Church leaders say NO to any US attack on Syria

While the US President ponders whether he should initiate targeted strikes on Syria, church leaders worldwide are united in their opposition to violent foreign intervention.

As far as I can see the number of Christian leaders on the planet who support armed foreign intervention in Syria number exactly zero! Certainly when it comes to Syria and her neighbours, the voice of the church is unambiguous and clear – for God’s sake don’t kill more Syrians!

There are other ways! While there are no shortage of mockers who say that dialogue will not achieve anything, the truth is that it has not been tried!

Father Dave

Gregory III Laham -Patriarch of the Church of Antioch

Gregory III Laham – Patriarch of the Church of Antioch

www.zenit.org…

Church Leaders Call for Negotiations in Syria as Obama Weighs Response to Chemical Weapons

A week of prayer for Syria began today. The texts of the prayers include the story of a 6-year-old Syrian girl who was playing hide-and-seek with her younger brother when the little boy was shot and killed. At the cemetery, before the boy’s tomb, his sister cried out to him: “Come out from your hiding spot! I don’t want to play anymore!”

Accounts such as this one, along with thousands of others, and photos, and now especially, the videos from what is presumed to have been an attack of chemical weapons, have the international community calling more urgently for a change in Syria after more than two years of conflict.

But as the United States and others consider plans for possible military intervention, Church leaders from Syria, and the Vatican as well, are reiterating the call for dialogue.

Only option

After Pope Francis met Thursday morning with the king and queen of Jordan, the Vatican’s official communiqué regarding the meeting contained this line: “[In regard to the tragic situation in which Syria finds itself], it was reaffirmed that the path of dialogue and negotiation between all components of Syrian society, with the support of the international community, is the only option to put an end to the conflict and to the violence that every day causes the loss of so many human lives, especially amongst the helpless civilian population.”

Caritas Internationalis today also said “peace talks” are the “only option” in Syria.

Spokesman Patrick Nicholson told ZENIT that the “international community has a responsibility to bring all sides to peace talks, to refrain from making the situation worse through military intervention, and to fund relief efforts both inside the country and for the refugees.”

“We urgently need peace talks as the only option for an end to the tragedy in Syria,” he said.

A statement from the aid agency recognized chemical weapons as a “horrific crime,” saying the alleged use of the weapons in Damascus on Aug. 21 highlights “how catastrophic the humanitarian situation has become.”

Caritas Internationalis Secretary-General Michel Roy said, “The Syrian people don’t need more bloodshed, they need a quick end to it. They need an immediate truce. Scaling up military intervention by foreign powers will simply widen the war and increase the suffering.

“The last decade bears witness to the tragic consequences of military intervention in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.

“Caritas believes that the only humanitarian solution is a negotiated one. Dialogue can end the war in Syria, safeguard the lives of the people and build a viable future for everyone. The priority must be to reinvigorate talks in Geneva as the first step towards a ceasefire and a peace deal.”

US President Barack Obama was speaking today of “limited and narrow” action in Syria, though he said the decisions are still being weighed. Over a year ago, the president said that the use of chemical weapons would call for a response.

The US bishops, however, echoed the Vatican’s call for negotiations. In a letter to US Secretary of State John Kerry, the bishops quoted Pope Francis: “It is not conflict that offers prospects of hope for solving problems, but rather the capacity for encounter and dialogue.”

From Damascus

The Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarch of Antioch has also said that in spite of the dire situation in Syria, reconciliation initiatives are still viable and should be the top priority for all countries concerned with the crisis.

Gregorios III of Damascus said this Tuesday in an interview with Catholic charity Aid to the Church in Need. The UK Houses of Parliament on Thursday heard the Patriarch’s appeal, as Baroness Caroline Cox of Queensbury quoted him, saying that armed intervention by the West in Syria would only fuel violence and unrest.

The Parliament on Thursday voted against possible missile strikes.

In the Tuesday interview, Patriarch Gregorios expressed his doubts about being able to determine who was behind the chemical weapons attack of Aug. 21.

He also criticized US policy with Syria: “You should not accuse the government one day and then accuse the opposition the next. That is how you fuel violence and hatred.”

“The Americans have been fueling the situation for two years,” he declared.

He condemned as immoral the flow of arms into the country.

“Many people are coming from outside Syria to fight in the country. These fighters are fueling fundamentalism and Islamism,” the patriarch stated. “It is time to finish with these weapons and, instead of calling for violence, international powers need to work for peace.”

From Jerusalem

In a statement Wednesday, the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, Fouad Twal, asked “by what authority” the US would launch a strike on Syria.

“Is there a need to increase the number of deaths, now over 100,000?” Patriarch Twal said.

The patriarch also warned of the consequences of a possible attack on the entire region.

“According to observers, the attacks should be specifically targeted and concentrated on a few strategic sites in order to prevent further use of chemical weapons,” he said. “We know from experience that a targeted attack will have collateral consequences — in particular, strong reactions that could ignite the region.”

These were concerns also expressed by Chaldean Catholic Bishop Antoine Audo of Aleppo, who is also president of Caritas Syria.

“The only road to peace is dialogue,” he said. “War will not take us anywhere.”

Power and faith

Even with strong voices calling for negotiations, the direness of the situation can hardly be underestimated.
The Caritas Internationalis spokesman suggested to ZENIT that the only way to bring those involved to a point where they can negotiate without violence, is prayer.

“Prayer, as Pope Francis has encouraged,” he said. “But also it must be made clear to those inside Syria and their allies outside the country that the violence must end. That means stopping more weapons going into Syria, an immediate ceasefire and pressure being put on all sides of the conflict to negotiate peace. The clear message from ordinary Syrians is that they want peace and an immediate end to this conflict. As one of our Caritas staff inside Syria said to us, ‘Against this dark tableau, civil society is leading a secret resistance. We are fighting against the hardships and violence in silence and with dignity.’ We must stand in solidarity with them.”

In that light, those doing the most to help Syria might be the people who started the week of prayer today, and others such as residents at the Monastery of St. James in Qarah (a city between Damascus and Homs). The ecumenical community of that monastery is dedicated to prayer; their leader, Fr. Daniel Maes, told Fides that, “aware of the power of prayer and faith in the Providence of God,” the priests and nuns will have all night Eucharistic Adoration.

[Ann Schneible contributed to this report]

Posted in Article, syria news, syria now | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Are the Saudis behind the Syrian Chemical Weapons attacks?

This is an important piece of investigative journalism by Dale Gavlak and Yahya Ababneh.

Whereas so many of the explanations that have been offered to explain the chemical attacks in Ghouta have been put forward by armchair theorists if not propagandists, these two reporters are based in Jordan and have spoken to people on the scene, including relatives of those killed in the attack!

Their conclusion – that it’s the Saudi’s who are responsible for the use of chemical weapons – needs to be listened to and seriously evaluated. Of course, whether such information, even if shown to be true, will affect decisions made in the USA, is another question.

Father Dave

syrian-flag

www.mintpressnews.com…

EXCLUSIVE: Syrians In Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack

Rebels and local residents in Ghouta accuse Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan of providing chemical weapons to an al-Qaida linked rebel group.

By Dale Gavlak and Yahya Ababneh

This article is a collaboration between Dale Gavlak reporting for Mint Press News and Yahya Ababneh. 

Ghouta, Syria — As the machinery for a U.S.-led military intervention in Syria gathers pace following last week’s chemical weapons attack, the U.S. and its allies may be targeting the wrong culprit.

Interviews with people in Damascus and Ghouta, a suburb of the Syrian capital, where the humanitarian agency Doctors Without Borders said at least 355 people had died last week from what it believed to be a neurotoxic agent, appear to indicate as much.

The U.S., Britain, and France as well as the Arab League have accused the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for carrying out the chemical weapons attack, which mainly targeted civilians. U.S. warships are stationed in the Mediterranean Sea to launch military strikes against Syria in punishment for carrying out a massive chemical weapons attack. The U.S. and others are not interested in examining any contrary evidence, with U.S Secretary of State John Kerry sayingMonday that Assad’s guilt was “a judgment … already clear to the world.”

However, from numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families, a different picture emerges. Many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the dealing gas attack.

“My son came to me two weeks ago asking what I thought the weapons were that he had been asked to carry,” said Abu Abdel-Moneim, the father of a rebel fighting to unseat Assad, who lives in Ghouta.

Abdel-Moneim said his son and 12 other rebels were killed inside of a tunnel used to store weapons provided by a Saudi militant, known as Abu Ayesha, who was leading a fighting battalion. The father described the weapons as having a “tube-like structure” while others were like a “huge gas bottle.”

Ghouta townspeople said the rebels were using mosques and private houses to sleep while storing their weapons in tunnels.

Abdel-Moneim said his son and the others died during the chemical weapons attack. That same day, the militant group Jabhat al-Nusra, which is linked to al-Qaida, announced that it would similarly attack civilians in the Assad regime’s heartland of Latakia on Syria’s western coast, in purported retaliation.

“They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them,” complained a female fighter named ‘K.’ “We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.”

“When Saudi Prince Bandar gives such weapons to people, he must give them to those who know how to handle and use them,” she warned. She, like other Syrians, do not want to use their full names for fear of retribution.

A well-known rebel leader in Ghouta named ‘J’ agreed. “Jabhat al-Nusra militants do not cooperate with other rebels, except with fighting on the ground. They do not share secret information. They merely used some ordinary rebels to carry and operate this material,” he said.

“We were very curious about these arms. And unfortunately, some of the fighters handled the weapons improperly and set off the explosions,” ‘J’ said.

Doctors who treated the chemical weapons attack victims cautioned interviewers to be careful about asking questions regarding who, exactly, was responsible for the deadly assault.

The humanitarian group Doctors Without Borders added that health workers aiding 3,600 patients also reported experiencing similar symptoms, including frothing at the mouth, respiratory distress, convulsions and blurry vision. The group has not been able to independently verify the information.

More than a dozen rebels interviewed reported that their salaries came from the Saudi government.

read the rest of this article here.

 

Posted in Article, syria news, syrian rebels | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The US fails to make the case against Assad

This is an important article by Virginia Tilley, doing a serious, line by line, analysis of the US document that is being used to justify intervention in Syria. 

Tilley is a political scientist of great renown. She is well known for her work on South African apartheid and for her advocacy for the rights of Palestinians. She is a much-needed force for rationality in the current Syrian crisis.

It may be that the American document she critiques is just a piece of contrived propaganda, but this needs to be determined by having it seriously evaluated. To fail to do that would leave nothing but mud-slinging and murder.

Father Dave

Virginia Tilley

Virginia Tilley

original.antiwar.com…

Another Failed Argument:

 U.S. Government Justification for Military Intervention in Syria, August 2013

by Virginia Tilley

31 August 2013

The U.S. Government has released an “Assessment of the Syrian Government’s Use of Chemical Weapons,” which argues that the Syrian regime was responsible for a devastating chemical weapons attack on civilians. The statement is presented as justification for U.S. military intervention in Syria, as punishment or deterrent against Syria for violating the international norm prohibiting use of chemical weapons.

This document requires our closest attention. Analysis, by this writer and others, of the famous speech by Colin Powell to the United Nations Security Council on 5 February 2003 justifying the invasion of Iraq identified many holes and weaknesses later confirmed as faulty intelligence and distorted analysis. The results in Iraq were disastrous for the Iraqi people and for international security in fostering far greater ethnic and sectarian tension in the Middle East and the unprecedented proliferation terrorist networks in the region and beyond. Given this hard lesson, an international spotlight has rightly been brought on this document.

The following is a point-by-point response to the document’s claim that President Assad was responsible for a chemical weapons attack by the Syrian government on 21 August 2013. This analysis does not, and cannot from existing evidence, conclude that the Syrian regime did not deliberately deploy chemical weapons on this or other occasions. It does conclude that the U.S. Government Assessment has not made the case for this claim, and certainly not to the point of justifying its own unilateral intervention (which, in any case, would clearly violate the United Nations Charter).

The full text document is extracted here for the main points.

The Syrian regime maintains a stockpile of numerous chemical agents, including mustard, sarin, and VX and has thousands of munitions that can be used to deliver chemical warfare agents. This is true, but the regime is not the only source of these agents. We assess with high confidence that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale against the opposition multiple times in the last year, including in the Damascus suburbs. This assessment is based on multiple streams of information including reporting of Syrian officials planning and executing chemical weapons attacks and laboratory analysis of physiological samples obtained from a number of individuals, which revealed exposure to sarin.

The evidence supporting these assessments is the our entire concern here. In the 2003 UN speech by Colin Powell, he made repeated references to intelligence sources that turned out to be obviously fake, wrong or distorted. Verifiability of this intelligence, including the channels through it was obtained, must be shared in order to have credibility. This is not done.

We assess that the opposition has not used chemical weapons.

No evidence is provided for this short statement, although rebel use of chemical weapons has been asserted by Syrian officials and the Russian government and at least deserves some explanation. The UN inspection team was brought in to examine cases of chemical weapons use in incidents where the Syrian government asserted that its own forces had come under such attacks. On what basis is this sweeping US assessment made, prior to independent studies?

The Syrian regime has the types of munitions that we assess were used to carry out the attack on August 21, and has the ability to strike simultaneously in multiple locations.

The rockets videoed near the sites of apparent other chemical attacks in Syria were of unique designs that have not been seen before. They have not been associated with any side’s regular arsenal. Some suspicious aspects of the rockets filmed near alleged attacks are evident: for example, less damage to the rockets than would be expected if they had been impacted the ground at full speed.

We assess that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons over the last year primarily to gain the upper hand or break a stalemate in areas where it has struggled to seize and hold strategically valuable territory. In this regard, we continue to judge that the Syrian regime views chemical weapons as one of many tools in its arsenal, including air power and ballistic missiles, which they indiscriminately use against the opposition.

This assessment still has no evidence to support it. “We assess” and “we judge” is not enough.

The Syrian regime has initiated an effort to rid the Damascus suburbs of opposition forces using the area as a base to stage attacks against regime targets in the capital. The regime has failed to clear dozens of Damascus neighborhoods of opposition elements, including neighborhoods targeted on August 21, despite employing nearly all of its conventional weapons systems. We assess that the regime’s frustration with its inability to secure large portions of Damascus may have contributed to its decision to use chemical weapons on August 21.

That the US intelligence community can offer no more than speculation to explain the sudden use of these weapons (“may have”) indicates that “we assess” In this paragraph equates with “we guess”. Many other assessments of regime motivations have found stronger prima facie arguments why the Assad regime would be highly averse to use chemical weapons, especially on such a scale (which could not be covered up), when a UN chemical weapons inspection team is actually in the country and international attention is focused on this very question.

We have intelligence that leads us to assess that Syrian chemical weapons personnel – including personnel assessed to be associated with the SSRC – were preparing chemical munitions prior to the attack. In the three days prior to the attack, we collected streams of human, signals and geospatial intelligence that reveal regime activities that we assess were associated with preparations for a chemical weapons attack.

Since the Syrian government has a formal policy not to use chemical weapons, it is not clear who these “chemical weapons personnel” are. Certainly, having chemical weapon stockpiles, the regime has scientists and engineers handling and monitoring them. But this phrasing suggests field personnel – people trained and tasked to deploy chemical weapons in the field. How are such people identified in the field? Who identified them? Again, the source of this intelligence and the evidence itself must be shared in order to be assessed by the public. The track record of false and misleading assessments driving US foreign policy in Iraq and Libya over the past decade, sometimes found to come from partisans who were deliberately providing biased or inaccurate information, does not allow the public to accept this level of vagueness regarding this crucial question.

Syrian chemical weapons personnel were operating in the Damascus suburb of ‘Adra from Sunday, August 18 until early in the morning on Wednesday, August 21 near an area that the regime uses to mix chemical weapons, including sarin.

Proximity to the attack is no explanation. Earlier instances of suspected chemical weapons attacks were not in this area.

On August 21, a Syrian regime element prepared for a chemical weapons attack in the Damascus area, including through the utilization of gas masks.

Three problems here. First, what “Syrian regime element”? And is this “element” under the full control of the Presidency?

Second,  the conclusion proposed by the U.S. Government is that having anti-chemical weapon equipment like gas masks signifies an offensive posture – intention to use such weapons. As reporters and photographers have been documenting for some time, rebels and activists also have gas masks: see here  (from a week ago), here (from an article posted on 14 June), and here (from 27 May). Some of these reports, drawing from opposition sources, suggest that the regime is using chemical weapons, but if the rebels were using chemical weapons, as others have alleged, this could explain the presence of gas masks by regime forces (assuming they were using them, as no hard evidence is offered of this).Gas masks and atropine (anti-Sarin) syringes have also been reported to have been found among rebel supplies, yet this is not being argued to represent the rebels’ own preparation for using a chemical weapon but their preparation for defense against it. The Syrian government has claimed that its own troops have been affected by chemical weapons deployed by the opposition. While this claim also is unsubstantiated, it would make their use of gas masks, and indeed use by either side, insufficient evidence in itself of intent by either side to deploy such weapons. In sum, the presence of gas masks in the area is not enough to assume any side’s plans to use chemical weapons.

Our intelligence sources in the Damascus area did not detect any indications in the days prior to the attack that opposition affiliates were planning to use chemical weapons.

This is particularly insufficient, as we must assume that he US government’s principal sources of intelligence in the Syrian battlefield are from the opposition’s side. It is highly unlikely that pro-rebel intelligence sources would communication to the US its own plans to use chemical weapons, particularly if the plan was to make them look like a Syrian military operation. Independent sources are mandatory here.

Multiple streams of intelligence indicate that the regime executed a rocket and artillery attack against the Damascus suburbs in the early hours of August 21. Satellite detections corroborate that attacks from a regime-controlled area struck neighborhoods where the chemical attacks reportedly occurred – including Kafr Batna, Jawbar, ‘Ayn Tarma, Darayya, and Mu’addamiyah. This includes the detection of rocket launches from regime controlled territory early in the morning, approximately 90 minutes before the first report of a chemical attack appeared in social media. The lack of flight activity or missile launches also leads us to conclude that the regime used rockets in the attack.

It is unexplained why a chemical weapon rocket attack would not be reported until 90 minutes later. Oral testimony from the area confirmed that people heard the impact and smelled a noxious odor seconds later. Why is this satellite data being associated with the gas attack an hour and half later?

Local social media reports of a chemical attack in the Damascus suburbs began at 2:30 a.m. local time on August 21. Within the next four hours there were thousands of social media reports on this attack from at least 12 different locations in the Damascus area. Multiple accounts described chemical-filled rockets impacting opposition-controlled areas.

That there was a chemical weapons attack is not in dispute, so the rest of this section is not addressed here. However, that such a wide-spread attack could not possibly escape public exposure and scandal, and would therefore be highly detrimental to the regime at this sensitive juncture regarding international intervention, is reinforced by the details provided here. This argues against a calculated decision by the Assad presidency to use such weapons on this scale at this sensitive time.

We have a body of information, including past Syrian practice, that leads us to conclude that regime officials were writing of and directed the attack on August 21.

What “past Syrian practice” involving chemical weapons? No such “past practice” is documented here.

We intercepted communications involving a senior official intimately familiar with the offensive who confirmed that chemical weapons were used by the regime on August 21 and was concerned with the U.N. inspectors obtaining evidence. On the afternoon of August 21, we have intelligence that Syrian chemical weapons personnel were directed to cease operations.

This is the US statement’s only suggestion that hard evidence exists linking the regime to the attack and is therefore the sole basis on which US policy is presently resting. The “communications involving a senior official” must therefore be shared in much greater detail. Who is this senior official? What exactly did he or she say? Several questions are pressing here: the confidence of this intercepted communication (did it really happen, who sent it, what exactly was said); and what it might imply for fissures within the regime, which would inform an assessment of regime culpability and an appropriate international response.

At the same time, the regime intensified the artillery barrage targeting many of the neighborhoods where chemical attacks occurred. In the 24 hour period after the attack, we detected indications of artillery and rocket fire at a rate approximately four times higher than the ten preceding days. We continued to see indications of sustained shelling in the neighborhoods up until the morning of August 26.

Again we have reference to “Syrian chemical weapons personnel”, whom we have no other information to know exist as deployed field operatives. That the artillery barrage increased is no evidence at all: if the rebels launched this attack as a false flag operation, then the barrage would be the perfect cover.

To conclude, there is a substantial body of information that implicates the Syrian government’s responsibility in the chemical weapons attack that took place on August 21.As indicated, there is additional intelligence that remains classified because of sources and methods concerns that is being provided to Congress and international partners.

This paragraph replicates the Powell Speech in concluding substantial evidence from unverified sources, coincidences and dubious claims.

A second question must arise in this scenario. In the second paragraph under “Background”, the US statement affirms that President Assad is responsible for everything done by his armed forces:

Syrian President Bashar al-Asad is the ultimate decision maker for the chemical weapons program and members of the program are carefully vetted to ensure security and loyalty. The Syrian Scientific Studies and Research Center (SSRC) – which is subordinate to the Syrian Ministry of Defense – manages Syria’s chemical weapons program.

This is legally true, but Syria is not in a normal condition presently. Defections from the armed forces have brought many officers to the rebel side or into exile. While the regime has generally retained control of the state’s armed forces, it cannot be assumed with confidence that legal responsibility is presently translating into full command and control. Confirming Syrian state responsibility, even for an attack organized by an “element” within the regime, therefore requires far more information that is presented here.

That unilateral action by the United States in this instance is illegal, in violating the United Nations Charter provisions regarding collective security and international norms prohibiting aggression, is a separate but hardly irrelevant question. It should not be the obligation of the international community hastily to analyze partial information and opaque claims of fragmentary, unclear and mostly circumstantial evidence to deter aggression by a single state, even one acting aggressively in the name of international security, the defense of international norms and possibly the ‘responsibility to protect’ (although this is not spelled out). Such behavior has led to wars in the past and is expressly prohibited by the UN Charter precisely because it is inherently destabilizing to international order. The ‘responsibility to protect’ is formulated in international law as a collective obligation, not a justification for unilateral aggression by a single great power. It is highly ironic that this most important norm for international security, the prohibition on aggression, is being baldly violated in the name of defending another one, the prohibition on chemical weapons. As new information has freshly confirmed that the U.S. and British governments apparently endorsed use of chemical weapons on the Iraq-Iran battlefield, the contradiction is both legally and morally untenable.

However, analysis here considers only whether the U.S. Government has made a case that the Syrian regime is responsible for an appalling chemical weapons attack on civilians. It is concluded here that the U.S. has failed in this effort.

Virginia Tilley is a scholar of ethnic and racial conflict, an analyst of Middle East politics and author of two books and many articles on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. She can be reached at virginia.tilley@gmail.com….

Posted in Article, syrian army, syrian rebels | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Al Nusra Massacres in Lattakia

The following is a report from the Sham Times – an independent Syrian newspaper. It has been translated from the Arabic.

love Syria

www.shamtimes.net…

A Documentary Report on Al Nusra Massacres in Lattakia

by Hussein Mortada

The Syrian coast is witnessing a state of collective suicide/ mass murder perpetrated by armed men ideologically affiliated to Al Quieda under the banner of the “liberation of the coast”. The armed groups commenced their attack on more than one interval; the operation began with these groups bombarding the villages of Kafriya, Tala, Bramsa, Anbata and Beit Alshekouhy; these villages are considered to be loyal to the Syrian leadership.

The spontaneous bombardment contributed to mass exodus from the villages, and as they were besieged, the civilians found themselves in the hands of the armed Islamists. The armed men considered themselves victorious. One of the survivors of the massacres has stated that the armed men committed crimes against humanity in villages they entered;  including the liquidation of the entire family of retired army general Youssef Al Qusseiby, who was slaughtered along with his family. The survivor added that the armed men slaughtered over 136 individuals, most of whom were women and children, also relaying that a pregnant woman was slaughtered following the slitting of her belly and the killing of her fetus . Additionally, many people are missing and their whereabouts remains unknown. Information was also obtained in relation to the fact that many civilians and soldiers were taken hostage by the armed men, the most prominent of whom was Sheikh Bader Ghazal from the village of Tala, whose photograph emerged , his clothing bloodied and his face slashed, exhibiting signs of torture. After this massacre the armed groups exerted control over Anbata, Barouda and Alhamboushia, however the Syrian Army managed to regain all of this territory, with the exception of Al Hamboushia, which was regained after it was completely destroyed by the armed men. Less than 48 hours after the Syrian Army battled the armed men, it regained the greater part of the area they occupied, after killing 6 of their senior leaders, most prominent of whom  was the leader of Tawheed Brigade and the battle for the “liberation of the coast” Qahtan Haaj Muhammad. The armed groups withdrew to the Haffa and Salma area, which witnessed heavy bombardment, in addition to widespread fires engulfing the northern outskirts of Lattakia.

The Syrian Army carried out bombardments against the positions of the armed groups in Saraya area, which contributed to the deaths of an unknown number of armed men who had set up base in one of the government buildings. The Syrian Army also managed to enforce a military blockade on the areas in which the armed men took refuge.  In this context, an observer notes that the goal of the armed men in attacking the villages of the coast was to create a state of sectarian tension in the area in accordance with a plan devised by Saudi Intelligence under auspice from Washington. The so-called “co-ordination” committees had stated that the armed men had managed to control the area of Abrad Barouda, Anbata, Astarba, Al Hamboushia and Balouta, yet simultaneously, sources from within the armed groups, via one of the co-ordination committees, have stated that the information previously given conflicts with other sources citing that the armed men withdrew from Abrad Barouda after subjection to heavy bombardment targeting them.

Sources close to the Syrian Army have stated that “ the clashes in which the army engaged have forced the armed groups to withdraw  under fire especially in Marsad Barouda and buildings in the mountain of Barouda, where “ more than thirty armed men were killed…This highlights the fact that clashes continue on many fronts as the armed opposition attempts to exert control over areas”.

The sources also indicate that “most of the dead are foreign fighters, fighting in groups affiliated to AlQuieda”, and this was evident via photographs which emerged of the dead, most of them being of Libyan and Saudi-Arabian nationality. Pertaining to the last massacre, “ Al Hor Ghazal”- one of the sheikhs of the region-confirms that none of the residents of Al Hamboushia have survived, whereas in Nabata there were nine survivors, and the rest were killed via method of slaughter; in addition to the women who were taken as sex slaves, one of whom killed herself to avoid such a fate.

In the village of Kharata, a small housing collective, the residents of which number no more than thirty-seven, all were liquidated. In Balouta, a retired army general was slaughtered, following which the residents of the village were rounded up in its centre, the children were killed in front of their parents; those who tried to run were shot to death. Despite this, ten people survived the slaughter wounded, three have since died in hospital.

The village of Asterba was also subjected to slaughter and every home was set on fire. Sheikh Muwafaq Ghazal stated that “ on Sunday morning Sheikh Bader Ghazal (one of the religious notables of the Alawite community in the area) was in Barouda for Qadr night which is commemorated towards the end of the month of Ramadan and he remained there until morning, the armed attack on the area occurred, and the sheikh was kidnapped. The village was subjected to massacre, and the family with whom the sheikh were staying were all slaughtered”. Sheikh Muwafaq Ghazal added that the number of martyrs from the massacre at Barouda exceeded fifty women and children, and male and female youth were bound and taken as sex slaves, their fate still unknown.

The massacre commenced in the village of Ramtha, where the armed men killed eighteen to twenty people, no survivors with the exception of one who ran towards the forest.  The residents of Barouda and Kharaba were all killed by method of slaughter, and in Alhamoushia at least fifty people were killed. The number of martyrs in all the villages combined number approximately 400 people, with a great number of women, children and sheikhs kidnapped and taken to the villages of Doriya and Salma where they are subjected to torture. The armed groups acknowledged holding 150 hostages including women and the sheikh, demanding an exchange.

Sheikh Muwafaq Ghazal stated that “ the point of these massacres is to create sectarian conflict between Alawites and Sunnis, however the sons and daughters of the Alawite community will not resort to these divisive actions, given that the kidnappers contacted one of the families and requested an exchange to take place- 150 hostages for three Libyan prisoners broadcast on Syrian Television three days prior”. A large number of the victims of the massacres committed by” Jabhat Al Nusra” and the” Islamic State in Iraq and Syria” in eight villages on the northern outskirts of Lattakia resulted in the liquidation of entire families.

The victims of Nabata:

  • Hafez Mehrez Shahada- 80 years
  • Kamal Muhammad Shahada, his wife and three children; Rand- 11 years; Naser- 9 years; Muhammad 7 years
  • Jaffar Alsheikh- 4 years. Jaffar, in terror, asked to drink water, and one of the armed men stabbed him to death.
  • Yaseen Najdat Shahada
  • Jawdat Shahada
  • Imad Alsheikh
  • Tamador Saleem Shahada- 17 years
  • Khitam Adib Shahada
  • Ibraheem Al Sheikh
  • The kidnapped of Nabata
  • The wife of Hafez Shahada, and Fahima Muhhamad Suleiman, his second wife
  • Ramza Alsheikh and her daughter Taymaa
  • The child Amer Ghassan Yahya
  • Ahmad Shahada and his wife Shazza Hitaab and their nine month old son
  • Ali Hitaab
  • Kazem Mehrez Shahada, his wife Diaa Sweid and their three children, Ala, Heidar and Zein, who is one.
  • Mona Fatima, kidnapped after her husband was slaughtered
  • Samara Alsheikh
  • Lotus Al Sheikh
  • Marah Alsheikh; the three daughters of Emad Al Sheikh, who was slaughtered
  • Inaam Alsheikh- 13 years
  • Bashar Alsheikh- 11 years
  • Ahmad Alsheikh
  • Aktham Alsheikh

The victims of Al Hamboushia, mostly children

  • Hani Shakouhy
  • Hamza Mariam
  • Taher Mariam
  • Munzir  Darweish
  • Hala, wife of Munzir Darweish, the pregnant woman who was slaughtered and her belly slit open, killing the fetus
  • The child Ayman Mariam
  • The child Lina Qadra
  • The child Ahmad Mariam
  • Rafaat Mariam
  • The child Dalaa Mariam
  • The child Muhammad Mariam
  • The child Marah Mariam
  • The child Farah Mariam
  • The child Muhammad Mariam
  • The child Jaafar Ismail
  • Wisaal Tamer
  • Taim Shakouhy- one year old child
  • Tamer Shakouhy- 3 years old
  • Lamiya Shahada and all of her children
  • Entisar Mariam
  • Esrar Mariam
  • Narjes Mariam
  • Waheeb Mariam
  • Nazeera Areefo
  • Adel Mariam
  • Wael Mariam

 Those kidnapped by Jabhat Al Nusra of Al Hamboushia village

  • Fadel Shakouhy
  • Wazifa Shakouhy
  • Kinana Shakouhy
  • Afaf Shakouhy
  • Mustafa Shakouhy
  • Faten Mariam
  • Widad Mariam
  • Eleeen Shakouhy
  • Duaa Mariam

The Victims of Balouta village- entire families were liquidated here

  • Azab Salim
  • Taim Salim- one year old child
  • Samir Salim
  • Haidar Salim
  • Wafiq Ibrahim and all of his three  children
  • Shadi Ibrahim
  • Muqdad Ibrahim
  • Geidak Ibrahim
  • Nohad Deeb
  • Fawzia Deeb
  • Ghadeer Deeb
  • Amjad Deeb
  • Zeina Deeb
  • Ziad Deeb- one year old child
  • Hussein Ibrahim
  • Mariam Ibrahim
  • Zahra Ibrahim
  • Ismail Ibrahim
  • The names of those kidnapped from Balouta are unknown

The Victims of Bramsa

  • Sleiman Fateema and his wife Samira Ghanem
  • Muhammad Fateema and his wife Fakeera Yasseen
  • Nadi Fateema, his wife and their  two children
  • Bassem Fateema, his wife and three children
  • Until this point in time, the names of the  kidnapped of Bramsa remain unknown

The victims of Abu Makka

  • Asaad Sleiman Qadra
  • Muhammad Kamel Qadra
  • Faeqa Haidar- teacher
Posted in Article, syrian rebels | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

"Arming the rebels will not help Syria" says Mairead Maguire

The following is a press release from “The Peace People” of Northern Ireland. You can find out more about their wonderful work via their website – peacepeople.com…

26th August 2013

Mairead Maguire, Nobel peace laureate, today appealed to the Rt. Hon. William Hague, British Foreign Minister, and M. Laurent Fabius, French Foreign Minister, to stop calling for military action against Syria which, she said, will only lead the Middle East into even more violence and bloodshed for its people.

Maguire said:

Arming rebels and authorizing military action by USA/NATO forces will not solve the problem facing Syria, but indeed could lead to the death of thousands of Syrians, the breaking-up of Syria, and it falling under the control of violent fundamentalist jihadist forces. It will mean the further fleeing of Syrians into surrounding countries which will themselves  become destabilised. The entire Middle East will become unstable and violence will spiral out of control.

Contrary to some foreign governments current policies of arming the rebels and pushing for military intervention, the people of Syria are calling out for peace and reconciliation and a political solution to the crisis, which continues to be enflamed by outside forces with thousands of foreign fighters funded and supported by outside countries for their own political ends.

Having visited Syria in May, 2013, after leading a 16 person delegation I returned convinced that the civil community, with groups such as Mussalaha, who are working on the ground building peace and reconciliation, can solve their own problems if their plea for outsiders to remain out of the conflict is honoured by the international community.

During our visit we met with all sections of the community, most of whom are sick of violence and death and want peace and reconciliation and a political solution. We met with the Syrian Prime Minister and 7 other government ministers, and we were assured that the Government did not use sarin gas on its own people, and they invited the UN to send in inspectors to see what was happening.

Currently there is an International Commission of Inquiry on Chemical Weapons in Damascus staying at Four Seasons Hotel, which is less than ten minutes from the areas where the chemical weapons were allegedly used. The western media, particularly vocal being the British and French Foreign Ministers, are accusing President Assad of using chemical weapons on his own people but have no proof of this accusation, rather some things point to rebels as the ones who used such weapons.

The question must be asked,  what would it benefit Assad to use sarin gas in the vicinity of visiting international UN inspectors and in his own environment and neighbourhood where it would affect his soldiers, etc., personally, I do not believe the latest accusations against the Assad government using sarin gas,  and in order that the world can hear the truth, I would appeal to the International Commission of Inquiry to go into the areas in question immediately and report as quickly as possible.  In the meantime I appeal to the Foreign Ministers of Britain and France to encourage, as the Syrian people wish, dialogue and negotiation as a way forward.   We all remember the fear, panic and lies spun by the British and American governments, and others that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and it was not true.   Let us learn the lesson of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya where so many millions have been killed in invasions and war, and many continue to die in violence. Violence is not the answer, let’s end this ‘war on terror’ and give nonviolence and peace a chance.

Mairead Maguire
Nobel peace laureate
www.peacepeople.com…
info@peacepeople.com…
peace people, 224 Lisburn road, Belfast. Bt307NW.  N. Ireland

Report and Appeal to the International community to support a process of dialogue and reconciliation in Syria between its people and Syrian government and reject outside intervention and war. BY Mairead Maguire, Nobel peace laureate. Spokesperson for Mussalaha International Peace delegation to Lebanon/Syria l-llth May, 2013,

Father Dave and Mairead Maguire in Beirut in May 2013, enroute to Syria

Posted in Press Release, syrian rebels | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Galloway: chemical weapons in Syria were used by Al Qaeda, supplied by Israel!

Questioning over the possible use of chemical weapons in Syria is serious business at the moment! Horrendous images of apparently infected persons have been plastered all over the world’s TV screens and, amazingly, this has happened just at the time that UN inspectors have arrived in Damascus to do a full investigation on on the subject!

Various European leaders have suggested that this incident ought to be a ‘game-changer’, leading to the sale of more weapons to the rebels, and yet it’s not clear that anything has been substantiated as yet. Was there really a massacre? If so, were there chemical weapons used and, if they were used, who used them?

Two questions in particular have me confused:

Firstly, why is everybody so concerned about these chemical weapons attacks? I appreciate that such forms of warfare are monstrous, but I’m not convinced that any form of warfare is less than monstrous, and why are we focusing on these deaths that may have caused some hundreds of casualties when other forms of warfare in Syria have cost over 100,000 lives.

Secondly, why would the Syrian government use chemical weapons when the UN inspectors were already in the country! We have to assume that Assad’s regime is either incredibly brazen or just plain stupid!

The Jerusalem Post ran a misleading article today, saying that British MP, George Galloway “responded to the latest alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria, stating that if there has been any use of sarin gas, it was radical Islamist group al-Qaida, using gas supplied by Israel.”

The Post included a YouTube video of a statement made by Galloway on (Iranian) Press TV, where he indeed postulates both theories. The problem is that the Press TV statement was not a response to the latest alleged attack. A more complete version of the same Press TV statement can also be found on YouTube that dates back more than three months!

Certainly the accusations made some months ago, that the Syrian government was using chemical weapons, were not substantiated. Indeed, despite the ‘game-changer’ rhetoric at the time, the evidence did seem to suggest that it was the rebels who had been using sarin gas, and once this was established the rhetoric suddenly dried up!

It’s worth noting that the Galloway statement published on YouTube and used by the Jerusalem Post was published by GallowayWatch – an anti-Galloway group – and the video is intended to illustrate Galloway’s lunacy! Personally, as one who considers Galloway a friend and a mentor, I find his theory entirely plausible.

Father Dave

Here’s the fuller (and older) of the video statements:

[imaioVideo v=1]

if you can’t view this video, click here

George Galloway and Father Dave - July 2013

George Galloway and Father Dave – July 2013

Posted in Article, syria news | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Palestinian refugee camps in Syria targeted by Jihadists!

The relationship between Palestine and Syria is a complex one, and no one understands that better than my insightful friend, Franklin Lamb.

Palestinian refugees in Syria receive equal rights to Syrian citizens – a privilege denied them everywhere else in the Middle East – and so you might expect Palestinian leaders to be strong supporters of the Syrian government. And yet Khaled Mashal (leader of Hamas) moved his headquarters from Damascus to Doha and was, at one point, sending Hamas soldiers into Syria to fight alongside the rebels!

Mashal was probably acting under orders from senior figures in the Muslim Brotherhood. Certainly his wavering allegiances should not be taken as indicative of the broader position  of Palestinians, let alone of Palestinian refugees in Syria who seem, for the most part, to prefer the secular rule of Bashar Al-Assad to the religious tyranny of the Jihadists!

Father Dave

Franklin Lamb with his son, Alistair, in Beirut

Franklin Lamb with his son, Alistair, in Beirut

Seven of Syria’s Thirteen Palestinian camps now controlled by Salafi- Jihadists

Vows of ‘Occupation Until Martyrdom’

by FRANKLIN LAMB

Homs Palestinian Camp, Syria

Jihadists are entering Syria at an accelerating pace, according to Syrian, UNWRA, and Palestinian officials as well as residents in the refugee camps here. For the now-estimated 7000 imported foreign fighters, Palestinian camps are seen as optimal locales for setting up bases across Syria.

“Syria’s Palestinian camps have become theaters of war,” said UNWRA Commissioner Filippo Grandi.

The Syrian people compassionately host 10 official, UN-mandated Palestinian camps, along with three unofficial ones, whose populations total at least 230,000. Eight of these are “Nakba (“catastrophe”) camps,” organized soon after Palestinians were expelled from their homes in 1948, while two, Qabr Essit and Dera’a (emergency camp), are “Naksa (“day of setback”) camps.” The latter were set up in 1967 as a result of the internationally condemned Zionist-colonial aggression against the two sister-Arab-nationalist regions—Palestine’s West Bank and Syria’s Golan Heights.

And it was on the Ides of March of the year 2011 we saw an explosion of violence near one of these camps, the Dera’a camp established in 1950, in the south near the Jordanian border.

But first, perhaps a simple listing of the camps, along with their populations and dates of establishment, would be in order here:

1950, Dera’a, 5,916
1967, Dera’a (Emergency), 5,536
1950, Hama, 7,597
1949, Homs, 13,825
1948, Jaramana, 5,007
1950, Khan Dunoun, 8,603
1949, Khan Eshieh, 15,731
1948, Neirab, 17,994
1967, Qabr Essit, 16,016
1948, Sbeineh, 19,624
1955-6, Latakia camp, 6,534 registered refugees
1957, Yarmouk Camp, 112,550 registered refugees
1962, Ein Al-Tal, 4,329 registered refugees

As of 8/8/13, seven of the camps—two in the north and five in the Damascus area and in the south of Syria—are presently with their throats under the jackboot of foreign Salafi-Jihadists. These jihadist cells moved against the camps early in the current crisis for purposes of forced recruitment, to benefit from a supply of noncombatant human shields, to shakedown the residents and take over UNWRA facilities, and to make use of the erstwhile “refugee camp security zones.” All these steps were precursory to the setting up of military bases from which to launch operations aimed at toppling the current government of the Syrian Arab Republic.

How do the jihadists infiltrate the camps?

How is it possible that more than half of the Palestinian camps in Syria not only fell, but did so, regrettably, without all that much resistance, to the point at which we see them now—dominated by largely foreign jihadists who continue to impose their unwanted extremist religious beliefs on a largely progressive secular Palestinian community? It is a subject currently much discussed here.

This observer has deduced from a number of conversations—with former and current camp residents, as well as members of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, Palestinian NGO’s, and also with academics—that there is a ‘model of occupation’ metastasizing in Syria in a manner strikingly similar to what we saw six years ago at Nahr al Bared Palestinian camp near Tripoli Lebanon. The stories we hear today are quite similar to those from among the nearly 30,000 refugees at Nahr al Bared who were forced to flee to the nearby Badawi camp or to Lebanon’s ten other camps—reports related to this observer in visits to Nahr al Bared in May of 2007.

What we hear today in Syria bears an almost uncanny likeness. For instance one lady, whose family is from Safad in occupied Palestine explained: “First they (the intruders) appeared only a few in number. We noticed them and that some had ‘foreign’ accents and wore conservative clothes, most had beards. They were polite and friendly. Then more arrived, a few followed by women and children. They stayed to themselves at first and they began using the local mosque—even being welcomed at first by local sheiks who sometimes expressed admiration for the sincerity and devoutness. Then some of them began to preach their versions of the Koran, and at some point their gentle teaching became more strident, and soon these men were commenting on how some of the Palestinian women dressed in an un-Islamic fashion and even lectured young women about modesty and that they must change their ways, including stop smoking, and to leave public meetings if they were the only women present, and wear a full hijab.”

The lady’s sister interrupted: “Then guns appeared and some of the men appeared to be very skilled when they would use, for example, a school or playground to train. They were so serious and seemed to be in a trance of some kind. There was no possibility to talk or reason with them. All they seemed to want was martyrdom! Some actually believe that Syria was Palestine and they were here to liberate Al Quds!”

Upon some in the camps it began to dawn that the newcomers intended imposing their ideas, and that they fully intended that camp residents should submit to “pure Islam,” as they view it. Some resistance began to jell from camp residents, but the camp popular committees did not have the power to confront them, and a few actually joined them. The fighting with Syrian government troops accelerated the takeover process, and soon the camp residents were presented with a demand: join the gunmen and “liberate” the camps.

With respect to Ahmad Jibril’s Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command—and no offense meant to them and their officials, with whom this observer met in July and early August—but several of their best Palestinian patriot commanders jumped ship in protest against the plan to “liberate” Yarmouk. At the same time many of the PFLP-GC rank-and-file fighters split and joined the opposition for various reasons, including better pay and wanting to be on the presumed winning side. That being said, however, camp residents overwhelmingly rejected the PFLP-GC “defense” project, and insisted that their camp was neutral, that it was to be maintained as a safe zone for its residents, who were guests in Syria pending their return to still-occupied Palestine.

Again, this chain of events is singularly similar to what we saw (too late as it turned out) in Lebanon’s Nahr al Bared, a process which, like the one unfolding now in Syria, was accelerated by the civil war raging here.

There is fear that the Syrian army will sooner or later attack and destroy the camps in order to confront the rebel militias—similar to what the Lebanese army did during the 75 days of shelling in 2007. At that time it took vengeance on the camp and demolished it in an unjustifiable frenzy of shelling for the criminal attack and killing of some Lebanese troops, an attack that had been carried out by camp invaders, not Palestinians. For Palestinians in Syria, it is the all too familiar fate of outsiders entering and seeking to control their camps, coupled with the threat of a host army attacking them to confront the invaders. The residents are once more killed or forced to flee and their homes are destroyed.

Here once more comes to mind the cliché: “Where is the Arab League, the Organization of Islamic Council, the EU or the UN? Where’s Waldo?

In order to gain control of the camps in Syria, two main processes appear to be made use of by the al Qaeda affiliates. One is what this observer labels the ‘Nahr al Bared model”. A Popular Committee member from Yarmouk, who just barely escaped the camp before his home was destroyed by a direct hit mortar round, put it this way:

“Some come bearing gifts. They usually set up small problem solving centers. Maybe a little cash, offers of medical aid, bread distribution, pledges of camp security, these sorts of currently absent social services.”

But the camps quickly become petri dishes, and the explosive growth of the foreign implantations is sometimes dazzling. By the time government supporters report the camp invaders it’s too late. And what can the government do anyhow? Guns appear everywhere, and suddenly it’s no longer ‘nicely nicely’ polite treatment from the Islamic brothers. Residents are told they must help liberate the camp from the Assad regime or face the wrath of Allah. Consequently, fleeing for one’s life becomes an utmost urgency, often literally as the snipers arrive and intense fighting, and rooftop targeting, ensues.

Dodging the snipers

So what happens next to the Palestinian camps in Syria? Is a hopeful, positive or peaceful resolution possible? This observer’s 2-cents worth of analysis suggests that the answer is no. The camps will stay largely under the domination, militarily and socially, of the jihadist elements that continue building fortifications and ‘digging in.’ What is happening is a God-awful calamity, one being foisted upon those whose only prayers and wishes are to leave Syria and return home to reclaim their stolen lands.

A central question is the precarious situation in Yarmouk and the fate of the 18-20 percent of its population still remaining. These are people risking their lives daily trying to avoid snipers from both sides. One can hear speculation on the prospects that the Syrian Army, aided by Hezbollah, will move on Yarmouk to try and expel the rebel militia. Some PLO officials with offices inside the Yarmouk neighborhood claim that Ahmad Jibril’s PFLP-GC is being beefed up and armed by the government with more than just AK47’s and RPG’s. Last winter, some of Jibril’s forces were expelled when they tried to eject the foreign militia, while others, as mentioned above, went over to the opposite side. At the same time, three PFLP-GC commanders quit over tactics while questioning Jibril’s decision to violate the camp’s neutrality, a decision leading to the destruction of parts of Yarmouk.

As to speculation on the possibility of the Syrian government and/or Hezbollah moving to eject the foreign forces from Yarmouk, this observer does not give the reports much credit. The Syrian Army has more urgent and prioritized battles being waged today, with others being planned. Hezbollah, likewise, is facing challenges at present, and fighting in Yarmouk against unknown numbers of rebel militia would surely add to them. Moreover, any force invading a Palestinian camp faces being roundly condemned over violations of the Cairo agreement forbidding host governments from entering UNRWA refugee camps.
This observer and contacts in the Palestinian community cannot verify the recent report for a foreign media source that al Nusra has fled Yarmouk and is on the run. On the run from whom? Currently they are not being seriously challenged. On the contrary, the al-Qeada affiliates are busy digging more tunnels under the camps to store weapons and move freely. Their ranks are growing not dwindling.

Grim as it sounds, they who reside in Syria’s camps, along with the 12 million Palestinian refugees worldwide, will continue to be at the mercy of events they had no part in creating. It is a fate they share at this moment with much of the rest of Syria’s population, and things are not likely to improve in the immediate term.

But on a more positive note, the Palestinians of Syria persist in their resistance and opposition to the illegal occupation of their country. Theirs is a determination to return to their homeland that simply will not fade or wither, and speaking with Palestinian refugees these past several days in Damascus and Homs has convinced this observer more than ever that on this they will not retreat a single inch—and that in time they will liberate their country.

Franklin Lamb is doing research in Syria and Lebanon and can be reached c/o fplamb@gmail.com…

Posted in Article, syrian rebels | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The persecution of Christians in Syria continues

Christians are not the only minority group in Syria being persecuted, of course. I was speaking to a friend in Damascus last night and she told me that there had been massacres in seven Alawite villages. She knew personally of 136 people who had been killed because they were Alawites.

Meanwhile the US and NATO move to give further aid to the very persons committing these massacres!  Lord, have mercy on us!

Father Dave

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10218869/Syrian-Christian-towns-emptied-by-sectarian-violence.html…

Christians and Muslims working together for peace in Damascus

Christians and Muslims working together for peace in Damascus

Syrian Christian towns emptied by sectarian violence

Towns and villages in Syria that have been home to Christians for hundreds of years are being steadily emptied by sectarian violence and targeted kidnappings.

By Ruth Sherlock, Istanbul 

Tens of thousands Syriac Christians – members of the oldest Christian community in the world – have fled their ancestral provinces of Deir al-Zour and Hasakah in northeastern Syria, residents have said.

“It breaks my heart to think how our long history is being uprooted,” said Ishow Goriye, the head of a Syriac Christian political Hasakah.

Mr Goriye, told The Daily Telegraph how, over the past two years he has watched as Christian families from Hasakah pack their possessions on the rooftops of their vehicles and flee their homes “with little plan to come back”.

Conflict in the area, desperate economic conditions, lawlessness, and persecution by rebel groups born from the perception that Christians support the regime, remain the main reasons for why Christian families are fleeing the area.

The growing presence of radical jihadist groups, including al-Qaeda, has also seen Christians targeted.

“It began as kidnapping for money, but then they started telling me I should worship Allah,” a male Christian resident of Hasakah who was kidnapped by jihadists said.

“I was with five others. We were tied and blindfolded and pushed down on our knees. One of the kidnappers leant so close to my face I could feel his breath. He hissed: ‘Why don’t you become a Muslim? Then you can be free’.”

Another Christian in Hasakah said he knew of “five forced conversions” in recent weeks.

Mr Goriye’s Christian ‘Syriac Union’ party has long been in opposition to President Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

While speaking to The Telegraph, its members were loath to criticise the opposition rebels, but many confessed that the situation had become “too bad” not to talk about it.

Hasakah and other towns in northeastern Syria have long been one of the main population centres for Christians, who make up approximately 10 per cent of the country’s population. Residents estimate that at least a third of Christians in northeastern Syria have fled, with few expecting to return.

One Hasakah resident who has now escaped the area said: “Rebels said we had to pay money for the revolution. My cousin is a farmer, and wanted to check on his land. I warned him he should take armed security but he refused. A group kidnapped him in the barn of his farm. We had to pay $60,000 [£52,000] for his release. They are milking the Christians”.

Though accused by some opposition groups of supporting Mr Assad, much of Syria’s Christian community has avoided “choosing sides” in the war, seeking self-preservation in neutrality.

But the strategy has left Christians defenceless in the face of sectarian attacks and the lawlessness that now define rebel-held areas. Last year, when government forces pulled out Hasakah province, leaving the terrain in the hands of Kurdish groups and Sunni opposition rebel, Christians became an easy target.

A Christian man calling himself Joseph and living in Hasakah said: “The only unprotected group are the Christians. The Arabs had arms coming from Saudi and Qatar, the Kurds had help from Kurdistan. We had no weapons at all.”

Local residents said many Christians had tried to join the rebellion against President Assad, but their efforts were marginalised early on by sectarian minded Sunni rebel groups.

Joseph added: “We are not with the regime. Many times the Islamists didn’t want us to join them in the demonstrations. We tried to participate but we were not given a role. It felt as though it was a strategy to force Christians out of the revolution”.

Bassam Ishak, a Christian member of the main opposition bloc the Syrian National Coalition, who comes from Hasakah, said he and his colleagues had tried “several times” to approach western officials asking for weapons for Christian groups to defend their areas.

“The West wants to arm the seculars or ‘West friendly’ people, well we, the Syriac Christians those people. We want arms to protect our communities,” he said. “We spoke to western diplomats asking for help, and everyone ignored us”.

Posted in Article, syrian civil war | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Divide and Conquer – the future of Syria?

More insights from Sharmine Narwani that highlight the complexity of Syria’s position.

When George Galloway spoke recently at the Sydney Town Hall he reminded us that the ‘divide and conquer’ strategy that seems to be at the heart of US’ Middle East policy is nothing new. “How do you think England last century manged to control 600,000,000 Indians with only 60,000 British troops?” he asked us!

So long as the Arab states remain divided and absorbed in sectarian squabbles the reigning superpower has nothing to worry about. Israel will retain its hegemony in the region, the Palestinian Occupation will continue on indefinitely, and Syria will continue to blaze until  nothing is left!

Father Dave

Those who pay the price of war - syrian refugees

Those who pay the price of war – syrian refugees

english.al-akhbar.com…

Arabs, Beware the “Small States” Option

At the heart of all politics lies cold, hard opportunism. New circumstances, changed alliances and unexpected events will always conspire to alter one’s calculations to benefit a core agenda.

In the Middle East today, those calculations are being adjusted with a frequency unseen for decades.

In Egypt and Syria, for instance, popular sentiment is genuinely divided on where alliances and interests lie. Half of Egyptians seem convinced that deposed President Mohammed Mursi is the resident US-Israeli stooge, while the other half believe it is Egypt’s military that is carrying out those foreign agendas.

In Syria the same can be said for Syrians conflicted on whether President Bashar al-Assad or the external-based Syrian National Council (SNC) most benefits Israeli and American hegemonic interests in the region.

But Egyptians and Syrians, who point alternating fingers at Islamists or the state as being tools of imperialism, have this wrong: Empire is opportunistic. It has ways to benefit from both.

There is another vastly more destructive scenario being missed while Arabs busy themselves with conspiracies and speculative minutiae: A third option far more damaging to all.

Balkanization of Key Mideast States

At a June 19 event at the University of Michigan’s Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger touched upon an alarming new refrain in western discourse on Mideast outcomes; a third strategy, if all else fails, of redrawn borders along sectarian, ethnic, tribal or national lines that will shrink the political/military reach of key Arab states and enable the west to reassert its rapidly-diminishing control over the region. Says Kissinger about two such nations:

“There are three possible outcomes (in Syria). An Assad victory. A Sunni victory. Or an outcome in which the various nationalities agree to co-exist together but in more or less autonomous regions, so that they can’t oppress each other. That’s the outcome I would prefer to see. But that’s not the popular view…First of all, Syria is not a historic state. It was created in its present shape in 1920, and it was given that shape in order to facilitate the control of the country by France, which happened to be after UN mandate…The neighboring country Iraq was also given an odd shape, that was to facilitate control by England. And the shape of both of the countries was designed to make it hard for either of them to dominate the region.”

While Kissinger frankly acknowledges his preferred option of “autonomous regions,” most western government statements actually pretend their interest lies in preventing territorial splits. Don’t be fooled. This is narrative-building and scene-setting all the same. Repeat something enough – i.e., the idea that these countries could be carved up – and audiences will not remember whether you like it or not. They will retain the message that these states can be divided.

It is the same with sectarian discourse. Western governments are always warning against the escalation of a Sunni-Shia divide. Yet they are knee-deep in deliberately fueling Shia-Sunni conflicts throughout the region, particularly in states where Iran enjoys significant influence (Lebanon, Syria, Iraq) or may begin to gain some (Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen).

“Seeding” Sectarianism to Break Up States

If ever a conspiracy had legs, this one is it. Stirring Iranian-Arab and Sunni-Shiite strife to its advantage has been a major US policy objective since the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran.

Wikileaks helped shed light on some of Washington’s machinations just as Arab uprisings started to hit our TV screens.

A 2006 State Department cable that bemoans Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s strengthened position in Syria outlines actionable plans to sow discord within the state, with the goal of disrupting Syrian ties with Iran. The theme? “Exploiting” all “vulnerabilities”:

“PLAY ON SUNNI FEARS OF IRANIAN INFLUENCE: There are fears in Syria that the Iranians are active in both Shia proselytizing and conversion of, mostly poor, Sunnis. Though often exaggerated, such fears reflect an element of the Sunni community in Syria that is increasingly upset by and focused on the spread of Iranian influence in their country through activities ranging from mosque construction to business. Both the local Egyptian and Saudi missions here, (as well as prominent Syrian Sunni religious leaders), are giving increasing attention to the matter and we should coordinate more closely with their governments on ways to better publicize and focus regional attention on the issue.”

Makes one question whether similar accusations about the “spread of Shiism” in Egypt held any truth whatsoever, other than to sow anti-Shia and anti-Iran sentiment in a country until this month led by the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood.

2009 cable from the US Embassy in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia continues this theme. Mohammad? Naji al-Shaif, a tribal leader with close personal ties to then-Yemeni President Ali Abdallah ?Saleh and his inner circle says that key figures “are privately very skeptical of Saleh’s? claims regarding Iranian assistance for the Houthi rebels”:

Shaif told? EconOff on December 14 that (Saudi Government’s Special Office for? Yemen Affairs) committee members privately shared his view that Saleh was providing false or exaggerated? information on Iranian assistance to the Houthis in order to? enlist direct Saudi involvement and regionalize the conflict. Shaif said that one committee member told him that “we know? Saleh is lying about Iran, but there’s nothing we can do ?about it now.”

That didn’t stop Secretary of State Hillary Clinton lying through her teeth to a Senate Committee a few short years later: “We know that they – the Iranians are very much involved in the opposition movements in Yemen.”

US embassy cables from Manama, Bahrain in 2008 continue in the same vein:

“Bahraini government officials sometimes privately tell U.S. official visitors that some Shi’a oppositionists are backed by Iran. Each time this claim is raised, we ask the GOB to share its evidence. To date, we have seen no convincing evidence of Iranian weapons or government money here since at least the mid-1990s… In post’s assessment, if the GOB had convincing evidence of more recent Iranian subversion, it would quickly share it with us.”

Yet as Bahraini rulers continue to violently repress peaceful protest in the Shia-majority state two years into that country’s popular uprising, their convenient public bogeyman mirrors that of Washington: Iranian interference.

read the rest of this article here.

Posted in syria now, syrian civil war | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Australia gives humanitarian assistance to Syria instead of weapons!

This is indeed encouraging news. While the US and NATO focus on adding more weapons to the Syrian conflict, Australia is committing itself to supporting the victims! It’s not often that I have a reason to feel proud to be Australian, but credit should be given where it is due. Well done, Bob Carr!

Having said that, the question that isn’t answered in the report below is where this aid will go and how it will be used? ‘World Vision’, ‘Oxfam’ and ‘Save the Children’ are mentioned but, as far as I can work out, none of these organisations is actually operative within Syria itself!

I spoke with a representative of ‘Médecins Sans Frontières’ earlier this year and was told that NGO’s are having a hard time getting into Syria. The Bashar Al-Assad government has been very suspicious about the activities of NGO’s as they claim that anti-government elements readily embed themselves in such organisations (as allegedly happened in Libya). Even so, the cost of such caution is paid by suffering civilians!

Father Dave

Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Bob Carr

Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Bob Carr

AUSTRALIA BOOSTS AID TO WAR-TORN SYRIA

au.news.yahoo.com…

Australia has pledged an extra $21.5 million in humanitarian assistance to victims of the Syrian civil war.

The money will be spent on emergency food supplies, medical supplies, shelter for refugees and ensuring people have safe drinking water.

Since the war began in 2011 there have been an estimated 93,000 deaths while around 1.8 million refugees, mostly women and children, have fled the country.

Foreign Minister Bob Carr said on Thursday that the violence and human suffering in Syria was continuing unabated.

“A refugee exodus of this size has not been seen since the Rwandan genocide almost 20 years ago,” Senator Carr said.

Australia’s total humanitarian assistance to Syria, since June 2011, is $100 million.

The latest pledge has been welcomed by aid organisations World Vision, Oxfam and Save the Children.

Posted in Article, syria news, syrian civil war | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment