SUNDAY, MAY 27, 2012
Tony Cartalucci, Contributor
Update: The Western media has now admitted Syrian troops were not responsible for the "massacre" in Houla, Syria, and are now instead blaming the violence on "pro-regime thugs."
Despite this backpedaling, the US, UK, and French governments are moving ahead with their calls for "action" and have continued to condemn the Syrian government, which according to the activists they are allegedly citing, were not even responsible for the massacre.
Proving that the massacres were carried out by "pro-regime thugs" and not Al Qaeda terrorists who are renowned for such tactics and known to be operating in the area alongside the so-called "Free Syrian Army," will be very difficult for the West if it intends to use this latest tragedy to justify further meddling, especially action from the UN Security Council.
Before UN monitors even arrived in Houla, Syria, northwest of Homs and close to the Lebanese border where it is now admitted that militant extremists, cash, and weapons had been freely flowing for months, the US, UK, and France were already calling for the "international community" to move against the Syrian government, in the latest effort to justify further meddling in the Middle Eastern nation.
France's new Foreign Minister, Laurent Fabius, has called for the dubious "Friends of Syria" cadre to meet again to discuss further measures to be taken against Syria while both France and the UK urged for more support to be given to the Syrian opposition, now long exposed as employing terrorist tactics, including indiscriminate bombings, and according to both the UN and Human Rights Watch, the kidnapping, torture, and murder of civilians.
Western media organizations had claimed that Syrian government shelling was responsible for the 90 deaths "confirmed" by UN monitors who later arrived at the scene. However, conflicting reports from across Gulf State media claim the deaths, particularly those of children, were caused by "knives" wielded by death squads. Images broadcast by both the opposition and the Syrian government's SANA news network shows slain families laying dead within intact structures, the result of a combination of brutality including close range small arms fire and possibly bladed weapons as claimed by Gulf State networks. SANA maintains that the atrocities were committed by opposition death squads, as it has consistently maintained throughout the duration of the unrest. The West and its allies however, have presented conflicting, and ever-shifting narratives to obfuscate increasingly depraved atrocities committed by their own proxy rebel forces.
Almost immediately after UN monitors arrived in Houla, Syria, the so-called "Free Syrian Army" declared it was abandoning the UN peace plan, as was predicted from reading reports by Western think-tanks calling for the ending of the UN "ceasefire" and the recommencing of violence to overthrow the Syrian government. It appears that indeed, death squads, not shelling has cost the lives of the vast majority of the 90 killed in Houla, regardless of which source one cites. The question that must be asked, as in all horrific crimes, is "Cui Bono?" To whose benefit does it serve to massacre very publicly entire families in close quarters and broadcast the images of their handiwork worldwide? To whose benefit does it serve to immediately jump to conclusions before UN monitors even arrive on scene to make sense of the violence?
The Syrian opposition who has been losing tactically, morally, and rhetorically as their extremist background is systematically exposed, their ties to Al Qaeda admitted even by their allies in the Pentagon, and a growing list of atrocities undermining confidence that they will lead Syria into a future anywhere other than the same dystopian tragedy that has befallen Libya? Or the Syrian government who has been steadily keeping at bay the forces of Neo-Conservatives, corporate-funded think-tanks, NATO machinations, and a combined US-Israeli-Saudi plot to divide and destroy its nation, articulated and documented in 2007 by Seymour Hersh in his article, "The Redirection?"
Clearly, Syria's government has everything to lose by making it a policy to brutalize an already self-incriminating, admitted band of sectarian-driven extremists with overt ties to foreign interests. And obviously the Syrian opposition, teetering on either total defeat or receiving a torrent of additional arms and perhaps even NATO military support, had everything to gain by brutalizing the Syrian population at Houla and blaming it on the government, wringing out of tragedy the casus belli the West has been searching for, for months.
After the serial lies both the Syrian opposition and the Western corporate-media has been caught in, not to mention the deceitful premises used to sell both the Iraq and Libyan wars to the world, is it not unreasonable to question a narrative so quickly concluded and leveraged (in hours) by the West? This, the same West that sat idly by while the "Free Syrian Army" conducted nationwide terrorist bomb attacks, they themselves admitted they were carrying out. Where was the outrage and calls for action then? The UN condemnation of foreign interests funding militant groups purposefully targeting civilians?
Clearly with the massacre at Houla, we find ourselves at another critical juncture where an informed, objective world population must push back against insidious interests clamoring for war to allegedly stop violence they themselves both plotted and have perpetuated.
Tony Cartalucci's articles have appeared on many alternative media websites, including his own at Land Destroyer Report.