Skip to main content

The hidden agenda of Kerry, Hague and the "Opposition Coalition".

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/22/syria-peace-talks-assad-future


Syria peace talks: John Kerry leads calls for removal of President Bashar al-Assad



U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, left, talks to U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon prior to the Syrian peace talks in Montreux, Switzerland, Wednesday, Jan. 22, 2014. The peace talks in the Swiss city of Montreux marked the first time the opposition and the Syrian government will sit down face to face since their dispute began in March 2011. (AP Photo/Arnd Wiegmann, pool)
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon


 
The arrogance of Kerry and to only a slightly lesser extent Hague, demonstrating the hypocrisy and duplicity of the "Western Powers" in their continued campaign to find any excuse to attack Syria, no matter what the people of the United States or United Kingdom may say. At yesterday's (Wednesday 22nd January 2014) opening speeches to what has been described as "Geneva 11", and at news conferences later in the day, Kerry launched astonishing attacks on the so called "Assad Regime" in speeches full of rhetoric, unsubstantiated allegations and distorted history.
It is indeed ironic that, after the uncompromising speech from Walid Muallem Syria's foreign minister, criticising the Western Powers for supporting with arms and finance the terrorism of the rebel groups, the US State Department should condem what it called Muallem's "inflammatory rhetoric". The irony of their own hypocrisy is frequently lost on American "spokes persons".
Having already succeeded in forcing Bank Ki-moon and the United Nations to withdraw an invitation to Iran to attend this conference, it was clearly evident that Britain and the United States felt confident that their support for the "Syrian Opposition" aided by Saudi Arabia and some other Gulf States, would be warmly received in the conference hall and by the worlds media and that consequently the Syrian government delegation would somehow be pressurised even further. The stimulation of public opinion in the west towards supporting intervention in Syria has increased with the publication of photographs and a report detailing atrocities allegedly carried out by the Syrian government. There are of course no allegations of atrocities alleged to have been carried out by "opposition forces", as that would not suit the intentions of the west. The propaganda campaign on television and in the media, will no doubt intensify over the coming days and weeks with the objective of galvanising public opinion in support of intervention. 



Syrian foreign minister Walid Muallem


Syrian foreign minister Walid Muallem, despite an interruption from Bank Ki-moon and audible mutterings from other delegates, argued that  “The West claims to fight terrorism publicly while they feed it secretly. Syrians here in this hall [who] participated in all that has happened, they implemented, facilitated the bloodshed and all at the expense of the Syrian people they claim to represent”. and in a remark addressed directly to the Opposition delegation added “If you want to speak in the name of the Syrian people, you should not be traitors to the Syrian people or agents in the pay of enemies of the Syrian people.” 
There is clearly a chasm between the Syrian government delegation and the western backed rebel opposition. Kerry and the west are interested only in the removal of Bashar al-Assad and in finding some justification for military intervention to achieve that objective, while at the same time, Damascus seek to address what they see as the spreading threat of terrorism in Syria and the region generally. The position of President Al Assad is not on the agenda.
It is difficult to see how these two diametrically opposed positions can ever be reconciled.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Enough of this hysterical nonsense

  http://style.uk.msn.com/royal-baby/how-will-the-royal-baby-look-as-he-grows-up Media generated hysteria.                           This is too much. For the last 36 hours (thought it seems more like 36 days) there has been wall to wall news coverage, media and television comment and reporting, with Sky News taking first prize for frenzied minute by minute reporting from the Palace, the hospital, from a village somewhere in England, from the studio and anywhere else that Burley, Botting and company could stick a microphone into some obscure "celebrity's" face and ask for yet another banal quote. All this galvanising the mass hysteria of some elements of the public, (who the media would have you believe is the reaction of "the whole world",) with their flag waving, dancing, singing and cheering over what is after all, no more than a woman having a baby. How will the royal baby look as he grows up? Now the latest absurdity, this time f

New Agenda on Sunday is out Sunday, Apr. 28, 2019

https://paper.li/f-1346065353#/ Good morning everyone. Last weeks scare regarding Megan and Harry being sent to live "somewhere in Africa" seems to have been dispelled, at least for the time being. It now seems that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will take up residence in California.  Unless  they are actually  doing  some proper work in "The Golden State", I hope that they are taken off the civil list so that we do not have to fund their life choice. The nauseating Daily Mail is at it again. A headline this week, which I will not even bother to reproduce here, screams out in disgusting and repulsive bias without any acknowledgement to the factual basis of their "story". Spewing out their usual smears and embellished distortions about Hamas, the IRA, Hezbollah and the rest, the Mail condemns itself with ample justification, for the closure of a "newspaper," which again abuses 10 fold, the privilege of "freedom of t

Northern Ireland and Brexit. The return of "The Troubles"

Northern Ireland: police attacked in another night of disturbances | Northern Ireland | The Guardian When the "Brexit" debate was still filling our newspapers and our television screens, readers may remember why I had changed my mind since voting to leave at the referendum vote. Apart from the economic arguments, which had become crystal clear after peeling away all the lies and misrepresentations trotted out by Bozo Boris and his "Get Brexit Done" conspirators, there was always the problem of the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Would it be possible to have a border between the European Union and the United Kingdom where people, goods and services could pass freely between the two nations without customs restrictions, tariffs, duties and all the other formalities? Would it be possible to have one part of the United Kingdom treated differently from other parts of the United Kingdom, particularly when Scotland for example had voted overwhe