Cindy Sheehan's Soapbox
April 27, 2017
Guest: Eva Bartlett
TOPIC: Myth-busting Lies about Syria
Guest Website:
Guest Category:
Guest Occupation:
Freelance Journalist/Human Rights Activist
Guest Biography:
Eva
Bartlett is an independent writer and rights activist with extensive
experience in Syria and in the Gaza Strip, where she lived a cumulative
three years (from late 2008 to early 2013). She documented the 2008/9
and 2012 Israeli war crimes and attacks on Gaza while riding in
ambulances and reporting from hospitals. Since April 2014, she has
visited Syria 6 times, including two months in summer 2016 and once
month in Oct/Nov 2016. Her early visits included interviewing residents
of the Old City of Homs, which had just been secured from militants, and
visiting historic Maaloula after the Aramaic village had been liberated
of militants.
In December 2015, Eva returned to old Homs to find life returning, small shops opened, some of the damaged historic churches holding worship anew, and citizens preparing to celebrate Christmas once again. On her 5th visit in June-August 2016, she went twice to Aleppo, also visiting Palmyra, Masyaf, Jableh, Tartous, and Barzeh district of Damascus, as well as returning again to Maaloula and Latakia. On her sixth visit to Syria, in October and November, she visited Aleppo twice more, as well as areas around Damascus.
The testimonies Eva gathered in Aleppo starkly contrasted narratives corporate media had been asserting. Many of her published Syria writings, videos, photos can be found at this link:
https://ingaza.wordpress.com/syria/
*“…the White Helmets are handling the corpses of people without
sufficient safety gear, most particularly with the masks mostly used ,
as well as no gloves. Although this may seem insignificant,
understanding the nature of sarin gas that the opposition claim was
used, only opens questions. Within seconds of exposure to sarin, the
affects of the gas begins to target the muscle and nervous system. There
is an almost immediate release of the bowels and the bladder, and
vomiting is induced. When sarin is used in a concentrated area, it has
the likelihood of killing thousands of people. Yet, such a dangerous
gas, and the White Helmets are treating bodies with little concern to
their exposed skin. This has to raise questions.” (from: “Jumping to
conclusions; something is not adding up in Idlib chemical weapons
attack“)
This morning, under the orders of President Trump, the US military fired a reported 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at an airbase in Syria, killing at least 6, according to early reports. The false pretext for this is the tired old refrain that “Assad used chemical weapons”, a ‘red line crossed claim’ made–and disproven–in 2013 in Ghouta, and in allegations prior and since. Any actual instances were the western-backed ‘rebels’. All others were fabrications of the NATO aligned media and faux human rights groups.
I’ll keep my own commentary short other than to emphasize that I do not believe for one second that the Syrian government used toxic gases on Idlib last week. My reasons are logical and many, but I will list just a few here and continue with suggested reading/listening:
–The Syrian army had no need to do so, are making advances on the ground in various areas of Syria with conventional means of fighting terrorism. Using a chemical weapon is precisely the ‘red line’ act America and NATO/Gulf/Zionist allies would leap upon to wage their war of ‘regime change’ fully on Syria, as per Libya and Iraq before. Meanwhile, western-backed ‘rebels’ have a history of using toxic gas in Syria (even the UN’s Carla del Ponte admitted this).
-Recently, apparently relations with America, via Trump, had improved. At the time of the alleged gas attacks, relations were looking positive. (That said, today, sadly, Trump has launched an illegal attack on Syria, using at least 59 cruise missiles on a military site and causing unknown deaths. This is an unprovoked act of war. Trump/America have zero evidence that the Syrian government authorized and used toxic gas, something even the United Nations admittedeven the United Nations admitted.)
For the sake of time, because this is an urgent issue that needs clear thinking and a firm stance against American (and Zionist/NATO/Turkish/Gulf) attacks on Syria, I am posting excerpts from a number of good analyses already online. Please share.
“Ex-UK Ambassador: Assad wasn’t behind the chemical attack“, Apr 5, 2017
“Former British Ambassador to Syria Peter Ford says he believes it is “highly unlikely” that Russia or the Assad regime was behind the attack in Idlib.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=pS6Oa_aDS6E
Finian Cunningham, April 6, 2017, “Chemical reaction: Trump in U-turn, bubbling with Syria regime change“:
“Last week, the Trump administration announced it was abandoning a failed US policy of regime change in Syria. This week, however, the White House suddenly back-flipped, saying Syrian leader Bashar al Assad “must go”.
The dramatic U-turn in US policy was, of course, in reaction to the reported chemical weapons incident in Syria’s Idlib province on Tuesday morning in which over 80 people were allegedly killed. Among the dead apparently were some 30 children.
Such a vigorous contradictory response from the Trump administration is strongly suggestive that the incident was an orchestrated political stunt; carried out for the purpose of achieving that very outcome by the Syrian militants and their foreign sponsors. It wouldn’t be the first time such a false flag device has been attempted to influence US policy in Syria.
Within minutes of the alleged attack in Khan Sheikdoun, in Syria’s northern Idlib province, Western governments and media were rushing to blame the Syrian air force for dropping chemical weapons on the town. Such claims were based entirely on images and information released by the discredited so-called rescue group, the White Helmets, who are reportedly affiliated with the Nusra terror organization. There was no attempt at verification by Western outlets, just straight-to-screen broadcast.
…The rush to condemn was reflected in the hasty UN draft resolution drawn up by the US, Britain and France. Russia’s acting deputy ambassador Vladimir Safronkov noted that the entire Western position was based on discredited sources like the terrorist-linked White Helmets.
“Taking the White Helmets at face value is not professional and not serious,” said Safronkov. He also added that the Western position was driven by an ideological expedience for “regime change” in Syria.
The last major deadly incident in Syria allegedly involving chemical weapons was in August 2013, when hundreds of civilians, including children, apparently died from exposure to the nerve agent sarin.
As with this week’s incident, Western governments and media were quick to accuse Syrian armed forces of carrying out the supposed attack in East Ghouta, a militant-held suburb of capital Damascus. Horrific images of children gasping for air were likewise given saturated coverage by Western media outlets.
The then Obama administration asserted “conclusively” that the Assad government was guilty of “heinous crimes”. Washington was on the verge of taking unilateral military action because of “red lines crossed”. It was only due to Moscow’s last-minute diplomatic intervention in September 2013 that US military involvement was averted, when a deal was struck by which the Syrian government vowed to decommission its chemical weapons arsenal under the auspices of the UN-affiliated Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).
The Assad government insisted back then that it did not carry out the East Ghouta attack even though it was willing to comply with the Russian-brokered decommissioning deal. It later emerged from investigative reports and Syrian testimonies that the East Ghouta chemical weapons massacre most likely was carried out by militants as a propaganda stunt aimed at forcing the Obama administration’s hand to act on its “red line” threats of military intervention in Syria against the Assad government.
This week, Damascus again categorically denied that its forces had used chemical weapons in Idlib province. The Syrian government said all such weapons had been disposed off under the 2013 disarmament.
…images and video footage released by the White Helmets “aid responders” show no sign that those suffering from chemical exposure were caught up in the aftermath of an air strike. The location indeed appears to be a depot, and the people appearing to administer aid and recording the video footage seem to be doing so with a strange air of calm deliberation.
At one point in the video footage, three semi-conscious adult males are dragged from prone positions on a floor and then propped up against a pillar. The “aid responders” then walk away, but the video footage of the “victims” continues to run. Is that the expected action of “humanitarian responders”?…”
In December 2015, Eva returned to old Homs to find life returning, small shops opened, some of the damaged historic churches holding worship anew, and citizens preparing to celebrate Christmas once again. On her 5th visit in June-August 2016, she went twice to Aleppo, also visiting Palmyra, Masyaf, Jableh, Tartous, and Barzeh district of Damascus, as well as returning again to Maaloula and Latakia. On her sixth visit to Syria, in October and November, she visited Aleppo twice more, as well as areas around Damascus.
The testimonies Eva gathered in Aleppo starkly contrasted narratives corporate media had been asserting. Many of her published Syria writings, videos, photos can be found at this link:
https://ingaza.wordpress.com/syria/
America Illegally Bombs Syria Under False Pretexts. Links for critical thinking.
by Eva Bartlett
This morning, under the orders of President Trump, the US military fired a reported 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at an airbase in Syria, killing at least 6, according to early reports. The false pretext for this is the tired old refrain that “Assad used chemical weapons”, a ‘red line crossed claim’ made–and disproven–in 2013 in Ghouta, and in allegations prior and since. Any actual instances were the western-backed ‘rebels’. All others were fabrications of the NATO aligned media and faux human rights groups.
I’ll keep my own commentary short other than to emphasize that I do not believe for one second that the Syrian government used toxic gases on Idlib last week. My reasons are logical and many, but I will list just a few here and continue with suggested reading/listening:
–The Syrian army had no need to do so, are making advances on the ground in various areas of Syria with conventional means of fighting terrorism. Using a chemical weapon is precisely the ‘red line’ act America and NATO/Gulf/Zionist allies would leap upon to wage their war of ‘regime change’ fully on Syria, as per Libya and Iraq before. Meanwhile, western-backed ‘rebels’ have a history of using toxic gas in Syria (even the UN’s Carla del Ponte admitted this).
-Recently, apparently relations with America, via Trump, had improved. At the time of the alleged gas attacks, relations were looking positive. (That said, today, sadly, Trump has launched an illegal attack on Syria, using at least 59 cruise missiles on a military site and causing unknown deaths. This is an unprovoked act of war. Trump/America have zero evidence that the Syrian government authorized and used toxic gas, something even the United Nations admittedeven the United Nations admitted.)
For the sake of time, because this is an urgent issue that needs clear thinking and a firm stance against American (and Zionist/NATO/Turkish/Gulf) attacks on Syria, I am posting excerpts from a number of good analyses already online. Please share.
“Ex-UK Ambassador: Assad wasn’t behind the chemical attack“, Apr 5, 2017
“Former British Ambassador to Syria Peter Ford says he believes it is “highly unlikely” that Russia or the Assad regime was behind the attack in Idlib.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=pS6Oa_aDS6E
Finian Cunningham, April 6, 2017, “Chemical reaction: Trump in U-turn, bubbling with Syria regime change“:
“Last week, the Trump administration announced it was abandoning a failed US policy of regime change in Syria. This week, however, the White House suddenly back-flipped, saying Syrian leader Bashar al Assad “must go”.
The dramatic U-turn in US policy was, of course, in reaction to the reported chemical weapons incident in Syria’s Idlib province on Tuesday morning in which over 80 people were allegedly killed. Among the dead apparently were some 30 children.
Such a vigorous contradictory response from the Trump administration is strongly suggestive that the incident was an orchestrated political stunt; carried out for the purpose of achieving that very outcome by the Syrian militants and their foreign sponsors. It wouldn’t be the first time such a false flag device has been attempted to influence US policy in Syria.
Within minutes of the alleged attack in Khan Sheikdoun, in Syria’s northern Idlib province, Western governments and media were rushing to blame the Syrian air force for dropping chemical weapons on the town. Such claims were based entirely on images and information released by the discredited so-called rescue group, the White Helmets, who are reportedly affiliated with the Nusra terror organization. There was no attempt at verification by Western outlets, just straight-to-screen broadcast.
…The rush to condemn was reflected in the hasty UN draft resolution drawn up by the US, Britain and France. Russia’s acting deputy ambassador Vladimir Safronkov noted that the entire Western position was based on discredited sources like the terrorist-linked White Helmets.
“Taking the White Helmets at face value is not professional and not serious,” said Safronkov. He also added that the Western position was driven by an ideological expedience for “regime change” in Syria.
The last major deadly incident in Syria allegedly involving chemical weapons was in August 2013, when hundreds of civilians, including children, apparently died from exposure to the nerve agent sarin.
As with this week’s incident, Western governments and media were quick to accuse Syrian armed forces of carrying out the supposed attack in East Ghouta, a militant-held suburb of capital Damascus. Horrific images of children gasping for air were likewise given saturated coverage by Western media outlets.
The then Obama administration asserted “conclusively” that the Assad government was guilty of “heinous crimes”. Washington was on the verge of taking unilateral military action because of “red lines crossed”. It was only due to Moscow’s last-minute diplomatic intervention in September 2013 that US military involvement was averted, when a deal was struck by which the Syrian government vowed to decommission its chemical weapons arsenal under the auspices of the UN-affiliated Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).
The Assad government insisted back then that it did not carry out the East Ghouta attack even though it was willing to comply with the Russian-brokered decommissioning deal. It later emerged from investigative reports and Syrian testimonies that the East Ghouta chemical weapons massacre most likely was carried out by militants as a propaganda stunt aimed at forcing the Obama administration’s hand to act on its “red line” threats of military intervention in Syria against the Assad government.
This week, Damascus again categorically denied that its forces had used chemical weapons in Idlib province. The Syrian government said all such weapons had been disposed off under the 2013 disarmament.
…images and video footage released by the White Helmets “aid responders” show no sign that those suffering from chemical exposure were caught up in the aftermath of an air strike. The location indeed appears to be a depot, and the people appearing to administer aid and recording the video footage seem to be doing so with a strange air of calm deliberation.
At one point in the video footage, three semi-conscious adult males are dragged from prone positions on a floor and then propped up against a pillar. The “aid responders” then walk away, but the video footage of the “victims” continues to run. Is that the expected action of “humanitarian responders”?…”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please limit your comments to the content of the posts---not your self-perceived, self-righteous, personal opinions of the authors/activists who post at this blog. Personal attacks, or threats of violence will not be posted....moderator.