START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x

TAKE ACTION NOW! Support Ceasefire In Syria To Provide Aid To Wounded Citizens


World  (tags: politics, middle-east, world, Syria, violence, government, death, ethics, 'HUMANRIGHTS!', humanrights )

Cal
- 789 days ago - forcechange.com
Without this ceasefire, hundreds of Syrian citizens will continue to die due to wounds or disease. Sign this petition to tell President Assad to support this daily ceasefire.



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.

Comments

Taylor isMyName (32)
Friday February 24, 2012, 1:13 am
Thanks for posting the petition, Cal. I've signed.
 

Dominic Delarmente (33)
Friday February 24, 2012, 1:23 am
Signed..Thanks Cal..
 

ellen m. (233)
Friday February 24, 2012, 1:27 am
In a heartbeat! Thanks Cal
 

Cynthia Davis (339)
Friday February 24, 2012, 3:48 am
signed ty cal
 

Carol H. (229)
Friday February 24, 2012, 4:37 am
signed and noted
 

Past Member (0)
Friday February 24, 2012, 5:03 am
signed
 

Birgitta S. (216)
Friday February 24, 2012, 6:38 am
Signed; Thank you for this very one, Cal
 

patricia lasek (317)
Friday February 24, 2012, 7:41 am
I cna't get to the site this AM for some reason. I'll try again later.
 

Farah Hage Ali (146)
Friday February 24, 2012, 8:20 am
noted and signed, thank you
 

Patricia E. G. (76)
Friday February 24, 2012, 8:20 am
Noted & Signed
For all of
Mankind
Thank you Cal
 

Joe R. (195)
Friday February 24, 2012, 8:32 am
Thanks Cal. Signed and noted.
 

Past Member (0)
Friday February 24, 2012, 8:33 am
life has value beyond measure
Peace and Love
 

Roger M. (0)
Friday February 24, 2012, 9:03 am
Very glad to sign. Thanks, Cal.
 

Robert O. (12)
Friday February 24, 2012, 9:17 am
Thanks Cal.
 

Jason Green (227)
Friday February 24, 2012, 9:33 am
signed thank you
 

Nicole W. (619)
Friday February 24, 2012, 10:18 am
noted, signed and shared
 

Glenn Byrnes (194)
Friday February 24, 2012, 10:31 am
noted.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Friday February 24, 2012, 11:24 am
TY Cal.
 

Eddie O. (95)
Friday February 24, 2012, 12:45 pm
We need less war and killing and much more peace!!!
 

Liliana D. (124)
Friday February 24, 2012, 1:00 pm
done, thanks
 

Past Member (0)
Friday February 24, 2012, 1:07 pm
A wounded French journalist begs for a ceasefire to get her out - and suddenly there are petitions and calls for a ceasefire. Jeez, I've heard it all now.
 

Lynne Buckley (0)
Friday February 24, 2012, 1:09 pm
Signed
 

Douglas S. (1)
Friday February 24, 2012, 1:21 pm
signed
 

Alice B. (241)
Friday February 24, 2012, 1:56 pm
NOTED & SIGNED.
 

Rose NoFWDSPLZ (265)
Friday February 24, 2012, 2:27 pm
signed
 

Lydia Weissmuller Price (181)
Friday February 24, 2012, 2:35 pm
The Laws of Morality and Human Decency dictate that the Red Cross and Syrian Cross be allowed to render aid to the wounded.
 

Alicia v. (181)
Friday February 24, 2012, 3:07 pm
Governments killing their civilians, killing children, killing its peoples, are out of their minds. They must disappear from the face of the Earth, they are the ones to disappear, not the people.
 

Daniel Partlow (189)
Friday February 24, 2012, 4:11 pm
Noted and signed.
 

Sharon F. (0)
Friday February 24, 2012, 4:31 pm
What is Assad trying to prove. I hope he gets the same treatment as other deposed dictators. Shame on the nut-case, killing his own people.
 

anne barusta (0)
Friday February 24, 2012, 4:49 pm
signed
 

dAlbert M. (13)
Friday February 24, 2012, 5:23 pm
In the light of what has happened regarding the ARAB LEAGUE RESOLUTIONS and MISSIONS, as well as the UN's perseveration FUELLING A DEMOLITION DEMOLITION BLITZ as soon as the impasse was announced, WHAT IS NEEDED AT THIS HOUR IS A GENEROUSLY EQUIPPED , ROBUST and 'BUTCHED' FIRE BRIGADE FORCE to prudently expeditiously FLY IN', ROBUSTLY 'SWAT OUT' ALL FIRES ALONG defined corridors, ENSURE THEY REMAIN extinguished and allow HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE TO FLOW In !! A CEASE FIRE IS TOTALLY meaningless and unsustainable in this situation. CONFLICT IS TOO FAR GONE IN THIS COMPLEX SITUATION and as long as The Presidential Forces feel they have committed backers NORTH and EAST OF THE HOLY CITY. CEASE FIRES WILL COME and GO and the SLAUGHTER OF SYRIAN CIVILIANS WILL CONTINUE !!!! !!!!
 

Catherine Turley (198)
Friday February 24, 2012, 5:41 pm
i signed, but have less confidence in this petition than any i've ever signed. he's trying to kill people; why would he stop to get them aid.
 

Terri Hughes (412)
Friday February 24, 2012, 8:30 pm
''SIGNED''
 

Gloria Morotti (14)
Friday February 24, 2012, 8:44 pm
Signed.
 

Naoko I. (258)
Friday February 24, 2012, 9:00 pm
Signed. Thanks.
 

Vicky P. (462)
Friday February 24, 2012, 10:14 pm
signed and noted, hope it helps..
 

JOHNLEWIS HODDINOTT (77)
Friday February 24, 2012, 11:27 pm
NOTED,thank you
 

Charles O. (209)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 1:14 am
I'd be happy to support a cease-fire, if it applied to BOTH sides.

But asking one side to stop fighting while you continue to arm the other side makes no sense.

According to the ForceChange article, "The conflict in Syria has almost reached the point of civil war". Yet the petition targets only one side, the side that is attempting to preserve order and maintain secular rule in Syria.

This totally one-sided approach is dishonest and obviously doomed. It seems like another effort that is DESIGNED to FAIL and thus provide the Ziosphere with the pretext for bombing Syria and turning Syria into another Iraq.

Why do we assume that all responsibility rests with Assad and none with the U.S., Al Qaeda and other foreign elements that are arming and fueling the rebellion? Because we have a chronic inability to hold our own government responsible for its crimes, our government makes war with impunity. We create a bottomless pit for ourselves.

That's why Russia and China are refusing to take part in the dismemberment of Syria: They know that our war-addicted regime will target them next. The killing won't end with the destruction of Syria. If the insatiable lust for war is not checked, we will end up killing off much of the human race.

> We destroyed the village in order to save it.

-- U.S. colonel in Vietnam, as he looked out over the ruins of Ben Suc.
 

Charles O. (209)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 1:26 am
Shar F. writes:

> What is Assad trying to prove. I hope he gets the same treatment as other deposed dictators. Shame on the nut-case, killing his own people.

Assad, with the backing of the Syrian people, is trying to preserve secular government in Syria and prevent an armed rebellion from paving the way for a foreign take-over of Syria.

Have you seen the devastation NATO inflicted on Libya, under the guise of "Protecting Civilians"? Have you seen what the U.S. did to Iraq? A million Iraqis were killed and four million became refugees. Many Iraqis fled to Syria.

Assad is trying to prevent the U.S. from turning Syria into another Iraq.

You would not have to ask the question you ask, if we were receiving balanced coverage of the conflict in Syria.

For our masked media, it's 2002 all over again. Sometimes the war-makers appeal to our fear -- e.g., fear of (non-existent) "WMDs". When fear fails, they appeal to our idealism -- e.g., we are urged to stop a (non-existent) "Genocide". We then get to shower the targeted country with "Humanitarian Bombs" and "Humanitarian Missiles", and that is when the real slaughter begins, but by then, we're no longer paying attention.
 

Jose Ramon Fisher Rodriguez (13)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 2:47 am
Signed but pretty sure nobody's going to listen. Remember Bahrain? The government there specifically targeted hospitals and even doctors treating wounded demonstrators.
 

Unnikrishnan Sasidharan (48)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 4:01 am
~All Done
 

Ellen Emerson (14)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 7:50 am
Doubt it will do any good but I signed.
 

Jutta N. (25)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 8:34 am
Just signed. Thank you!
 

Judy B. (61)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 10:18 am
Signed and noted, thanks.
 

Gloria H. (88)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 10:24 am
I wondered how the military could fire on their own people, then I remembered the
American civil war where brother killed brother. When will people ever put down the arms and say no more? Following the orders of generals and not the heart.
 

TERRANCE N. (65)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 11:41 am
Instead of signing blindly, how about looking at the pattern of involvement by the Western powers like NATO and most likely Israeli intelligence.

Did Syria all of a sudden decide to start firing on their own people or were agent provocators strategically placed to instigate rebellions? Why are Western countries intervening in Libya and not in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen?

Remember, the neocons and The Project for a New American Century targeted certain countries to be overthrowned which included Iraq, Syria, North Korea, Libya, Venezuela, Iran, and a few others. Is Iran next after Syria?

If the Syrian government cease firing, will the western sponsored rebels cease firing? When Kaddafi called for a cease fire, what was NATO's response?
 

Charles O. (209)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 12:20 pm
Exactly, Terrance N.!

The war-makers are counting on us acting blindly. They know how to press our buttons. They need us to enlist in their next big killing spree.

* To get conservatives to enlist, they press the Fear and Hate buttons and appeal to people who want to Kill Commies, Muslims, etc..

* To get liberals to enlist, they press the Human Rights and Genocide buttons and appeal to people who want to Save the Poor Kosovars, Muslims, etc..

When we sign one-sided petitions, we're enlisting to fight World War III. We're not Saving anybody. The Humanitarian Bombs and Humanitarian Missiles that will rain down upon the targeted country will kill the "Peaceful Demonstrators" along with everyone else.

Remember how the U.S. encouraged the Iraqi Kurds and Shiites to rebel, then left them hanging? That's exactly what we're doing today in Syria: sending people to their deaths. We get to Feel Good About Ourselves, while paving the road to hell with our Good Intentions.

> ... we think the price is worth it.

-- Madeleine Albright, in a 1996 CBS Lesley Stahl interview, when asked whether 500,000 dead Iraqi children was too high a price to pay.

That's the mentality of the war-makers. These guys are not our friends!
 

Jonjon Hoy (146)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 2:13 pm
Thank you Cal for the highly important issue. So gladly signed
 

brittany h. (16)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 3:02 pm
Signed and noted
 

DAVID LAIRD (0)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 3:20 pm
SIGNED
 

DORIS L. (61)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 5:25 pm
Signed.
 

Past Member (0)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 5:38 pm
I'm disgusted. 2 extremely well thought out posts from Terrance and Charles and then 4 more saying "Signed". Charles, you are right when you say that people are acting blindly on the path to destruction and death. They don't even read posts, let alone balanced reports from anywhere, and just sign. These are the people, the same type of people who sent the Jews in Europe to the ovens (or connived at the same), caught up as they were in a miasma of propaganda.
 

Gloria Morotti (14)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 5:49 pm
Time to end all conflict and take care of people.
 

Esther Z. (101)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 6:44 pm
Noted and signed.
 

anne barusta (0)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 8:53 pm
signed, thanks
 

Kerry S. (21)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 8:54 pm
Signed....
 

Charles O. (209)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 10:11 pm
Hello John --

Such is the nature of the world. Seeing so many "Progressives" beating the drums for war saddens me, because war obliterates everything progressives supposedly believe in. But seeing so many "Conservatives" supporting war is also strange, since war is the most radical least conservative thing there is.

These "Progressives" who support war remind me of the blue-collar workers who support the Republican Party. Why do they vote against their own interests? It seems like they are swayed by emotion. It is as if they have been programmed or hypnotized. They do not think for themselves.

Real freedom begins when we learn how to think for ourselves. Peace and freedom do not seem to be much in demand these days. We cannot force people to want peace and freedom, so all we can do is sit back and watch, as the lemmings in the Ziosphere march inexorably towards the abyss of war and madness.


 

New G. (8)
Saturday February 25, 2012, 10:51 pm
Thank you.
 

Parvez Zuberi (7)
Sunday February 26, 2012, 12:46 am
Signed and noted thanks
 

Emilia Boccagna (14)
Sunday February 26, 2012, 1:27 am
done
 

Past Member (0)
Sunday February 26, 2012, 1:31 am
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/24/world/middleeast/syrian-opposition-is-hobbled-by-deep-divisions.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha2

BEIRUT, Lebanon — Syria’s downward spiral into more hellish conflict in cities like Homs has provoked a new surge of outrage around the world, with Arab and many Western countries searching for new ways to support protesters and activist groups coming under the government’s increasingly lethal assault.


But as diplomats from about 80 countries converge on Tunisia on Friday in search of a strategy to provide aid to Syria’s beleaguered citizens, they will find their efforts compromised even before they begin by the lack of a cohesive opposition leadership.

Nearly a year after the uprising began, the opposition remains a fractious collection of political groups, longtime exiles, grass-roots organizers and armed militants, all deeply divided along ideological, ethnic or sectarian lines, and too disjointed to agree on even the rudiments of a strategy to topple President Bashar al-Assad’s government.

The need to build a united opposition will be the focus of intense discussions at what has been billed as the inaugural meeting of the Friends of Syria. Fostering some semblance of a unified protest movement, possibly under the umbrella of an exile alliance called the Syrian National Council, will be a theme hovering in the background.

The council’s internal divisions have kept Western and Arab governments from recognizing it as a kind of government in exile, and the Tunis summit meeting will probably not change that. Russia, Syria’s main international patron, is avoiding the meeting entirely.

The divisions and shortcomings within the council were fully on display last week when its 10-member executive committee met at the Four Seasons Hotel in Doha, Qatar — its soaring lobby bedecked with roses and other red flowers left over from Valentine’s Day.

The council has been slow on critical issues like recognizing the transformation of the Syrian uprising from a nonviolent movement to an armed insurrection, according to members, diplomats and other analysts.

Aside from representing only about 70 percent of a range of groups opposing Mr. Assad, the council has yet to seriously address melding itself with the increasingly independent internal alliances in Homs and other cities across Syria trapped in an uneven battle for survival, they said, warning that the council runs the risk of being supplanted.

“They were in a constant, ongoing struggle, which delayed anything productive and any real work that should be done for the revolution,” said Rima Fleihan, an activist who crawled through barbed wire fences to Jordan from Syria last September to escape arrest. She was representing Syria’s Local Coordination Committees, an alliance of grass-roots activists, on the council until she quit in frustration this month.

“They fight more than they work,” Ms. Fleihan said. “People are asking why they have failed to achieve any international recognition, why no aid is reaching the people, why are we still being shelled?”

Even by comparison with Libya, where infighting among rival militias and the inability of the Transitional National Council to exert authority fully created turmoil after the successful uprising there, Syria’s opposition appears scattered.

Well before NATO intervened in Libya, groups hostile to Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi leveraged the huge chunk of eastern Libya they held around Benghazi into the attempt to claim the whole country. A unified focus on the rebellion submerged most overt political differences for a time.

The United States and other Western governments are also wary of the uncertain role of Islamists in Syria. The Muslim Brotherhood and other organized Islamist groups were more thoroughly suppressed in Syria than in Egypt, and their leaders are less well known. Some diplomats fear that Syrian Islamists could ride to power amid the turmoil, imposing an agenda that might clash with Western goals.

That may be one reason the United States is hoping the Syrian National Council can overcome its divisions and shortcomings. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, in a press conference in London, moved the United States a step closer to recognizing the council.

“They will have a seat at the table as a representative of the Syrian people,” Mrs. Clinton said. “And we think it’s important to have Syrians represented. And the consensus opinion by the Arab League and all the others who are working and planning this conference is that the S.N.C. is a credible representative.”

Council members describe opposition divisions as a natural result of trying to forge a working organization that encompasses wide diversity from a complex society that has known only oppression.

Indeed, the men at the Four Seasons in Doha ranged from the various Islamist representatives with suits, ties and neatly trimmed beards to the one Christian on the executive committee, a longtime university professor in Belgium who wandered around in flip-flops.

The council members contend that progress has been made among a group of people who were virtual strangers when they first gathered in Istanbul in September, and that sniping about their unrepresentative nature is mostly a disinformation campaign by Damascus.

“This is a manufactured problem,” said Burhan Ghalioun, the council president, in a brief interview outside an executive committee meeting last week. “Some independent people don’t want to join the S.N.C., but there is no strong opposition power outside the national council.”

He said lack of money was the group’s most acute problem. Although the Qatari government picked up the bill for the Doha meeting and for frequent travel, council members said that no significant financial support from Arab or Western governments had materialized despite repeated promises, so they must rely on rich Syrian exiles. They hope Friday’s meeting in Tunis will begin to change that.

After communicating via Skype with activists in embattled cities like Homs, Hama and Idlib, council members admitted sheepishly that those activists just flung accusations at them, demanding to know why they seemed to swan from one luxury hotel to the next while no medical supplies or other aid flowed into Syria.

The bickering takes place in plain sight. “Is this any way to work?” yelled Haithem al-Maleh, an 81-year-old lawyer and war horse of the opposition movement, as he came barreling out of one Doha meeting, only to be corralled back in. “They are all stupid and silly, but what can I do?”

The 310-member council remains Balkanized among different factions; arguments unspool endlessly over which groups deserve how many seats. The mostly secular, liberal representatives and those from the Islamist factions harbor mutual suspicions.

No one from Syria’s ruling Alawite community, the small religious sect of Mr. Assad, sits on the executive committee, despite repeated attempts to woo a few prominent dissidents. The fight over Kurdish seats remains unsettled even though Massoud Barzani, a leading Kurd in neighboring Iraq, tried to mediate.

The council has also not reconciled with members of another opposition coalition, the Syrian National Coordination Committee, some of whom remain in Syria and who have generally taken a softer line about allowing Mr. Assad to shepherd a political transition.

“Time is running out for the Syrian opposition to establish its credibility and viability as an effective representative of the uprising,” said Steven Heydemann, who focuses on Middle East issues at the United States Institute of Peace, a research group financed partly by Congress.

Even the council’s diplomatic efforts remain troubled. The council has yet to appoint an official envoy in Washington, and jockeying over who should lobby the United Nations Security Council earlier this month was so intense, diplomats and analysts said, that the council sent an unwieldy delegation of some 14 members who continued arguing in New York over who would meet which ambassador.

The key issue the council is grappling with right now is how to coordinate an increasingly armed opposition. The council says it supports the defensive use of weapons.

But exiled Syrian Army officers who formed the Free Syrian Army, based in Turkey, have stayed aloof from the council, and even they do not really control the many local militias that adopt the army’s name alone.

Steven Lee Myers contributed reporting from London, and an employee of The New York Times from Beirut.
 

Stella AWAY W. (258)
Sunday February 26, 2012, 1:55 am
Yes, I believe it is his duty to support the ceasefire but I also believe it is the moral responsibility of every participant in the conflict, to honour the ceasefire. May peace prevail!
 

Past Member (0)
Sunday February 26, 2012, 3:35 am
Support the ceasefire.
 

Parvez Zuberi (7)
Sunday February 26, 2012, 7:16 am
Noted and signed thanks
 

Abdessalam Diab (150)
Sunday February 26, 2012, 8:45 am
Wednesday February 22, 2012, 12:44 pm . On an other thread titeled " TAKE ACTION NOW! Chad, Support Forcefully Evicted Families " I posted the following story asking Cal's help saing : Can you post this story and ask your good friend Raedene to start a petition for this cause asking the Israeli prime minister to stop the demolition of Palestinians houses and facilitate the issuance of building permission.This will be highly appreciated.


ISRAEL-OPT: Record number of Palestinians made homeless by demolitions

Since January, Israeli authorities have demolished 176 Palestinian buildings

RAMALLAH, 6 April 2011 (IRIN) - The number of Palestinian homes in the West Bank and East Jerusalem demolished by Israeli authorities increased for the third consecutive month in March, according to the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA).

Since January, Israeli authorities have demolished 176 Palestinian buildings, displacing 333 people, including 154 children. “The West Bank is where the future Palestinian state is meant to be situated, and its viability is being reduced with each demolition,” UNRWA spokesperson in Jerusalem Chris Gunness said.

In March, 77 buildings were demolished compared with 29 in January and 70 in February.

Half of the demolished structures were houses, while the rest included stables, which can be just as valuable to a herding community as a house, Gunness said.

The number of Palestinians made homeless by these demolitions also hit a record monthly high, according to UNRWA, with 158 affected in March (including 64 children) compared to 70 in January and 105 in February.

But Capt Amir Koren, spokesperson for the Israeli Civil Administration in Judea and Samaria (West Bank), told IRIN the structures were illegal.

"The Civil Administration is responsible for enforcing laws regarding planning and building in Judea and Samaria… As such, illegal structures built by both Israelis and Palestinians are dismantled as a matter of course, according to a set of priorities which have been brought before the High Court of Justice dozens of times in the past.

“During the first two months of 2011, the Civil Administration carried out 69 orders to dismantle illegal structures built in Area C by Palestinian residents."

I am still waiting for his help.
 

Past Member (0)
Sunday February 26, 2012, 9:36 am
Well, we can't have bad news about the Zionist Entity, can we? I mean, exposing the truth about it is just not allowed.
 

Charles O. (209)
Sunday February 26, 2012, 12:10 pm
Thanks, John D.. The NYT article is highly informative.

> Indeed, the men at the Four Seasons in Doha ranged from the various Islamist representatives with suits, ties and neatly trimmed beards to the one Christian on the executive committee, a longtime university professor in Belgium who wandered around in flip-flops.

-- Neil MacFarquhar, "After a Year, Deep Divisions Hobble Syria’s Opposition", *New York Times*, 23 Feb 2012

So this one Belgian professor in flip-flops is supposed to represent Syrian Christians, tens of thousands of whom will be murdered if the rebellion succeeds?!

Who backs this suicidal rebellion? The U.S., Al Qaeda, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and American "Progressives". See:

> John V. Walsh, Progressives Embrace Humanitarian Imperialism – Again, *antiwar.com*, 24 Feb 2012

Apparently, we "Progressives" have learned nothing from Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. Or maybe we think revolution (regime-change) is a LARK and we are envious of the neo-cons: Why should they get to have ALL of the blood-soaked FUN?!

Yes, we "Progressives" want to Feel Good About Ourselves, but we do not yet have the courage to confront the war-system directly, so we go along with the war-makers and delude ourselves into believing that we can put a "Humanitarian" spin on the slaughter.

I like the first comment at the NYT site:

> globe trotter / west ny

> the u.s. and its nato allies have blood on their hands for creating the chaos and bloodshed in syria. anyone expects the assad regime to just rollover and lay down is daydreaming. best of all, the gullibles blamed russia and china for veto the u.n. resolution.

> so now, a little by little, nyt is letting its readers know the dirty details behind the scene on libya and syria.

> any future article on the good work by our spooks and contractors?

-- Reader comment following Neil MacFarquhar, "After a Year, Deep Divisions Hobble Syria’s Opposition", *New York Times*, 23 Feb 2012
 

Mary Donnelly (44)
Sunday February 26, 2012, 1:44 pm
Thanks cal--signed and sent.
 

Charles O. (209)
Sunday February 26, 2012, 3:28 pm
Whenever Cal posts an article, there seems to be a whole army of people who come to note and sign but never comment.

What explains this? I can't believe that these people are all Hasbara. I'd like to know what some of these people are thinking.
 

Past Member (0)
Sunday February 26, 2012, 4:09 pm
I have been given to understand that Cal sends out a newsletter to his many Care2 friends twice a day, publicising articles he has posted. I don't mind being corrected by Cal if that is incorrect, but I think we should be told.

So perhaps this explains the mindless "noted and signed" comments.
 

Past Member (0)
Sunday February 26, 2012, 4:34 pm
noted
 

Alice B. (241)
Sunday February 26, 2012, 4:48 pm
NOTED & SIGNED.
 

Jane H. (125)
Sunday February 26, 2012, 5:55 pm
noted and signed
 

Vicky Locke (0)
Sunday February 26, 2012, 11:21 pm
Petition signed with diminishing hope, thanks, Cal.
 

Past Member (0)
Monday February 27, 2012, 12:43 am
Syria's crisis is leading us to unlikely bedfellows
David Cameron and William Hague are at risk of over-simplifying a dangerous and complex situation.



By Peter Oborne

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/peter-oborne/

18 Feb 2012


When two car bombings killed nearly 50 people in the heart of the Syrian capital of Damascus just before Christmas, we in the West were quick to challenge claims made on state TV that the atrocities had been carried out by al-Qaeda. We were inclined to award more credibility to the Syrian rebels, who denied that the terror group was involved at all, and insisted that the attacks had been cynically staged by the government, perhaps as a bid for international sympathy.
However, all doubt ended last week when James Clapper, director of US national intelligence, informed the Senate Armed Services Committee that the Damascus bombings “had all the earmarks of an al-Qaeda attack”. Mr Clapper added that “we believe al-Qaeda in Iraq is extending its reach into Syria”. So, it’s official. Al-Qaeda is acknowledged as an ally of Britain and America in our desire to overturn the Syrian government.

Think about it. Ten years ago, in the wake of the destruction of the Twin Towers, we invaded Afghanistan to eliminate al-Qaeda. Now the world’s most notorious terror organisation wants to join a new “coalition of the willing” in Syria (not just al-Qaeda: yesterday the Muslim group Hizb ut-Tahrir staged a march through west London in support of their Syrian brothers and the establishment of the Khilafah state).

This may be the most profound turnaround in global politics since the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact of 1939 converted Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany from bitter enemies into allies – and it is important to understand that the affinity of interests between al-Qaeda and the West extends far beyond Syria. Britain, the United States and al-Qaeda also have a deep, structural hostility to President Assad’s biggest sponsor, Iran.

Like al-Qaeda, we are interested in undermining Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in the Lebanon. In Libya, David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy threw their weight behind the destruction of Gaddafi’s government and its replacement by a new regime which reportedly embraces al-Qaeda-connected figures. We and the terror group have come to share the same hostility to the Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki, and for very much the same reason: we both agree that he takes his orders from Tehran.

Of course, it remains the case that we have different methods and contrasting ideals. But we share unnervingly similar short-term objectives. Although it is unlikely that Britain and America have significant direct dealings with al-Qaeda, it may be that some of our allies do.

Let’s consider for a moment one of the most glaring hypocrisies of American foreign policy: the differential treatment between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Washington never ceases to complain about the connection between the Pakistani intelligence services and the Taliban. But we never hear a whisper of concerns about the connection between Saudi intelligence and Salafi movements across the Middle East, of which al-Qaeda is the best known offshoot.
For months, the region has been alive with rumours that al-Qaeda and other Sunni fighters have been sneaking into Syria through Lebanon and Turkey. Many of these extremist Sunni infiltrators fought with al-Qaeda in Iraq before being driven out and taking refuge in the Lebanon. It is likely that they are backed with money and arms by Saudi interests, and inconceivable that they could act without the knowledge, and perhaps the assistance, of Saudi intelligence.
So what has brought al-Qaeda in from the cold? The answer lies in the Arab Spring. Certainly the revolutions in Libya, Tunisia and elsewhere started out as popular uprisings; many of the rebels in Syria continue to fight, and often die, for human rights and democracy. But, as time has gone by, other agendas are coming into play, and other interests have sought to assert themselves. The statecraft of Saudi Arabia demonstrates how complex the situation has become. The gerontocracy which governs that desert kingdom will never countenance internal opposition. Indeed, Saudi troops marched into Bahrain to suppress the democracy movement there. On the other hand, the Saudis backed the Libyan rebels and are reportedly active in the destabilisation of President Assad.

This deeply reactionary monarchy remains Britain and America’s closest ally in the Middle East. As the Arab Spring has unfolded, we have encouraged the Saudis to develop a makeshift alliance that embraces Qatar, Jordan, the Israelis, al-Qaeda and, it would seem, elements of the Muslim Brotherhood, who have very strong historical reasons for wishing to dislodge the Assad regime, in the light of its brutal crushing of the Brotherhood-inspired revolt in Hama 30 years ago. All members of this alliance would agree that they want the Shiite-Allawi regime in Syria to be replaced by some form of majority Sunni rule. Britain and America hope this would be democratic; doubtless al-Qaeda and its Saudi allies have something else in mind. Ranged on the other side are Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas and Iraq’s al-Maliki government. In Iraq, many of the Awakening Councils (the militia set up by the US six years ago to defeat al-Qaeda) now feel betrayed and are said to have joined forces agai!
n with their Sunni brethren.

The situation could hardly be more dangerous or more complex. Yet, in recent public pronouncements David Cameron has repeatedly spoken of the conflict in Syria as a struggle between an illegal and autocratic regime at war with what he likes to call “the people”. Either he is poorly briefed, or he is coming dangerously close to a calculated deception of the British public. For the situation is far more complicated than he has admitted. It is far from obvious, for example, even that a majority of Syrians are opposed to the Assad regime. Russia calculates that perhaps two thirds of Syrians are still broadly supportive, and it is worth recalling that Russia was a more accurate source of information in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq than either Britain or the US.

Foreign policy is perhaps the area where David Cameron’s Government has copied New Labour most closely. Mr Cameron shares much of Tony Blair’s slavish adherence to American foreign policy aims, especially in the Middle East. Like Mr Blair, he wilfully simplifies intractable foreign policy decisions and has shown a fondness for overseas adventures. In Syria, British rhetoric may raise expectations among the opposition which we can never satisfy.

Meanwhile, in Libya there are menacing signs that last year’s Anglo-French intervention is starting to go wrong. The toppling of the Gaddafi regime has not brought an end to the killing. If anything, the fighting appears to be getting worse, as the country breaks into hostile armed fractions – a fertile hunting ground for al-Qaeda, our latest collaborator in the war on terror. I hope that the Prime Minister and his Foreign Secretary, William Hague, know what they are doing as they allow Britain to be dragged closer towards further intervention in the Middle East. But judging from their public remarks they may be playing a game whose rules they do not fully understand.
 

Charles O. (209)
Monday February 27, 2012, 1:57 am
Thanks, John D.! The article says it all:

> So, it’s official. Al-Qaeda is acknowledged as an ally of Britain and America in our desire to overturn the Syrian government. Think about it.

-- Peter Oborne, "Syria's crisis is leading us to unlikely bedfellows", *The Telegraph*, 18 Feb 2012

In 2003, the U.S. and Al Qaeda both sought the violent overthrow of the secular regime in Iraq. Now, the U.S. and Al Qaeda seek the violent overthrow of the secular regime in Syria. When we sign petitions that support the rebels, that is what we are supporting too.

50 people are dead because of an Al Qaeda car-bombing in Damascus. We laughed when Assad told us that he is fighting terror, but now it turns out that he was telling the truth.

2002, the masked media published lie after lie about "Iraqi WMDs". Remember the Judith Miller series in the New York Times? Many of us swallowed the lies and the one-sided reporting and hoped on the bandwagon for war. And now the masked media give us one-sided reporting on Syria Libya and Iran and once again, many of us believe everything we read and hop on the bandwagon for war.

We end up with blood on our hands, because we do not bother to use our minds! We sign whatever petition is shoved in our face, without asking who will be harmed by our support for regime-change. Those of us who think revolution in Syria is a fun idea now find ourselves in bed with Al Qaeda. The "Peaceful Demonstrators" we support turn out to be not so peaceful. They have killed several thousand Syrian soldiers and police.

More from the article:

> For months, the region has been alive with rumours that al-Qaeda and other Sunni fighters have been sneaking into Syria through Lebanon and Turkey. Many of these extremist Sunni infiltrators fought with al-Qaeda in Iraq before being driven out and taking refuge in the Lebanon. It is likely that they are backed with money and arms by Saudi interests, and inconceivable that they could act without the knowledge, and perhaps the assistance, of Saudi intelligence.

-- Peter Oborne, "Syria's crisis is leading us to unlikely bedfellows", *The Telegraph*, 18 Feb 2012
 

Past Member (0)
Monday February 27, 2012, 2:28 am
Hi Charles, in addition (and I think I have deleted the bloody article) those car bombs in Damascus that the Zionist media in the West immediately said was the work of al-Assad's men has now been acknowledged by the intelligence community of the USI as having been done by al-Qaeda. This was revealed in testimony, as far as I remember, to a Senate (sub) Commitee.
 

Past Member (0)
Monday February 27, 2012, 2:30 am
No, the full article has gone. As you say, the Telegraph article makes reference to this, but the testimony, which formed a large part of the article, I can no longer find.
 

Donna Hamilton (128)
Monday February 27, 2012, 3:48 am
Signed. Thanks for posting.
 

Marianna Molnar Woods (9)
Monday February 27, 2012, 5:17 am
noted
 

Julia P. (38)
Monday February 27, 2012, 12:35 pm
Noted & signed. This is a sad situation. Innocent people are being killed while governments sit back & twiddle their thumbs. There will be no one left to save if the U.N. doesn't intervene. Syrians are not asking the US for help. They are calling on their Arab brothers. Someone must step up and help them.
 

Pier Luca F. (18)
Monday February 27, 2012, 1:31 pm
done
 

Charles O. (209)
Monday February 27, 2012, 3:14 pm
Julia P. writes:

> Someone must step up and help them.

WHICH Syrians do you want to help, Julia?

* The Syrians and foreign fighters who are trying to overthrow the secular government?

* The Syrians who are trying to prevent these fanatics from taking over?

The former are ALREADY receiving lots of help, in the form of arms and funds and propaganda, from the U.S., Al Qaeda, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and NATO's Libya.

The latter are receiving help from Iran and Russia.

The Arab League, dominated by Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, sent monitors. The monitors were recalled, however, when their reports failed to support the pro-war agenda of the Saudis.

The U.N. could help by sending observers who could help us to see BOTH sides of the conflict.
 

Past Member (0)
Monday February 27, 2012, 5:14 pm
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/289-134/10179-syria-iran-and-the-obama-doctrine


"In Syria, where the death toll is already above 6,000 by most estimates, there is no equivalent NATO operation; so far, a limited intervention to spur a coup or create a "safe zone" for Syrian civilians near the Turkish border is all still talk. So at first glance, providing arms looks like the next-best option. But the worry is that what started as a protest movement has morphed into what Steven Heydemann, a Syria expert at the United States Institute of Peace, described as "a dangerous and uncoordinated array of armed opposition fighters." While there is an entity called the Free Syrian Army - not to be confused with the civilian Syrian National Council - it is less an army than bands of free-form militias. Some are tribal; some are linked by regional or ethnic bonds; there is no real command structureW".
 

Charlene Rush (32)
Monday February 27, 2012, 6:55 pm
It appears, that governments, all over the world, have far too little regard for their citizens. When the U.S.A. places a higher value on Big Business, than it's citizens, we are no different. We have done it with wars numerous times and now we honor corporations, regardless of their offences.
 

Abdessalam Diab (150)
Tuesday February 28, 2012, 1:09 am
"West" Wants Assad Out, Democracy or Not

By Global Times

February 27, 2012 "Global Times" -- Syrians voted Sunday on a draft constitution that calls for multi-party rule and parliamentary elections, and puts in place a presidential limit of two seven-year terms. The result of the vote will be announced today. The opposition, with the West's support, has resisted the vote.

The West is wrong to reject any reform undertaken by Syria and demand President Bashar al-Assad step down in order to end the crisis. This will bring about a civil war and lead to more deaths. What the West wants from Syria is not democracy but the overthrow of the regime so as to eliminate Iran's influence over Syria.

China should stand by Russia and support the vote.

In a globalized world, it's difficult for a regime to be unaffected by outside influences.

The West's political pressure on Assad's regime seems invincible, but it's unknown what will happen in the long run. The "Friends of Syria" meeting was nowhere near as effective as last year's "Friends of Libya." The Assad regime is not as isolated as that of Muammar Gaddafi. So far, there has been no obvious trend of officials jumping ship, and the opposition is far from united.

China and Russia should support and urge Assad's regime to reform in accordance with the Syrian people's will. At the same time, they should help resist outside interference. Only Syria's people can determine its future. If the reform wins the support of the majority, the regime is likely to live on.

Syria has become a place where countries in the Middle East as well as the world's great powers demonstrate their political ambition and place the bet. China, which has become involved in this issue, can pull out at any time, but will have to pay the price.

In the past, China has developed while abiding by a world order dominated by the West. But in the past few years, the world order has shown the tendency to limit China's development. It's unavoidable that China now sees the need to confront it. The Syrian issue can be seen as an unintentional confrontation point.

China favors a path that hurts the Syrian people least, not necessarily a path that benefits the West most. If the West accepts what China does, an element for the new world order will be formed. It will be a different case if China quits.

Whatever China does in the Syrian issue, the West will take note.

China's veto this time is just like water that has been poured. Many of the world's strategic changes originate with China. Now it's time for China to face them seriously.



Global Time report

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article30656.htm
 

Maria Papastamatiou (4)
Tuesday February 28, 2012, 12:51 pm
My heart goes with the Syrian people. I have visited Syria and felt at home there. Such warm hearted people!
 

Jennifer C. (172)
Tuesday February 28, 2012, 5:40 pm
Thank you.
 

Charles O. (209)
Wednesday February 29, 2012, 1:21 am
Thank you, Abdessalam Diab. The report you quoted --

"West" Wants Assad Out, Democracy or Not

is very helpful.

U.S. policy once again is outrageously hypocritical. The U.S. is supporting the violent overthrow of the government, a course that can only lead to many Syrians being killed -- then the U.S. loudly condemns the killing.

The U.S. has ignored all of the tools of the peace-maker: negotiation, mediation, mutual restraint, dialogue. Instead, it arms the rebels and dictates to the Syrian government.

This kind of "diplomacy" is designed to fail. The inevitable failure can then be used as the pretext for yet another U.S. blitzkreig.
 

Abdessalam Diab (150)
Wednesday February 29, 2012, 2:10 am
I still challenge Cal who posted this thread to answer my comment herein on the 26th of February 2012 and my previous comment on Feb.23 on an other thread.I ,however,know he doesn't have the courage to adopt a petition against the criminal acts Israel commit daily against Palestinians.He doesn't dare to.
 

Cal Mendelsohn (950)
Wednesday February 29, 2012, 2:16 am
Abdessalam, I am yet to see you post ANYTHING AT ALL here at Care2, but maybe I don't keep track as well as you do. I challenge YOU to personally post the petition you speak of and I will circulate it to my bevy of friends. Why can't you back up your own words with deeds instead of relying of me to be the social conscience of care2??

Why are you speaking of my courage when you are clearly lacking in the same??
 

Abdessalam Diab (150)
Wednesday February 29, 2012, 2:19 am
Finally after seven days a word came up to prove what I said.Thanks Cal.
 

Abdessalam Diab (150)
Wednesday February 29, 2012, 2:28 am
Great Cal.Now will you sign this petition and circulate ?.

Help stop attacks on civil right activists

http://www.care2.com/news/member/602821732/3119553

Every body on this post is invited to note and sign if she/he wishes.
 

Abdessalam Diab (150)
Wednesday February 29, 2012, 2:33 am
Cal said " I challenge YOU to personally post the petition you speak of and I will circulate it to my bevy of friends." Doesn't this mean that you will just circulate the petition? You never said that you will sign it. An other prove to what I have said.
 

Cal Mendelsohn (950)
Wednesday February 29, 2012, 3:58 am
I am sending out the following e-mail to all of my Care2 Friends today:

My Good Friend,



I am honored to have you as my friend here at Care2.

I have always maintained that Human Rights are a universal standard and for everyone everywhere, no matter which culture or country we're speaking about . I have circulated peitions and stories advocating this for various peoples on six continents on Care2 at various times.

The author of this petition and i have frequently disagreed about all matters on Middle East politics and international affairs in the region. He has challenged me to enforce this central belief of mine: I have accepted this challenge. I have signed and am circulating this petition to all my Care2 Friends and I urge you to review this and act accordingly to your consience. Be fair in considering its content.



http://www.care2.com/news/member/602821732/3119553



I understand that not all of you will want to agree with its content and that you may not want to sign. BUt I do hpe that we can always be firends here. Good friends do not have to agree with everything and every issue.



Thanks for your dear friendship and consdieration.



Cal
 

Cal Mendelsohn (950)
Wednesday February 29, 2012, 4:15 am
Just for the record, too, this doesn't change my support of Israel's right to exist and to exist in peace with its neighbors.
Also, It does not end the struggle for human rights for those who continued to be slaughtered in syria and against those who choose to falsely and perniciously call these protestors thugs and murderers instead of the victims of Syrian government persecution and genocide that they truly are.
 

Abdessalam Diab (150)
Wednesday February 29, 2012, 4:50 am
Date: Wednesday, February 29, 2012, 3:45 AM
Subject: Friend Request from Cal Mendelsohn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cal Mendelsohn would like to link to you.


Cal
I was about to accept your friend request based on the fact that friends don't have to agree always on every thing.But when you write on my petition post addressing me saying
" You know who you are and your cowardice is noted here " thus showing how polite you are,I find myself saying SORRY Cal I am not accepting your friend request before you behave.At the same time I tell you that I have signed your force change petition since February 24 . I wonder now who you are and who is the one whose cowardice is noted here.
 

Past Member (0)
Wednesday February 29, 2012, 5:25 am
"falsely and perniciously call these protestors thugs and murderers"

I don't think that people have been calling them that. People have said that they are armed and directed from outside, thus this is not a popular revolution, any more than the Ukrainian one was - or the Libyan.
 

Yvonne F. (160)
Thursday March 1, 2012, 9:21 am
So gladly signed! This has to be stopped now! Poor people, all they want is their rights! Thanks for posting, Cal!!!
 

Charles O. (209)
Thursday March 1, 2012, 10:30 am
Yvonne Fast writes:

> So gladly signed! This has to be stopped now! Poor people, all they want is their rights! Thanks for posting, Cal!!!

And how do you think "they" will get their rights, Yvonne?

It seems like you support the overthrow of the secular regime. Have you asked yourself what will take its place? Most likely, it will be anarchy and civil war, with most Syrians fearing for their lives. Eventually, Syria may turn into another Islamic state.

Do you really think that Syrians will have any more rights then than they have now?

Who are "they", Yvonne? Who are the "Poor People"? Why is it that most Syrians do NOT support them? Why is it that the rebels cannot even agree among themselves?

Why do "they" reject reforms made by the Assad government? Why do these "Poor People" refuse to participate in the national dialogue? What is the alternative to dialogue? Violence?

Do you realize that thousands of Syrian police and soldiers have been killed by your "Poor People"? Do you realize your "Poor People" include Al Qaeda terrorists, who recently killed 50 people in a bombing in Damascus?

How do you think the Syrian government should respond to these acts of terror and violence?
 

Charles O. (209)
Thursday March 1, 2012, 10:41 am
The rebels are retreating! Peace is returning to Homs!

See Jason Ditz, Syrian Rebels Withdrawing From Homs, antiwar.com, 01 Mar 2012

> Less than 24 hours after the Free Syrian Army (FSA) was claiming to be holding the Syrian military back from a “massacre” in the Baba Amro neighborhood of Homs, leaders of the group are now saying that they are withdrawing from the city entirely.

> Though rebels say this is only a “tactical retreat” it seems a significant gain for the Assad regime, as parts of Homs have been contested for months and it has been the site of some of the fiercest battles in the still relatively young civil war.

> If calm returns to Homs it could also be a major diplomatic victory for the regime, as the close proximity of anti-Assad protesters and battles has led the rebels to claim enormous civilian death tolls and sparked international outcry.

> Where this leaves the rebels is unclear, though they still enjoy considerable international support and have promised to escalate attacks across the nation, saying they will strike everywhere from Daraa (along the southern border with Jordan) to Idlib (near Turkey in the far north).

-- Jason Ditz, Syrian Rebels Withdrawing From Homs, *antiwar.com*, 01 Mar 2012

This is a huge win for President Assad and for the Syrian people in general.

In the recent referendum, Syrians approved multi-party democracy and term limits. And now the rebel threat is receding!
 

Past Member (0)
Thursday March 1, 2012, 10:51 am
This is what people "noting" articles don't think about. No critical faculties whatsoever. Just "oh those poor people". Or the Syrian government has technology to bump off Western journalists by precision strikes at one moment, then the next it is discriminately bombing a suburb and killing "civilians". Which is it?

Even La Clinton admitted that the USI was dangerously close to allying itself to al-Qaeda in Syria on the BBC. And still the propaganda spews onto Care2 from the usual suspects.
 

Past Member (0)
Thursday March 1, 2012, 4:47 pm
"This is a huge win for President Assad and for the Syrian people in general. "

Than you Charles O. I am behind the news today. This has not yet been reported by either Maroc One or 2M. I shall try to get onto Syrian TV later.
 

Past Member (0)
Thursday March 1, 2012, 5:07 pm
I just love Robert Fisk!

The new Cold War has already started – in Syria


http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/article7440620.ece

February 25, 2012, The Independent, Robert Fisk

If Iran obtains nuclear weapons capability, "I think other nations across the Middle East will want to develop nuclear weapons".

Thus thundered our beloved Foreign Secretary, William Hague, in one of the silliest pronouncements he has ever made. Hague seems to spend much of his time impersonating himself, so I'm not really certain which of Mr Hague-Hague's personas made this statement.

Flaw number one, of course, is Hague-Hague's failure to point out that there already is another Middle East "nation" that has, in fact, several hundred nuclear weapons along with the missiles to fire them. It's called Israel. But blow me down, Hague-Hague didn't mention the fact. Didn't he know? Of course, he did. What he was trying to say, you see, was that if Iran persisted in producing a nuclear weapon, Arab states – Muslim states – would want to acquire one. And that would never do. The idea, of course, that Iran might be pursuing nuclear weapons because Israel already possesses them, did not occur to him.

Now as a nation that sells billions of pounds worth of military hardware to Gulf Arab nations – on the basis that they can then defend themselves from Iran's non-existent plans to invade them – Britain is really not in a position to warn anyone of arms proliferation in the region. I've been to the Gulf arms fairs where the Brits show alarming films of an "enemy" nation threatening the Arabs – Iran, of course – and the need for these Arab chappies to buy even more kit from British Aerospace and the rest of our merchants of death.

Then comes the historical killer in Hague-Hague's peroration. He warns of "the most serious round of nuclear proliferation since nuclear weapons were invented" which could produce "the threat of a new Cold War in the Middle East" that would be "a disaster in world affairs". Now, I know that Hague-Hague sits in the throne room of Balfour and Eden – both pseudo-experts on the Middle East – but does he really have to mess up history so badly? Surely the most serious round of nuclear proliferation occurred when India and Pakistan acquired the bomb, the latter a nation which is awash with al-Qa'ida chaps, home-grown Talibans and dodgy intelligence men.

Still, it was good to be reassured that "we are not favouring the idea of anybody attacking Iran at the moment". Maybe later, then. Or maybe after President Assad eventually falls, thus depriving Iran of its only – and valuable – ally in the Middle East. Which is, I suspect, what a lot of the roaring and raging against Assad is all about. Get rid of Assad and you cut out part of Iran's heart – though whether that will induce the crackpot Ahmadinejad to turn his nuclear plants into baby-milk factories is another matter. For here's the rub. The mighty voices calling for Assad's departure grow louder every time they refuse to involve themselves militarily in the overthrow of the same man. The more they promise not to "do a Nato" on Syria – every time they claim there can be no "no-fly" zones over Syria – they get angrier and angrier at Assad. Why doesn't he just go off to retirement in Turkey, end the theatre once and for all, and stop embarrassing us all by bludgeoning his cou!
ntry with shells and sniper fire, killings thousands – journalists among them – while we rage on innocently from the stalls?

Needless to say, Hague-Hague waffles on and on about Syria, too, while presumably not "favouring the idea of anybody attacking Syria at the moment". And this is a real stinker for the Foreign Secretary. He was rightly denouncing the killing of Marie Colvin this week – I last saw her in the final, joyous days of the Egyptian revolution, heading, as usual, towards the crack of tear-gas grenades – but hundreds of other innocent human beings have been cruelly killed in Syria without so much as a whisper from Hague-Hague. And some of these were killed by the armed opposition to Assad; the murder of Alawites by Sunnis is becoming gruesomely familiar, just as the slaughter of civilians by Syrian government shellfire has become a template for this terrible war.

No, we are not going to involve ourselves in Syria, thank you very much. Because the new Cold War in the region which Hague was blathering on about has already started over Syria, not Iran. The Russians are lined up against us there, supporting Assad and denouncing us. Just what reaction Putin expects from any Assad replacement is a mystery. Nor will a "new" Syria necessarily be the pro-Western democracy that Hague-Hague and others would like to see.

The Syrians, after all, will not forget the way in which the Brits and the Americans silently approved of the infinitely more terrible massacre of 10,000 Syrian Sunni Muslims at Hama in 1982. Indeed, today marks the 30th anniversary of that onslaught, staged by the Defence Brigades of Bashar al-Assad's Uncle Rifaat.

But, like Hague-Hague, Rifaat also has a doppelgänger. Far from being the killer of Hama – a term he fiercely disputes – he is now a friendly and retired gentleman, living in style and protection quite close to Hague-Hague's desk. Indeed, if Hague-Hague turns left outside the Foreign Office and nips through Horseguards Parade, he can drop by and meet the man himself in – where else would he live? – Mayfair. Now that would be a disaster in world affairs, wouldn't it?
 

Charles O. (209)
Thursday March 1, 2012, 9:29 pm
> Now as a nation that sells billions of pounds worth of military hardware to Gulf Arab nations – on the basis that they can then defend themselves from Iran's non-existent plans to invade them – Britain is really not in a position to warn anyone of arms proliferation in the region.

-- Robert Fisk, The new Cold War has already started – in Syria, The Independent, 25 Feb 2012

If one looks for logic or sanity in the foreign policy of the Ziosphere, one looks in vain.

The driving force behind the war racket is greed, not logic. When the aim is to profit from death and destruction, any old pretext will do.
 
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story


Loading Noted By...Please Wait

 


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in World

Cal Mendelsohn

Cal M.
Cal's contributions:
Stories noted recently: 187
Stories submitted: 22248
Front Page stories: 19178




 
Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of Care2.com or its affiliates.