

During September the U.S. anti-IS coalition carried out an average of 4.2 airstrikes on IS in predominately east Syria. This after an average of 6.8 per day in August. The rate in October was about the same as in September until Thursday October 22. Then, according to the U.S. Military Times, the strike rate decreased markedly:

See original article here: http://www.moonofalabama.org/2015/10/us-stopped-syria-air-strikes-while-nusra-and-is-prepared-attack-on-government-supply-route.html

~4 strikes per day up to Oct 20
4 - Oct 20 Tuesday
8 - Oct 21 Wednesday
1 - Oct 22 Thursday
0 - Oct 23 Friday
0 - Oct 24 Saturday
0 - Oct 26 Sunday
1 - Oct 27 Monday
0 - Oct 28 Tuesday
0 - Oct 29 Wednesday

The Islamic State used the lull in airstrikes in east Syria to move hundreds of fighters and heavy equipment towards the supply line that connects Damascus with the government held areas (green) of Aleppo.

bigger

After two days of no U.S. airstrikes in east Syria the Islamic State (purple) attacked the government supply corridor from the east while at the same time and at the same main point Jabhat al-Nusra (orange) attacked the supply corridor from the west. The attacks started with suicide car bombs against Syrian army checkpoints which suddenly had to defend themselves to the front and the rear.

On Saturday October 24 Almasdar news reported:

For the first time in three months, the Syrian Arab Army’s (SAA) main supply route along the Khanasser Highway was closed due to an obstruction by the Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Sham (ISIS); this chaotic situation forced the pro-government forces to call on hundreds of reinforcements from the Aleppo Governorate to help push back the encroaching terrorists.

Initially, the Syrian Armed Forces were successful in repelling both ISIS and the Syrian Al-Qaeda group “Jabhat Al-Nusra” after they attacked from different axes in the Hama Governorate; however, ISIS regrouped near the Al-Raqqa Governorate border in order to launch another massive assault on the Khanasser Highway.

ISIS’ second assault on the Syrian Armed Forces’ defensive positions proved successful, as they cutoff the Khanasser Highway and pushed further west towards the strategic city of Ithriyah in east Hama.

The Islamic State fighters killed about a dozen government troops and captured several armed vehicles (gruesome photos here).

The Syrian army send reinforcements from the Palestinian resistance militia Liwaa Al-Quds to help clear the road. This was only somewhat successful as bad weather and a sandstrom on the 25th prevented air support.

The operations room in Damascus was not too unhappy with the situation even though the road was still cut. The thought was that having IS and Nusra fighters concentrated in an otherwise wide open rural area would help to eliminate them. On the 26th and 27the Russian and Syrian air forces flew some 90 attacks within 24 hours against the enemy held parts of the road.

These attacks cleared the IS held parts of the road but the Islamic State concentrated more forces on another part of the road further north and on October 27 it suicide-bombed another government checkpoint and again blocked the road. Additional support from Hizbullah arrived during the next days and the road is now mostly cleared though still endangered.

The closed supply route led to hardship for the nearly two million people in the government held parts of Aleppo as prices for produce and gasoline exploded.

The operations room in Damascus where Syria, Iran, Russia and Hizbullah coordinate the intelligence and operations in Syria suspects that the attack on the supply corridor was coordinated at a higher level than just between Nusra and the Islamic State.

The total cessation of U.S. air attacks on east Syria allowed the Islamic State to move hundreds of fighters and heavy equipment like tanks and cannons from its stronghold in Raqqa city to the west of Syria. At the same time Jabhat al-Nusra brought hundreds of fighters from other fronts south-eastward for its part of the attack. It is difficult to believe that these were just unrelated coincidences.

Posted by b on October 30, 2015 at 05:51 AM | Permalink

The former head of the Australian Defence Force, Retired General Peter Gration, has signed an open letter to the Prime Minister opposing bombing raids in Syria. The open letter suggests bombing IS targets could strengthen the organisation and divide the Australian community, while increasing refugees and civilian casualties.

Transcript of Interview by David MarkOriginally published on ABC World Today, here on 4 September 2015: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-04/retired-adf-general-blasts-strategically-dumb-move/6750164. a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-04/retired-adf-general-blasts-strategically-dumb-move/6750164">Podcast interview also available

DAVID MARK: The former head of the Australian Defence Force, retired General Peter Gration, has signed an open letter to the Prime Minister Tony Abbott, opposing bombing raids in Syria.

Australia is considering a request by the US to join its bombing campaign against the so-called Islamic State in Syria.

The open letter suggests bombing IS targets could strengthen the organisation and divide the Australian community.

I spoke to retired General Peter Gration a short time ago.

PETER GRATION: The central issue is that I believe this would be a strategically bad decision; in fact I would call is strategically dumb and I can give you the reasons for this.

To commit us to what is complex and confused war with a century's old religious conflict between the Sunnis and the Shias, the underlying issue, I think is really inviting disaster.

The second point is that the Americans have already been doing extensive air strikes for some months, and it hasn't stopped IS, and if we add our contribution to this it would be at best, a marginal increase and I think the inevitable thing, if we are seeking some sort of victory there, is that the conflict would have to escalate to get ground operations into Syria.

And, if we're already committed to air strikes, we would be part of that escalation.

DAVID MARK: Is that why you say it would be inviting disaster, because the natural conclusion would be a ground war?

PETER GRATION: Yeah, if we want to win, whatever that means in Syria, I think it's essential that, eventually there has to be ground operations and we would be drawn into that.

DAVID MARK: The Prime Minister, as you know, refers to IS as a death cult and he says they've committed some appalling atrocities and that we have a moral obligation to stop them. So how would you respond to him?

PETER GRATION: I think there's no doubt that IS have committed atrocities and altogether a very bad lot, but conceding that fact, that in itself is not an issue requiring Australian contribution halfway around the world, and I think the balance off between a moral imperative to do something about IS and the downside for Australia, the downside is much stronger.

The humanitarian issue is a significant one. If we escalate the air war, there are undoubtedly going to more civilian casualties; there'll be more refugees generated; there'll be more infrastructure damage, and eventually getting Syria back on its feet will be quite difficult.

DAVID MARK: We heard just the other day that the former commander of coalition forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, David Petraeus said Australia should join the campaign. He said there would be a military advantage in bombing IS targets in Syria.

How can it be that a former general of such high standing has got it wrong?

PETER GRATION: Ah well, it's a matter of opinion. I'd just point to the fact that the Americans have been having, been carrying out air strikes now for some months and it certainly hasn't produced any decisive effect.

DAVID MARK: Your letter to the Prime Minister also cites potential legal issues. What are they?

PETER GRATION: There are two things: first of all there is no direct threat form IS to Australia and secondly there is no UN cover for that particular operation.

I believe that will give them a strong indication that it would be illegal.

DAVID MARK: The Government might take issue with you about that issue of whether the IS poses any direct threat to Australia; they might argue that it does.

PETER GRATION: Yeah, I'm aware of that. What I think they're talking about is that IS will urge Muslims in Australia to carry out more terrorist acts, but the scale and the likely outcome of that is minute compared to the effort that we are contemplating putting into Syria.

DAVID MARK: We heard on AM this morning, General Gration, that there is evidence that civilians may have been exposed to Australian bombing raids in Iraq. If the Australian Air Force did take part in bombing raids in Syria, would they be adequately able to investigate any potential civilian casualties?

PETER GRATION: Ah well, it would be very difficult unless we were on the ground in Syria. It would be more difficult than it is in Iraq but I'm sure they would do their level best to carry, to do proper investigations.

DAVID MARK: General Gration, as a former commander of the Australian Defence Forces, do you expect the Federal Government will listen to your counsel?

PETER GRATION: Well, I do hope they listen and I do hope they listen to the points that we're making, but I'm not terribly confident.

I think there are some indications that the Prime Minister's mind is already made up, but I do urge the Prime Minister and the Government to consider these issues.

DAVID MARK: General Gration, we're seeing a humanitarian crisis in Europe at the moment as asylum seekers flee Syria and other countries in the region. Would bombing raids on IS targets in Syria have any effect on that exodus?

PETER GRATION: I think the only effect it could have would be to increase it. If we step up, increase air strikes, it will not only generate more casualties inside Syria, but will increase the flow of refugees from Syria outwards, to Europe. I can't see any other way it could happen.

DAVID MARK: Retired General Peter Gration, was the Commander of the Australian Defence Force from 1987 to 1993.

Senator Ludlam has called for War Powers reform and the obligation that all decisions on war involvement must be taken only in consultation with parliament. David Macilwain argues that the matter of Australian intervening militarily in Syria without Syria's permission should be pursued in the Senate and with the attorney general, George Brandis, because it is in breech of international law.

Letter to Senator Ludlam, Fri, Sep 11, 2015

Dear Senator Ludlam,

Last week on behalf of AMRIS the attached media release was sent to all MPs and media; my apologies if you have already seen and read it.

I am writing because I just saw a video of part of your speech on Thursday, echoing Melissa Parke’s call for War Powers reform and the obligation that all decisions on war involvement must be taken only in consultation with parliament.

As you point out of course, in this case such consultation would have led nowhere, because the Labor opposition has no problem with the government’s military deployment and submission to US authority. I would suggest therefore, that the matter – of what is quite clearly a breach of international law, for which their must be consequences – should be pursued in the senate and with the attorney general George Brandis.

While Brandis laid out the supposed justification for breaching Syria’s sovereignty on the spurious and irrelevant basis of ‘collective self-defence’, in an article in Thursday’s Australian, this seems no different from the advice received from Lord Goldsmith in 2003 that the attack on Iraq was justified. (even had there been WMD it is hard to see how such an act of aggression against a sovereign state by a country not sharing any border with it could have been ‘legal’.

It is not too late to pursue this, because Australia may be brought before the ICC for its infringements when they lead to culpable casualties of Syrians. The idea that somehow the North East of Syria where we intend to confine our military is ‘ungoverned space’ has already been dramatically exposed as nonsense by this report from Deir Al Zour. Leith Fadel of Almasdar news is quite reliable, and he reports how the Syrian army and air-force have repelled an attempted attack on Deir al Zour airbase, killing up to 100 IS fighters. Deir al Zour of course is on the Euphrates, and in a direct line between Anbar and Raqqa, in the area that Australia intends to deploy its fighter jets. It is easy to see the possibility that an Australian missile could hit a Syrian army platoon or vehicle if they are in close combat with IS. Such a strike would have consequences.

I hope that you will keep pursuing this matter with supportive colleagues. Australia can make a decision at any time to start cooperating with the Syrian government, if it is truly serious about stopping the terrorist groups, but otherwise we should immediately withdraw our support for the US coalition’s dirty little war and its terrorist ‘boots on the ground’.

All regards David Macilwain

Sandy Creek, Victoria

The misreporting and failure to report on the nature of the threat facing Syrian society – by which I mean the majority of that society which supports the Syrian army and the Syrian president against the foreign-backed insurgency – has now assumed a far less benign role in the Syrian conflict; in the view of many, the Western mainstream media have now become complicit with that insurgency, and in controlling the narrative that enables an illegal and criminal violation of Syrian sovereignty.

The Honourable Minister for Foreign Affairs Julie Bishop
David Macilwain,
Sandy Creek, Victoria
16th June 2015
Dear Minister Bishop,

While acknowledging your response to my letter of 10th October last year, which seriously challenged the accepted narrative on the situation in Syria and the Australian government’s position on it, I urge you now to reconsider the points I made in the light of recent developments, particularly in regard to the use of Chemical Weapons.

As I’m sure you are aware, a collaboration between Saudi and Turkish Intelligence agencies facilitated an invasion of NW Syria by thousands of ‘violent extremists’ in March, with the objective of overthrowing the Assad government. (#1) While the US may not have been directly party to this operation with the immediate supply of arms, the possession of new US-made TOW anti-tank missiles by the ‘Army of Conquest’ – Jaish al Fatah – was a critical factor in the violent recapture of towns and territory over which the Syrian Arab Army had control. The fall of Idlib to these mercenaries was well publicised in our media, though its illegal and aggressive nature was obscured by Opposition claims of fatalities from a ‘Chlorine’ attack on a nearby village by the Syrian army. (No credible evidence exists of the use of Chlorine or ‘barrel bombs’ by the army, just as no credible reason could be given for the government targeting Syrian civilians rather than the terrorists who are threatening the whole Syrian state.)

The failure of Australian mainstream media to acknowledge the nature of this renewed and extreme challenge to the Syrian state, and the failure to identify and condemn the countries responsible for financing and arming the ‘Army of Conquest’, was initially compounded by the concurrent focus on the ANZACs and the commemorations in Turkey. Far from this becoming an occasion to present the current resurgence of Erdogan’s ‘Ottoman empire’ in the light of history, the reality of Turkey’s active support for jihadist groups in Syria including Da’ish/IS passed unnoticed. Even though the army of conquest is dominated by Syria’s Al Qaeda – Jabhat an Nusra – which remains a proscribed terrorist organisation by Australia and her Western allies, both authorities and media seem unaware or unconcerned by its trail of death and destruction. Even An Nusra’s massive truck bomb attack on the National Hospital in Jisr al Shughour failed to interest our national broadcaster, no more the massacre of hundreds of soldiers and civilians as they later tried to escape the attackers.

Writing recently in the Independent, veteran journalist Robert Fisk related the accounts of soldiers recovering from the siege in the hospital in Lattakia, (#2) and confirmed that some of the mercenaries who invaded Jisr al Shughour were Turkish; from other reliable sources it appears that this army was composed mainly of Turks and Chechens.

The misreporting and failure to report on the nature of the threat facing Syrian society – by which I mean the majority of that society which supports the Syrian army and the Syrian president against the foreign-backed insurgency – has now assumed a far less benign role in the Syrian conflict; in the view of many the Western mainstream media have now become complicit with that insurgency, and in controlling the narrative that enables an illegal and criminal violation of Syrian sovereignty. As an example of this role – and one which could only be called ‘supportive propaganda’, both SBS and ABC recently aired programmes which presented the ‘violent extremists’ of Jabhat an Nusra in a relatively sympathetic light, and as fighters in a legitimate struggle against a despotic and violent regime. SBS Dateline screened an interview with a confessed local leader of Jabhat an Nusra in Idlib in which we heard his ‘spin’ on the Islamic state he hoped would soon replace the inclusive secular government of Bashar al Assad, and accompanied him into Aleppo to launch attacks on government-secured neighbourhoods.(#3) Meanwhile the ABC’s Background Briefing allowed us to hear the viewpoint of Australian jihadis going to fight in Syria, without any countervailing narrative from the Syrians they were going to fight. (#4) The ongoing unverified news reports claiming attacks ‘on markets and schools’ with ‘barrel bombs’ and Chlorine by the Syrian army, as well as opinion from some commentators that the Assad government was a greater threat than Islamic State, provided supportive commentary for the sectarian anti-Assad ravings of the ‘takfiris’.

Considering this background of misleading and false information about the nature of the Syrian conflict, I am frankly quite perplexed at the latest presentations from your government, and in particular the claims you made in Perth recently about the dangers of Da’ish obtaining Chemical Weapons. As reported by Seymour Hersh in his revealing report of December 2013 – ‘Whose Sarin?’- (#5) there was already detailed knowledge in the US intelligence community in May 2013 about the abilities of Jabhat an Nusra to use Sarin, as well as those of AQI, the forerunner of Da’ish. Hersh’s source – a ‘senior intelligence consultant’, reported on a top-secret cable forwarded to the Deputy Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, David R Shedd, which ‘confirmed previous reports that An Nusra had the ability to acquire and use Sarin’. These followed from investigations of the apparent use of Chemical Weapons in Khan al Assal in March 2013, which had already been verified on the ground by the Russians. Ironically perhaps, it was to investigate this crime committed by ‘rebel groups’ that the UN finally brought its inspectors to Damascus in August at the insistence of the Syrian government.

Expanding on these reports in his second article published by the London Review of Books – ‘Obama, Erdogan and the Syrian Rebels’, with the subtitle ‘The Red line and the Rat line’, (#6) Hersh described the details of the thinking and actions of Turkish intelligence and the Erdogan ‘cabinet’, leaving no doubt about the role Turkey was playing in actively supporting the armed insurgency, both in assisting the supply of fighters and weapons in entering Syria from Turkey, and apparently in working with An Nusra to ‘set up’ the Sarin attack on Ghouta with the express purpose of pushing Obama over his ‘red line’ for military intervention. Following a recent application by Judicial Watch for Defence Department documents significant evidence of the ‘rat line’ from Benghazi to Syria has now confirmed Hersh’s report. (#7)

It is now clear that Erdogan has tired of waiting for the US to commit forces to actively overthrow the Assad government, despite Obama repeating his desire for this to happen; the current joint operation with Saudi Arabia, and Qatar has now taken the ‘intervention’ out of US hands. Not only that – another development so far also apparently ignored by Australia’s government and media threatens to radically escalate the situation into full-scale war. Following the renewed attack on Syria by Turkish/Saudi mercenaries which Tehran quite correctly interprets as a deliberate act of war by Turkey, Ayatollah Khamenei has now formally committed forces to assist the Syrian Arab Army in fighting the insurgency, and killing the terrorist forces or driving them back into Turkey and Jordan. Along with the problems in Iraq, the potential of this war to spread further into Lebanon is most serious; the insurgency already has a strong base of support from Saudi-aligned groups in Tripoli which are opposed by both Hezbollah and the Lebanese army.(#8)

Australia’s involvement in the fight against IS/Da’ish in Iraq which is formally at the invitation of the Baghdad government, ironically puts us on the same side as Iran as Iranian forces are now actively supporting both the Iraqi army and the Iraqi Shi’ite militias who fight with it to drive back Da’ish and restore security to the civilian population. This comes in contrast to US forces, who sought their ‘authorisation’ from the Kurdish regional government. The apparent failure of those US forces to observe and destroy the Islamic State convoy on its long journey across the open desert to reach Ramadi before its recent capture poses some serious questions about US objectives, both in Iraq and Syria. (#9) While Western media have barely asked these questions, military commanders, leaders and public in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Iran have already answered them. For these countries and their defence forces, who have to fight and die at the hands of the modern barbarians, distinctions between ‘Da’ish’, Jabhat an Nusra, the ‘Islamic Front’, or ‘the Army of Conquest’ are increasingly irrelevant. The pipeline of support for all these insurgents is the same and contains the same fuel – weapons supplied and paid for by members of the Western coalition, whether formal or implicit. And while we talk endlessly of the unstoppable march of the ‘Islamic State’, and how it reaps billions from ‘selling oil’, we ignore its Achilles heel – the umbilical connection that enables it to survive and fight in the barren deserts of Syria and Iraq. (#10)

I need hardly explain why I am making this application to you, and to the other recipients of this letter; it is clear that there must be a radical re-assessment of Australia’s role in the Syrian conflict, along with a debate on the legitimacy of the parties to it that we are currently supporting. While the deaths of Syrian soldiers and civilians do not affect us directly, policies are being pursued by the government on the basis of the conflict which do. We should also take note of the recent case in the UK where the government sought to prosecute a man who had been fighting with a ‘rebel group’ in Syria. The case was dropped when the defence argued that the rebel group was effectively also being supported by the UK government. (#11)

It is also clear that current developments will surely drag Australia into direct involvement in the Syrian conflict, and an obligation to join the fight not just against Da’ish but against the ‘Army of Conquest’ being supported by our ‘proxy allies’, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey.

In my opinion a full parliamentary enquiry examining Australia’s commitment to and role in this conflict is necessary and urgent. This should include the role played by our public broadcasters.
I look forward to your response.

Yours etc,
David Macilwain.

[Editor: No response had been received from Ms Bishop at time of publishing this letter on 14 August 2015]

References:

(#1) There were many reports, including in the NYT describing this Saudi-Turkish operation, which began with a visit by President Erdogan to Riyadh:
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkey-saudi-arabia-agree-to-boost-support-to-syria-opposition.aspx?pageID=238&nID=79091&NewsCatID=510
See also Conn Hallinan’s overview:
http://fpif.org/the-dark-saudi-israeli-plot-to-tip-the-scales-in-syria/
(#2) Robert Fisk reports on the Jisr al Shughour hospital siege:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/the-syria-hospital-siege-thatturned-into-a-massacre-jisr-alshugour-breakout-was-less-of-a-victory-than-damascus-claims-10301084.html
(#3) SBS Dateline: Najieb Khaja meets former Australian preacher Abu Sulayman Muhajir, ‘leading figure in Jabhat an Nusra’, and provides a platform for his political viewpoint against Syria:
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/dateline/story/western-jihadis-australian-speaks-out-syrias-frontline
(#4) ABC Background Briefing; Sara Dingle speaks to Australian supporters of ISIS, but also provides a platform for their false portrayals of Bashar al Assad and his government:
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/2015-03-22/6325498
(#5) Veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh on questions over the Sarin attack in Ghouta of August 21st 2013:
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-hersh/whose-sarin
(#6) The Red line and the Rat line: (please note also the response in Letters from Richard Postol and Theodore Lloyd of MIT following the article)
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line
(#7) Defence department predictions for ISIS in 2012 obtained by Judicial Watch:
http://levantreport.com/2015/05/19/2012-defense-intelligence-agency-document-west-will-facilitate-rise-of-islamic-state-in-order-to-isolate-the-syrian-regime/
(#8) Alastair Crooke, former MI6 agent and specialist on ‘Political Islam’, on the coming war:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/syria-iraq-fractured_b_7471540.html?utm_hp_ref=tw%3ESunni
(#9) Sharmine Narwani with an Iraqi and ‘Resistance’ viewpoint on the US failure to combat ISIS:
http://rt.com/op-edge/262393-isis-us-coalition-syria-iraq/
(#10) Tony Cartalucci on IS ‘umbilical’:
http://journal-neo.org/2015/06/09/logistics-101-where-does-isis-get-its-guns/
(#11) Richard Norton Taylor on the collapse of the trial of Bherlin Gildo vs UK: (Gildo’s defence referred to evidence cited by Hersh in ‘the red line and rat line’, amongst other information showing Western collusion with terrorist groups including Jabhat an Nusra, which Gildo supported)
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/01/trial-swedish-man-accused-terrorism-offences-collapse-bherlin-gildo

The U.S. military is causing devastation to the environment. Joseph Nevins writes in 2010 that "The U.S. military is the world’s single biggest consumer of fossil fuels, and the single entity most responsible for destabilizing the Earth’s climate." The article states ". . . the Pentagon devours about 330,000 barrels of oil per day (a barrel has 42 gallons), more than the vast majority of the world’s countries." The amount of oil used by your military machine is beyond belief, and each military vehicle also releases pollutants through the exhaust. Tanks, trucks, Humvees and other vehicles are not known for their fuel economy. Other fuel guzzlers are submarines, helicopters and fighter jets. Each military flight, whether involved in the transport of soldiers or in a combat mission, contributes more carbon into the atmosphere. Candobetter.net editor: Unfortunately the Australian government supports this US war machine. Earth Day is Wednesday April 22, 2015. These letters will be sent for that occasion but they seek to involve the public earlier in this campaign against war.

National Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance

Despite the clear and convincing evidence that a 2013 Sarin attack in Syria was staged and effected by foreign intelligence agencies working with terrorist groups, to be used as a pretext for “humanitarian intervention”, this fabrication and other false allegations against the Syrian government are now being dusted off again, along with a suitable replacement “government in waiting”. But something happened in the meantime — Syria had a democratic presidential election with three candidates, in which even refugee expatriates went out of their way to vote - and Bashar Al Assad was returned with overwhelming approval. Any country ignoring the legality of the Assad Government in Syria surely does so at peril of later accusations of war-crimes.

The following article was republished from a letter entitled, "Attacking Syria is simply illegal"in the Border Mail, which is a Fairfax paper, on Sept. 27, 2014, midnight.)

A YEAR ago we saw a real demonstration of democracy in our electorate, as Cathy McGowan defeated the sitting member with the help of a strong preferential vote. At the same time as this was happening, plans by the “Western allies” for violent change of government in Syria following the criminal fabrication of a chemical weapons attack on Damascus were effectively thwarted by skilled Russian diplomacy.

Despite the clear and convincing evidence that the Sarin attack was staged and effected by foreign intelligence agencies working with terrorist groups, to be used as a pretext for “humanitarian intervention”, this fabrication and other false allegations against the Syrian government are now being dusted off again, along with a suitable replacement “government in waiting”.

But something happened in the meantime — Syria had a presidential election. [Ed. For the dramatic details, see "Video added: Anti-Syria camp taken aback by high voter turnout among Syrian expats"]

Despite the atrocious problems and continued fighting in some areas of Syria, 73 per cent of eligible voters cast their votes.

Even refugees participated, with more than 100,000 voting in Lebanon.

Unfortunately for the West’s ambitions, Syrians overwhelmingly supported their current president Bashar al Assad; the two opposition candidates received only 7 per cent of the vote.

Though declared free and fair by international observers, the election was hypocritically described as “illegal” by the US and Australia, and this is now being used as a justification for breaching Syria’s sovereignty without UN approval.

As we have now tacitly acknowledged the truth of President Assad’s claim that he was fighting “foreign terrorists”, isn’t it time to also acknowledge the democratically expressed will of the Syrian people, and time to abandon the preposterous idea that the cabal of Western and Gulf-state backed puppets we recognise as “legitimate representatives of the Syrian people” has no legitimacy whatsoever among those very people?

Join hundreds of others at Fed Square to shine a light of hope for the people of Syria. Where: Main Stage, Federation Square, Corner Swanston and Flinders Sts, Melbourne When: Friday 15 March, 7pm - 8.30pm More info: www.with-syria.org, Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA), Syria News, the Syrian Girl Partisan's YouTube channel, Global Research, PressTV, Russia Today, candobetter.net/syria.

From Fox News video (6/9/2013) of 'rebels', armed
by the United States, Saudi Arabia & Qatar, killing
unarmed Syrians

The conflict in Syria has become the worst humanitarian crisis_{#fnSubj1" id="txtSubj1">1} of our time. Friday 15 March 2014 marks the third anniversary of the crisis, three years of failure by the international community to end the appalling suffering. The Syrian people cannot wait any longer.

In 2014, with more than 100,000 people killed in the conflict (including 11,000 children) and a million children living as refugees, now is the time to call on our leaders to do all they can to make sure the people of Syria do not lose another year to bloodshed and suffering.

This event is hosted by Save the Children, Oxfam, World Vision, Amnesty International, Act For Peace, CARE and Caritas to highlight the plight of children in Syria and to encourage people to campaign for a peaceful resolution to this devastating conflict.

Guest speakers and a short visual presentation will be followed by a candlelight vigil.

Interesting perspective on the riots in Britain. Well commentated, with lots of useful statistics that reflect the British bias to produce a landless proletariat that gets discarded when it cannot be absorbed by industry. Says how the tax system encourages people to have children, but with fathers and mothers living separately. Final parts notes how civil war in the Middle East has coincided with very high food prices and how in Britain food prices have risen to three times the level in other parts of the EU. The video identifies itself as a "True News" service.