Today, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) meets again to debate on the topic Syria. The urgency, to achieve a resolution (or something else) “against Syria”, is increasing at the member states of the UN Security Council (UNSC). But it is a hypocritically urgency, underlined with questionable statements of the French, British and German Foreign Ministers.
Shortly before this next meeting of the UN Security Council (UNSC) on Syria, there are more and more new horror stories and allegedly reports about new victims in the media and on the Internet. There are also some new statements of the mentioned Foreign Ministers. What a surprise.
No wonder that a lot of these stories are again delivered by the so-called „Syrian Observatory for Human Rights“, based in London. The source which spreads false information without any confirmation, but Western media does not care about. There must be a reason, why Voltaire Network and others have started to call this allegedly “Observatory for Human Rights” an office of the Muslim Brotherhood in “the center” of London.
Of course, this faked human rights office has an enormous interest to influence the Western media in this week. Influencing Western media finally means to influence the opinions of the Western population and even of Western politicians. Somebody like the German Foreign Minister Mr. Westerwelle has no real clue what is really going on in Syria. But of course, he wants and needs to distinguish himself – in his final days at an important German ministry.
Despite the huge lack of any credibility, the so-called “Syrian Observatory for Human Rights”, based in London, is still cited as source in British, French, German and American newspapers. This dubious source is repeatedly mentioned despite the fact, that the most journalists even have no clue about the source they use. They are not interested to confirm reports or information.
They are interested to sell their stories and to stay in work. Journalism is business. No wonder that some journalists are shocked and disappointed to see that huge lack of real journalism nowadays. Investigative journalism is a fairy tale.
Mr. Abderrahman, still cited as head of the “Syrian Observatory for Human Rights”, despite the contrary press information of this “corner shop” in London, is a farce. Of course, it would be no surprise when even the latest information about Mr. Abdelrahman (or Abdulrahman / Abderrahman) is just false. But let us assume in this article that Mr Abdelrahman is reality.
This dubious head and likely the only employee of the “Syrian Observatory for Human Rights” in Syria, provides the media outlets with new allegedly numbers of victims in Syria in the last days. He also spreads some nice stories about operations and events in this country of the Middle East.
The Western media willfully buys it. Horror stories are good to sell, the truth is not very important, because such stories are in line with the false propaganda against the Syrian government, finally against Syria.
Is the information by the “Syrian Observatory for Human Rights” reliable? This information is not verified. Western politicians and Western media “work” with these numbers and the information of the questionable “Observatory for Syria”, based in London. At least, you are able to read sometimes, that there is a lack of independent sources in some reports. Great journalism, indeed!
Just before the beginning of the new UN Security Council session, the known media channels CNN, al-Arabiya and Al-Jazeera started to report about new massacres in the Syrian city of Homs (massacres in some known neighborhoods of Homs).
In the news of CNN, al-Arabiya and Al-Jazeera it is reported that at least 200 people were killed by grenade attacks of the Syrian army in Homs. But are these reports really true? Al-Jazeera underscored the report about the next allegedly massacre in the Syrian city of Homs with pictures.
However, these pictures, used by Al-Jazeera to underscore their report about the last allegedly events in Homs, should rather lead to skepticism about these news.
The Qatari channel Al-Jazeera has reported about deaths by shots, but in contrast to their report, the Gulf state TV channel showed only naked and shackled bodies without a drop of blood on their dead bodies. It does not fit and it is not the first time that al Jazeera shows a report which should raise a lot of questions about it.
In the reporting on the Syrian city of Homs, also the statements between allegedly witnesses and the residents of this Syrian city are contrary to each other.
Mr. al-Homsi, of course a pseudonym, has called CNN and reported that wounded and dead bodies are on the streets of Homs and they are not able to get on the streets because of the snipers (of course, from the Syrian army) are shooting on everybody.
On the other hand, there are also statements from citizens of Homs, who absolutely do not support this scenario, they even say, that there have been no Syrian soldiers in these districts of Homs.
In the end you have to decide which story you believe in. Of course, our friends in Homs confirmed our opinions, but that is irrelevant at the moment. The really worse thing on these methods of reporting is, those journalists fail to represent all sides of a story. Western media hides facts and information. These Western and Arab media stations fail at an objective reporting. Copy & Paste is as often used as the bad translations of Arab reports from al Jazeera and al-Arabiya.
Of course, Mr. al-Homsi called on the international community to help all Syrians. He hides the fact that the huge majority in Syria has a very contrary opinion. The huge majority in Syria still supports the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his reform process. They are also against any international intervention within their country. Mr. al-Homsi didn`t mentioned the way of assistance by the “international community” (NATO, UN, USA…).
Recalling Libya, there were the same (media) scenario before the final meetings of the UN Security Council (UNSC) and the decision for the war in Libya. The so-called “No-Fly Zone” was an act against humanity. NATO war crimes and the support of criminals and religious extremists have not provided a better future for the children in Libya and the children in Europe and USA.
Just before the UN Security Council has met on Libya, there were the same media echo about unconfirmed information and the terror by the former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi (Qaddafi). It’s a method and strategy of the “international community” to influence the opinions of the Western population. Of course, also these dubious members of the questionable “Transition Councils” (the “Syrian National Council” is just the same as the “National Transitional Council” in Libya) know how important the willingness for war in the Western population is.
The population of the Libyan city of Benghazi allegedly called for international assistance in order to avoid a bombardment by their own army. Afterwards, there was a bombardment by NATO in Libya.
The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) adopted the resolution on Libya, everything else is well-known yet. In Syria you can see the same intention. But will it work again this time? The total population of Syria is higher than Libya. As we mentioned already, the huge majority is still in support with the Syrian government or at least with the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. A lot differ between the Syrian “regime” and the Syrian “President”.
The huge majority is not interested in any international intervention in Syria. The huge majority of Syrians want to live in a secular country. They are not interested in the partly questionable dogmas of the Muslim Brotherhood and e.g. Salafiyha (Salafis, Salafists). They are not interested in the destabilization and bombardment of their country by armed groups of criminals and religious fanatics or the NATO. The total population of Syria is much higher than it is in Libya. The West shouldn`t underestimate this fact.
The final draft resolution was amended to convince Moscow to stay away from their veto rights this time and agree to this resolution on Syria. But Russia is smart and angry after the events in Libya. Beside the information that this draft resolution was submitted by Morocco, the truth is that this draft resolution, which is finally not really new, was submitted by the “international community”. Britain edited and updated the content of this one-sided draft resolution in the end. It`s a game.
The changes were finally no real serious changes to the content of this draft resolution on Syria. The draft resolution continues to hold on the one-sided Arab League peace plan, set on the 01/22/2012. This “peace plan” of the Arab League (AL) doesn`t rely on the updated report of their observers.
The Arab League buried the report of the observers in Syria in order to hide the truth. The Arab League, led by Qatar, had no interest in the truth about the events in Syria. False propaganda is more useful for the questionable goals and dubious intentions.
The members of the UN Security Council have changed the point about the overthrow or forced resignation of the Syrian president Bashar al-Assad. They also took out the sections about sanctions and an arms embargo from the proposed text of this one-sided and hypocritically draft resolution.
The ability to take further action (e.g. military intervention by the “international community”) if the violence in Syria will not end, was retained. Hello again, Libya!
In addition, the draft resolution stayed one-sided. In contrast to the more democratic and realistic draft resolution by Russia, the “new” Maroccan (British) draft resolution on Syria still only condemns the violence of the Syrian government. Very objective, indeed!
This draft resolution is far away from bringing peace to Syria and to be the start for a brighter future for the Syrian people. This draft resolution is still far away from the truth. It is based on propaganda and dubious interests.
Although the draft resolution makes concessions to Russia, the probability of a veto by Russia is still huge. If Moscow decides to contain in the UN Security Council today, the resolution against Syria will be adopted. This resolution will escalate the violence in Syria. The plan to destabilize Syria (regime change-method) is reality.