Iran sends troops to Syria

The mere fact that Gen Wesley Clark's video on the fact that America already had plans [which had commenced] to attack 7 countries in 5 years, should put to bed any other shrouds of doubt about what is going on in Syria.

I just don't understand how people can't see this...I'm not saying Assad is the "good" and holy guy. I'm just saying at this stage, I have more support for his government because he is fighting foreign terror in his country. I have no doubt he has clamped down on protests with violence. But I personally believe, that can be dealt with internally without US involvement. Look at Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, look at the democracy that we've brought to those nations. how lovely.

When I present FACTS, such as the 1957 joint US-UK intelligence documents to overthrow Syria. And of course Gen. Wesley Clark's testimony of attacking 7 nations in 5 years - HOW CAN PEOPLE STILL DOUBT what's going on?

 

I'd agree with you that it could be dealt with internally, but the world is too small for that to happen.

Besides, Russia is also manipulating Syria.

If America disappeared from the earth because of a meteor or whatever, the only thing that would change in terms of interventionism is that other major world powers would take up the slack.

If we didn't exist, China and Russia would just throw their weight around more.

It's inevitable.

 

How does that justify our actions that engender terrorism?

 

I woulldn't out too much faith in anything Wesley Clark has to say.................

 

Clark was selling his book at the time and in an interview he conceded that he did not see the memo and whatever it was, that one page memo was not a plan to invade 7 countries, and his source is unknown and the conversation he described sounded like a scene from a bad cliche ridden movie, and the list of countries to invade made no sense (Lebanon, Sudan, Somalia but not Afghanistan...come on) and nothing besides Iran happened since 9/112001 and Clark kept silent about it for 6 years until he needed to sell his book...

But of course some people choose to believe any nonsense they read/hear as long as it confirms their biases and agendas.

 

Man you are hilarious NOT!

Don't believe a 4 star General just believe the megaphonies on here right?

Take a look at what Clark said, it is exactly the countries on that list that are being demonized and attacked!

"We're going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran"

 

Why is everybody trying to over-analyze the United States? The United Nations hates what is going on in Syria just much as the rest of the world does. But, the United States has always been the proxy country when it comes to world politics because Americans don't care. Seriously, I am American. Most Americans don't care what the rest of the world thinks just as long as commerce is not stopped. Israel also uses the United States as their proxy country too.

If I was to set who will be against who on what side. I would say.

The United States, the United Nations, Israel, some Islamic countries that work together with the western world.

And, the rest is the communist world, Russia who still has communist ideologies will back up their bread and butter countries they make money off like Syria and Iran, and any Islamic countries that hate western countries and would work together.

 

Read this slowly and carefully Margot

May 31, 2012

Shabiha: The fantasy and reality of Syria's "ghost fighters"

The “Shabiha” in Syria have been getting a whole lot of media coverage that past few days.
I noticed an increased reporting, once again, of their ghostly existence right after the NATO terrorists massacred civilians in Houla.



The narrative of the Shabiha is not a new one. It emerged about a year back. The narrative was given birth to by the “activists”. And, the Syrian Human Rights Council, you know the one based in Britain? The one that has a direct line to the BBC spin department? Yes, that BBC, one of the best known UK propaganda outlets.


I covered the Shabiha in a previous post: Ghost fighters haunt Syria

look at my scary ghostfighter. Boo!

The information for the previous posting came from the BBC. Using the search engine link, here, you can see that the BBC had an article that corresponds with the date of my earlier post and then an updated version. The updated version appears right after the Houla massacre.

So, the Shabiha narrative is being promoted yet again. Like any other fictional narrative it hits all the right notes, mystery, suspense, drama, intrigue. Riveting.

No on really knows who they are. No one knows where they come from.

Like much else out of Syria, it is simply more spin to draw the gullible in and justify the desired for NATO attack.

The Shabiha narrative was created by the “opposition”, and is promoted by the usual lying media to manage your perception on what is really going on in Syria.
The Shabiha, give cover to the NATO backed terrorists and their slaughter of Syrian civilians. They have from the first media mention all the way through to the most recent media mention

Two very telling sentences that give this charade away come from both the BBC and the other lying media outlet The Guardian.


The BBC quote http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14482968

BBC: “There were even reports that soldiers and police who tried to stop shabiha killing civilians in Tell Kalakh and elsewhere had been shot dead”

The Shabiha reportedly kills soldiers and police. Who else kills soldiers and police?


The Guardian. (This one is a real gem!): (from your OWN POSTED article Margot) http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/31/ghosts-syria-regime-shabiha-militias?newsfeed=true


”Businessmen, many of them Sunni and not Alawite, who are now quietly passing money to the shabiha, mainly to protect their lucrative business privileges, but also to keep their political sponsors happy."

Sunni “business men”, NOT Alawite, are funding the shabiha?! To keep their political sponsors happy." ?!

What political sponsors are being referenced? ? Who are the political sponsors these Sunni business men "are keeping happy"? A happiness that requires them to fund the Shabiha?!

Has Saudi Arabia popped into your head yet? Because that’s the nation name that spontaneously burst into my brain.

Sunni “business men” funding the Shabiha, have everything to do with FSA, Al Qaeda, NATO and absolutely zero to do with Assad or his government.


The mainstream media is, as usual, lying on behalf of NATO. The deaths squads are real. People are being killed. At the behest of NATO/ GCC nations and Israel.

Additional reading: BBC Wages Propaganda War on Syria
From Steven Lendman

"Anyone can spot the propaganda with a modicum of vigilance while watching the news."

You would think so, but, some persons choose not to be vigilant."

http://pennyforyourthoughts2.blogspot.com/2012/05/shabiha-fantasy-and-reality-of-syrias.html

 

Just to add

Shabiha in not an Arabic word linked to any specific group or government its meaning is just being manipulated and used that way.

Shabiha simply means ghosts like we call them in Egypt 'baltageya'. Not ghosts as spirits but unseen thugs whose hands are hidden.
Usually paid with no real affiliation to anyone and more like hired thugs paid to fight for one side or the other.

 

Planned and initiated by the oppressed Syrian people living under the totalitarian police state of the jack booted Baathist thugs who modeled their entire regime on Hitlers Germany, you people sicken me, I mean seriously you are truly an enemy to human rights, human decency, and humanity itself. I bet your cried when Saddam was hung. Disgusting.

 

Finding a few terrorists dissatisfied with their government, then arming them to the teeth so they'll stage an armed resistance in their nation, then their government responding, is not oppression.

US would be slaughtering Americans on the street if we did what these Syrian terrorist rebels are doing.

 

Yes because a few terrorists could orchestrate a prolonged armed struggle against a highly entrenched totalitarian police state. No what that looks like is Iraq after the first Gulf War when Saddam put down the uprising with some helicopter gunships. You people just make up your own history as you go, this all began with nationwide protests against the Baathist thugs and only turned violent after the state did what totalitarian police states do to their citizenry when they demand their inalienable rights which is to slaughter said citizenry wholesale.

 

So how come when we support terrorists they are freedom fighters but then those against our agenda are just plain old terrorists?

 

Excellent info. Thank you. Your free McDonalds vouchers are not in the post

 

They are not targeting civilians they are targeting the state. You people just make up your own history as you go, this all began with nationwide protests against the Baathist thugs and only turned violent after the state did what totalitarian police states do to their citizenry when they demand their inalienable rights which is to slaughter said citizenry wholesale.

 

These armed rebels are slaughtering women and children. They are brutal.

 

You're thinking of the totalitarian Baathist regime sport. Once again this turned violent only after the Baathist turned their guns on peaceful protesters demanding their inalienable rights.

 

They both are.

We should stay out of it. It's savages vs savages. We are literally going to replace one tyrant for another. Ahh be these tyrants will do our bidding I see how it goes.

 

Just like the Libyan rebels who were denied their inalienable rights. Thankfully now they're free to oppress their people mainly blacks and religious minorities.

 

Weird... I find myself agreeing with you.

 

And why is that?

 

That Synagogue of Satan !

 

All the rebels were racists terrorists?

Don't buy it.

However what goes on now in Libya is up to them... yes there are attacks on "Gaddafi Loyalists" and various other challenges, it's up to them to stamp it out.

Did the West take advantage... yes? That's what major powers do... are we to assume that a fight against dictatorships should never be on the table? States act in their own self interest, always have always will. States are, by and large, violent systems... and were founded on violence.

But look at America in the 60's, 70's and 80's... supporting Saddam, Pinochet, Somoza, bombing the (*)(*)(*)(*) out of indo-china and so on. America was always quelling democratic movements and revolutions, like Daniel Ortega (who I know turned out to be a questionable human being) but the revolution he was heading was doing good things.

America is cynical... but these despots need to take heed to history. People warned Saddam not to kill his own people... maybe not to spend all the countries money on himself... maybe not to sponsor terrorism... maybe not to run around trying to procure nuclear weapons and ethnically cleansing the Kurds... people like him have no place in power in this world. We keep saying "he wasn't a threat." Maybe not to us, but tell that to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians either beaten, tortured, raped, imprisoned and killed by the regime.

I know it's cool to be Chomskyist... I love Chomsky too, but he just points out the way things work. That doesn't mean it's suddenly going to change any time soon or that America is the only state lying, or propagandizing things, or working in its own self interest. As Chomsky says, this happens time and time again... it's nothing new. Why Assad couldn't see it coming I don't know. (*)(*)(*)(*) him, he's a autocratic theiving self-aggrandized, totalitarian, murderous prick and I'd like to see his head on a stick... frankly.

All governments lie to their people. All of them. Would we all rather see no interference in Syria? Well maybe... but that would spell a swift crushing on dissent and an affirmation of Baathist power, back to business as usual and the people have no voice. Can you see Assad stepping down unless he absolutely has to?

What would have happened to the "staged" uprising in Libya without intervention?

What about Tunisia, what was America's involvement there? What if Assad did the righteous thing in the first place and stood down allowing for and interim government and a genuine election, years ago. Would there have been all this bloodshed?

Time will tell. But you have to say, who are the good guys? Not the regime, not the supposed Saudi terrorists... not NATO... so who? Just the innocent people caught in the crossfire. And how do you represent their corner from here, by supporting Assad? I can't do that myself.

 

Not all no. But some were. And some were Al Qaeda. When they took power in the government buildings they flew an Al Qaeda flag. Some of the new top commanders are Al Qaeda.

[video=youtube;JF6OGfe_VmE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF6OGfe_VmE[/video]

 

Yep America is a terrorist state. And she puts herself about way too much.

Do you think Gaddafi wouldn't do the same if he could? Remember when he invaded Chad... only reason he didn't carry on is because the French bombed him. Gaddafi had it coming.

I can't watch the vid btw, filter at work.