Is the Syrian Civil War and Revolution being Orchestrated and Propelled by Outside Interest and Propaganda?



With a civil war now raging in Syria the world has a situation similar to Libya whereby a fraudulent unelected group of individuals, mainly from foreign countries, who call themselves the Syrian National Council claiming to be the opposition forces for the protection of the unarmed citizens of Syrian and its resources.  

It has been reported that the Syrian Opposition Transitional National Council an unelected group of individuals named Burhan Ghalioun as the chairman and spokesperson of this self anointed class.

Ghalioun resides and works in France as a professor of political sociology at the University of Paris and of Syrian French decent?

For the record the creation of the SNC was publicly reported not from within Syria but from Istanbul Turkey. Its members are listed @

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/files/fp_uploaded_documents/110916_About%20SNC.pdf

I think that we in the west, along with the rest of the world, must start questioning the statements issued from Syrian exiles in France, Turkey, USA, Canada and throughout the Middle East and Africa. 

The Arab Muslim spring uprisings and the civil war of Libya and the anarchist’s revolution in Egypt it is becoming increasingly clear that two  goals of such uprisings are to establish Sharia law by incorporating Islam as the state religion and to achieve financial control of the country’s oil resources.

The ancient Arabic translation of Sharia law relates to a path to the water hole and considering today’s position could cause the route to the oil holes? 

Syria’s oil and gas reserves opposite to those of Egypt and Libya remains a top secret of its duly elected government and Islam is not currently the state religion.

Now Syria currently produces some 401,000 barrels of oil per day compared to the 662,600 (bbl/day) produced by Egypt and the 1.789 million (bbl/day) of oil produced by Libya. 

We should also be aware of other groups like the Syrian American Council and the Free Syrian Army which is made up of deserters from Syria’s armed forces. 

In all probability the world is witnessing desertions from Syria’s armed forces on the basis of clan alignment and radical Islamic religious beliefs? 

When military personnel go AWOL and put on masks and commence massacring their former comrades in uniform they are committing treason against the same people they took an oath and swore to protect against such lawlessness and anarchy?

These deserters for their deception and treasonous acts are now subject to appropriate military rule for these traitorous actions and killings and must be held liable?

The UN and peoples acceptance by condoning such treasonous acts, committed by deserters from the Syrian government’s armed force, based on their opinion that the elected Syrian government has “lost their legitimacy” and that “the free Syrian army of deserters will work hand in hand with the people to bring the regime down, protect the revolution and the country’s resources” says it all.

To me it sure sounds like a declaration of war, by Syrian army deserters, against the duly elected and recognized  leaders by the Syrian people.

Please keep in mind the very important and practical detail that Libya and Egypt are the only nations to recognize this De facto group of self anointed and unelected individuals.

The very countries in turmoil because of outside interference during the Arab Muslim spring uprisings through mob rule and anarchy.

We must also keep in mind that the government of Turkey, which itself has in the past committed crimes and provocations against the Kurds and the countries of Greece, Israel and Iraqi, has now threatened to cut off electricity its supplies to the Syrian people.  

This action by Turkey is a crime against humanity and contrary to the UN charter as are the economic sanctions that the US and other countries have initiated against the Syrian people and its government. 

One would think that after what happened in Egypt and especially after the Libya fiasco now is the time, as a result of such self anointed and unelected opposition groups formed by De facto entities, for the UN and most legitimate government representative at the United Nations to start abiding by the founding charter of the UN?

The charter states that nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter.

The civil war in Syria is definitely under the domestic jurisdiction of the state of Syria. As such the time has come for France, Turkey, USA, Canada, Libya, Egypt, Iran and the displaced Palestine's to all butt out of the internal domestic affairs of Syria.

Sources: 
Public documents from BBC, UK news, United Nations and numerous web sites, thanks to all.

Up DATES

MacKay does not rule out military pressure on Syria @

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1090089--mackay-does-not-rule-out-military-pressure-on-syria?bn=1

Canada needs only a defensive military not an aggressor war machine capability to respond to the internal conflicts of other nations.

Civilians and army deserters are also mounting violence against the elected government’s constitutional authority and its civilian supporters within Syria.

Unconfirmed one sided biased reports of mounting violence against civilians distributed by the media that do not mention that army deserters and civilian attempts of lawless by mob rule to overthrow Syria’s duly elected government constitutionally linked to a single political movement and under internationally laws are criminal act of aggression and crime against humanity.

Further nothing in the United Nations charter authorizes its members to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state and attempts of lawless mob rule to overthrow any duly elected power constitutionally linked to a single political movement under internationally laws is a criminal act of aggression and crime against humanity. Nov 21, 2011 9:26 AM

nehad ismail • Thanks Peter. I am not going to argue over all the contentious points but would like to say that the Syrian regime is doomed. It is going to be bloody and messy but the brutal regime has to go. In the coming weeks the SNC will be recognized by the EU, the US and most Middle Eastern countries. This is my perspective as some one who has been invovled in Middle Eastern Affairs for many years.  

Hi Nehad, your perception could be right but that does not legitimize the SNC as the official opposition of the Republic of Syria. 

If the regime is doomed then the Republic of Syria along with its constitution and all the legal citizens of Syria will once again be controlled by outside interests and the establishment of Sharia law as most likely will be the case in Libya and Egypt with more Middle Eastern countries to soon follow. 

Unfortunately the EU and the US do not have a clue as to what is truly taking place throughout the Regime similar to their mishandling of the Croatian, Serbs, republic of Krajina, Bosnia, Herzegovina and the Bosnian Serbs conflicts that are presently on hold. But that is for another day. 

Until the western powers understand that it is the radical Muslim's desire for establishing Sharia law that is driving and behind all of the conflicts within the Middle East nothing to do with democracy or the displaced Palestinians, whose rightful homeland is Jordan, the world shall continue to witness mob rule by malcontent anarchists and civil wars throughout this region. 

From my perspective your logic and that of your friends, the Western Powers, Pundits and experts should also be calling for the downfall of the following countries and their brutal regimes to go: 

1. United Arab Emirates

2. Qatar Oman

3. North Korea

4. Morocco

5. Monaco

6. Liechtenstein

7. Libya

8. Kuwait 

9. Jordan

10. Fiji

11. Eritrea

12. Egypt

13. Brunei

14. Bhutan

15. Bahrain,      

16. Sahrawi Republic

17. Tonga

18. People's Republic of China

19. Turkmenistan

20. Vietnam

Take care Nehad, stay active, healthy and safe in this crazy world of puppet leaders.

nehad ismail •Thank you for taking the trouble to respond. I do really appreciate and understand what you say and I would like to assure you that the Syrian people will not accept an Islamic System ruling by Sharia. The overwhelming majority are secular moderate people. Even among the Islamists there are reasonable people who give and take and have no intention of turning Syria into an Islamic state. The people would not have it. They will revolt as they are doing now. Nobody in the Middle East except a handful of fanatics would like to see aTaliban type of regime. Enjoy your Sunday Peter and have a good week. 
Posted by nehad

nehad ismail • Hi Peter I agree the Syrian National Council has not been elected by the people of Syria, but has been appointed by hundreds of opposition members meeting in Istanbul. For over eight months the opposition has been badgered and pressured by Western Powers, Pundits and experts to form a committee to speak on their behalf, hence the SNC. The members of the Council might not be true democrats, but they are not fraudulent as you desribe them. They are respected opposition figures and I happen to know some of them. Anyone reading your article in the Middle East would think the article has been written by a Pro-regime writer. This regime has killed many thousands and is still killing protesters. The regime has committed crimes against humanity and the ICC is preparing a case against the Syrian leadership.

Hello Nehad, the SNC from its exile base in Paris and Turkey is a nondemocratic self appointed entity without lawful authority and to suggest otherwise is incorrect.

Syria is a Republic with power constitutionally linked to a single political party and not a constitutional monarchy like the United Arab Emirates, Monaco, Morocco, Liechtenstein, Kuwait, or Jordan, to name a few, where the Monarch not an elected leader exercises power.

From my point of view and collaborated from your statement “that the opposition has been badgered and pressured by Western Powers, Pundits and experts to form a committee to speak on their behalf,” hence the SNC.” Thus this de facto group is speaking on behalf of their puppet masters and not the Syrian people.   

Further they are for whatever reasons personal and otherwise are in opposition to the Syria’s existing power constitutionally linked to a single political movement.

Since none of them were duly elected by a majority of the Syrian people but “badgered and pressured by Western Powers, Pundits and experts,” I stand by my opinion and statement that it is a fraudulent organization regardless of their individual esteem.

My article is not pro revolution, anarchists or prop regime but pro facts and as you are well aware civil wars, as brutally as they are, with both factions killing one another.

Protester’s, rebels, insurgents and army deserters are killing people as are Syrian government forces and their supports. Maybe the world does not like it but it is a Syrian domestic civil war under the jurisdiction of the state.

As such it must be decided by the Syrian people from both sides fighting within Syria without outside intervening by western powers, pundits, academic experts or the United Nations for their own political and economic interests as was the case in Libya and Egypt.

It remains my position and opinion that this civil war in Syria is definitely under the domestic jurisdiction of the state of Syria and as such it is time that France, Turkey, USA, Britain, Canada, Libya, Egypt, Iran, the displaced Palestine's fighters and all others to butt out of the internal domestic affairs of Syria.

Bikes must be Defined as a VEHICLE under Traffic Laws

Complete awareness concerning the use of highways, roadways and city streets will not be solved by better infrastructure but through amendments to traffic law that defines and includes bikes, e bikes, and bicycles as a VEHICLE and thus treats all users as equals under traffic laws.

The NDP and all political parties should be demanding that bikes, e bikes, bicycles be classed and defined as a VEHICLE under all laws similar to a motorcycle if they honestly want to accomplish respect for roadways, highways, city streets and country roads by all users on an equal footing.

Also, the mandatory wearing of a bike safety helmet regardless of the person age for all bike riders, e bikes, cyclists, etc. when peddling  or otherwise on public roadways, city streets, country roads and highways.    

These are the simplest most appropriate measures that are urgently required for saving lives, the abuse of traffic laws and to legally curb alcohol use by all including cyclists and bike riders.

If politicians truly and honestly desire making our cities and country more cycle friendly so that bike riding, bicycling commuters, pedestrians and motorists can safely coexist as equals on city streets, roadways and highways these amendments should be made immediately and without further delay.

Additional Info @

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1086374--cyclist-s-death-prompts-call-for-mandatory-truck-side-guards

http://www.bhsi.org/stats.htm

http://www.caregiver.org/caregiver/jsp/content_node.jsp?nodeid=44

http://www.clarity.net/~adam/hurt-report.html

UN Seeking to Control the Internet and Individual Content?



 
This idea, supported by France under the leadership of Sarkozy with the support of President Obama and his administration in the USA through both the G8 and the United Nations, for attempting to exert a control over the usage and management of cyberspace within the Internet was recently pointed out, believe it or not,  by the Russian President Medvedev.

During the recent G8 in Paris, and reported on by the Christian Science Monitor, France’s Sarkozy’s was claiming that now control of the internet somehow in his mind has become a “moral imperative” to control the Internet.

He was unfortunately backed by the Obama administration by its proposed law now floating around congress and which has since been amended to target “foreign infringing sites.”

Some have dubbed the US proposed law as the Enforcing and Protecting American Rights Against Sites Intent on Theft and Exploitation Act or the E-PARASITE Act, (formerly known as the PROTECT-IP Act).

“These revisions would allow the US Department of Justice to force search engines, browsers, and service providers to block and censor users' access to websites, and scrub the American Internet clean of any trace of their existence without having to deal with the annoying legal notion of fair use or any legal rights of the accused.”

Now, the United Nations, which for the most part is under the control and influence of truly non democratic nations, continues with its committee, that was started back in 2003, for setting up a global system under the direct control of the UN for the management and control of cyberspace.

The real issue relates to the extent to which private industry, civil society groups, and other nongovernmental stakeholders should continue to play significant roles in the management of the Internet.

Recent hearings at the UN had some countries, including China, favoring the limiting of the oversight role to governmental and intergovernmental bodies.

Tang Zicai, representing the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology in Beijing stated:

"The governments are located in the center of this process," and "This process cannot be accomplished without the meaningful participation of the governments."

Also, the Internet Society, a nonprofit international organization focusing on Internet standards, education, and policy argued that:  

"The Internet is a network of networks working cooperatively together, designed to operate without centralized control or governance mechanisms."

However, there is growing support from developing countries within the General Assembly of the UN for increased government regulation and control of the internet as stated by Mohammed Hussain Nejad, a representative of the government of Iran:

"Developments have not been supportive of increasing the leverage of developing countries in policy issues pertaining to the Internet," and further argued "The few developed countries are either monopolizing policymaking on such issues or entering into exclusive treaties among themselves, while further marginalizing other countries, mainly developing ones."

Most realize that the United Nations General Assembly is controlled by developing countries and for the most part do not have truly democratic governments in their own countries.

As such it would be fair to say that they truly are against the democratic idea of the free flow of information to citizens.

Verveer another representative speaking at the committee stated:  

" inter governmental controls would be a way of controlling the content that passes over the Internet by requiring, by treaty if you will, other administrations to cooperate in terms of suppressing speech that they didn't like."

Special interest groups such as the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), supports the drafting of a "cyber peace treaty" and attempted to offer up some farfetched assurances that some non-governmental bodies would be a part of the process.

The Director of the Citizen Lab and the Canada Centre for Global Security Studies at the University of Toronto, Ron Deibert has stated that:

"We have to be careful about what institutions take the lead. The Chinas, the Iran’s, the Saudi Arabia’s of the world want to impose a territorial vision of control over cyberspace -- and if the ITU got its wishes, that's essentially what would happen."

Stay informed as the United Nations along with the US, France and other countries will continue the attempts at controlling the Internet directly or through the UN's World Conference on International Telecommunications, scheduled for 2012 in Malaysia.

Sources:
Public documents from Christian Science monitor, numerous web sites and United Nations, thanks to all.

 

Why has Bilingualism, Biculturalism and Multiculturalisms Not Been Voted On or Approved by Canadians, but Enforced by Political Parties and Unelected Bureaucrats?

I am seeking input and assistance with an article on the above topic and how it has been manipulated and used by political parties for vote getting mainly in the province of Quebec.

Please send your comments, experiences, ideas and suggestions etc to me at clarketoronto@gmail.com ASAP.

THANKS for your anticipated assistance with this matter and which one trusts is a concern to all Canadians regardless of language.   

Warmest regards,

Peter Clarke

Pedal Protest Groups Always Push Cycling Freedom While Ignoring Highway Traffic Act

If we are honestly and truly interested in the safety and health policy issues for bike riders and the peddling commercial activities along city streets, then hopefully a majority of law-abiding and safety-conscious citizens would agree with me, that if we are to continue with the idea of biking activities on city streets, we must greatly improve the safety of cycling by the mandatory wearing of a bike helmet at all times.

To date, it is fair to say that the most successful and important steps used and effective in traffic safety are based on restrictions to the freedom of car driving through regulations and enforcement such as speeding, highway speed limits, traffic restrictions within the city core, signalized crossings, penalties for DUI and rightfully so, intersection camera stop enforcements and the obligatory use of seat belts for car drivers but NOT as yet for bike riders and or bike couriers daily cycling on city streets!

As far too often we witness bike riders illegally evoking the rights of pedestrians by dangerously peddling on city sidewalks and then darting across or through intersections and skirting red lights and stop signs because of cyclist’s complete disregard for the rules of the road.

Unfortunately, it appears that they are of the opinion that the rules and regulations under the Highway Traffic Act do not apply to them and when accidents do happen it is automatically the fault of drivers, pedestrians or others because as peddlers and not polluters they miraculously believe that they are above the laws of society.

And because, unfortunately to date, the policies adopted by city politicians and traffic services for improving the safety of cycling has been preceded and driven the policy and argument by the special interest groups of cyclist activists solely for their unlicensed freedom of cycling and not safety.

So what is the answer to curb such abuse of our traffic laws by cyclists and bike riders who continually ignore the laws when occupying city streets and sidewalks and at the same time make our city more cycle-friendly?

There are hundreds of thousands of Torontonians, made up of cyclists and car drivers who want bicycling commuters, pedestrians and motorists to safely coexist on Toronto streets.

The primary goal and answer, by our City Council and Transit Services Committee, to promote acceptable and friendly city street bike use must NOT be one of simply adding bike lanes throughout city streets in a political attempt to appease special interest protest groups of either car drivers or cyclists.

Might I foolishly suggest and recommend to all councillors and career politicians that now is the time to make your intentions clear by introducing and passing a city bike license, registration and insurance requirement program which includes the mandatory wearing of a bike helmet when cycling or riding city streets before it is too late and there is another fatal accident or head injuries to citizens or tourists of our bike-friendly Toronto.

Warmest regards,

Peter Clarke

Update

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1078938--cyclist-struck-by-garbage-truck?bn=1

The Question’s Remain, Libya’s Civil War was for Who?

The question remains, Libya’s civil war, not a revolution from the very beginning, was for whom and for what purposes? 

What is for Sharia law or the reintroduction of a monarchy that NATO interfered and supported one side in Libya’s civil war?

Was the creation of the unelected Libya’s National Transition Council a trade off for Libyan oil for Italy, France, the EU and other countries?

The facts of history past, lest we forget, should always be compared to events of the present.

For me, it seems that the history of installing or appointing selected individuals to represent the interests of others in the name of the Libyan people just keeps on repeating itself.

Let’s remember that back in 1951 the USA and Britain, in Benghazi, installed the exiled Libyan monarchy of Idris. The appointment of this monarchy as then stated, was of course, to represent the Libyan people.

However, more importantly, at the same time this monarchy installed by western powers would be the overseers in the Kingdom of Libya and North Africa to protect the economic and military interests of these western governments.

Then 18 years later in 1969, Libya with the lowest standards of living in the world, thanks to that installed monarchy for the benefit of the Libyan people by western powers, was itself overthrown in a bloodless revolution led by a Libyan Muammar al Gaddafi.

After this bloodless 1969 internal military coup in Libya led by Gaddafi, the western oil companies shortly thereafter were nationalized by the Libyan regime.

As a result, one of the first military and economic causalities in Libya was the dismantling of the American Wheelus airbase in the kingdom of Libya along with the evacuation of all British and American forces stationed in that previous kingdom.

Libya’s was a civil war and not at all like the mob uprising in Egypt which was supported and urged on by international union organizations, various foreign and domestic rights groups, Muslim special interest groups including the original Jihad from inside and outside of Egypt, Syria, Iran, Pakistan, the free Palestine movement from the west bank and Gaza to mention but a few.

We must remember that in 2011, Libya was exporting 80% of its Oil to Italy (32%), Germany (14%), France (10%), USA (5%) and China (10%) and is Africa’s largest exporter of oil with approximately 1.7 million tons a day.

Considering the history, and under the camouflage of civil war, it seems it was now payback time for the Gaddafi regime and Libya by western powers using NATO early in 2011 thanks to the commencement of a civil war which could be externally managed under the further guise of a revolution.

On March 11, 2011, France was the first to recognize the rebel council in Benghazi fighting to oust Muammar Gaddafi from power in Libya’s civil war.

Therefore, is France one of the puppet masters of the NTC?

Just prior to this in February 27, 2011, and once again in Benghazi, the NTC was formed around the axis of two men, Mahmoud Jibril and Abdel Jalil’s, modern day equivalents to Marcus Julius Brutus.

Thus, the NTC was and remains a group of self appointed individuals acting as a government, propped up by western powers, without having been legally or officially established by the Libyan people.

In reality then the NTC serves as a function for western powers and the people of Libya without having been legally established officially by a majority of the Libyan people but rather installed by western powers using the military might of NATO, 70% controlled by the USA, for the protection of what and for whose purpose?

As previously pointed out, on March 11, 2011 with the internal civil war of Libya still raging on Libya announced it had suspended diplomatic relations with France after French President Nicolas Sarkozy recognized the rebel council in Benghazi fighting to oust Muammar Gaddafi from power?

One of the self appointed opposition envoy’s Ali al-Issawi, meeting with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, proudly announced that "France has recognized the national transition council as the legitimate representative of the Libyan people."?

This same NTC member endorsed by France further stated that "On the basis of this recognition, we are going to open a diplomatic mission, that is our own embassy in Paris, and an ambassador from France will be sent to Benghazi," a key city held by revolutionaries, he added.

France was the first to recognize the rebel council in Benghazi fighting to oust Muammar Gaddafi from power in Libya’s civil war. The question then persists, is France one of the puppet masters of the NTC and or the mastermind in getting NATO’s involvement?

The Gaddafi regime upon hearing this news, while the civil war was getting under way, stated that "A country like France cannot be stupid enough to recognize such people who only represent themselves," the official said.

Further a foreign ministry official within the then legal Gaddafi government stated that they would "consider severing ties with France after information about the dangerous intervention in Libyan affairs," as quoted previously by Jana in March 2011.

"Today the decision has been taken to suspend diplomatic relations with France," Libya's Deputy Foreign Minister Khaled Kaim said. "It's clear the French government is concentrating on dividing Libya."

President Barack Obama stated on March 11 that the US and its allies are slowly 'tightening the noose' on Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and that a no-fly zone remains an option to put pressure on him.

The White House called the council "legitimate and credible", but stopped short of granting full diplomatic recognition to the opposition.

"During the meeting, Mr. Donilon stated that the United States views the NTC, as a legitimate and credible interlocutor of the Libyan people," the White House said in a statement, released after the meeting.

Let us all keep in mind that it was only on February 27, 2011 and in Benghazi, that this entity under the name of the NTC was formed around the axis of two men, Mahmoud Jibril  and Abdel Jalil’s, modern day equivalents to Marcus Julius Brutus?     

In May 14, 2011, it was only France, Italy and Qatar who had officially recognized the NTC as Libya’s legitimate unelected government and at the same time was also taking part with NATO with air strikes on strategic Libyan government sites as an effort to protect the civilian population and oust the Libyan leader Muammar Al Gaddafi?

Today the world wakes up the knowledge that the NTC is the axis of and based on a Muslim modern day equivalent to Marcus Julius Brutus.

Their leaders and a majority of the NTC members as we all now know describe themselves as secular people and this greatly concerns me and hopefully raises further red flags to the entire civilized world or what is left of it?

History and the facts are that this so-called “secularism” has been responsible for and accomplished more evil in the 20^th century as evidenced by the underlying secular regimes of Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, and Mao than religion itself.

Perhaps it is time that every member state within the UN along with the self appointed NTC members, NATO and all western powers who directly got involved in the civil war within the sovereign state of Libya should be held liable and accountable.

Such accountability to be conducted by a free and truly independent international criminal and civil court of law  proceedings for any and all atrocities, killings, tortures, bombings and collateral damages as a result of these bodies and governments direct interference and involvement from having taken one side of the Libyans people in its sovereign state of civil war.

Might is never right and does not represent freedom, liberty or democracy when formed by a de facto entity like the National Transition Council for the Libyan people or by a foreign government’s inference with another sovereign state?  

Update……..

$$ Dollars $$ spent by western powers interfering with Libya’s civil war through NATO.

United State $1,100 billion USD, Canada $50 million USD, United Kingdom $1,500 Billion, USD France $450 million USD Sweden $50 million USD?

CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS
Article 1CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS

7. Nothing contained in the present Charter

shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in

matters which are essentially within the domestic

jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Membersto submit such matters to settlement under

the present Charter; but this principle shall not

prejudice the application of enforcement measures

under Chapter VII.

http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/ha/cun/cun.html