Assad’s alleged Barrel Bombs: An information war by the west?

Sendungstext
herunterladen

PDF (.pdf)

Word (.docx)

18.10.2015 | www.kla.tv/6953

When it comes to the Syrian president Bashar al-Assad the western mainstream media again and again mention this one sentence, I quote: “Assad drops barrel bombs on innocent children”. Also so-called Middle-east experts and western politicians join this accusation. US-president Barack Obama in his speech on September 28, 2015 at the UN- general meeting spoke exactly this sentence and declared Assad to be a “tyrant”.The Assad-regime having committed war-crimes and violations of human rights. Therefore Assad could no way be part of a future government, said Obama. A typical barrel bomb consists of a barrel filled with explosives and metal splinters. Due to the gruesome, in most cases deadly injuries that barrel bombs inflict, they are ostracized internationally and considered illegal according to international law. Due to its impreciseness in striking, the military benefit is questionable. Barrel bombs can be dropped out of military or non-military aircrafts. So the question now has to be raised on how far the accusations against the Assad-government are justified – first of all the ‘barrel bombs accusation’. In the following we summarize the most important counter-statements as well as inconsistencies in the accusations against Assad. 1. Concerning the ‘barrel bombs accusations’: - In several interviews Assad raised the counter-question as to why he should be interested in bombarding his own countrymen on who’s support he still depends?Still in June 2014 in the last presidential electionAssad was democratically elected with over 80% of votes. – President Bashar al-Assad answered the Television Broadcasting Stations BBC and France2 on the ‘barrel bomb accusation’ that his army had no need of using barrel bombs which are ostracized according to international law, since theyalready have conventional bombs at their disposal which are much more useful for targeted attacks. – As the French journalist Thierry Meyssanrevealed on www.voltairenet.orgonMay 21, 2015 the Human Rights organization “Human Rights Watch” had repeatedly brought reporting’s in which the Syrian Arabic Army was accused of using barrel bombs against their own population. “Human Rights Watch” is a US-organization that is financed by the speculator George Soros in the amount of 100 million dollars. So it can hardly be spoken of as an independent source. – According to Meyssan, videos and pictures were said to be produced by a Syrian oppositional group named “White Helmets” that has its base in Turkey. These showed alleged bombardings with barrel bombs by the Syrian Arabic Army. However they are forged, Meyssan says. And yet they were purposefully spread by the “Syrian Observatory for Human Rights”. By this they became, even though unexamined, the alleged evidence for the western press. The “Syrian Observatory for Human Rights” is said to stand in opposition to the Assad-government and to be run by one man only, a Syrian migrant in England. –The press office of Secretary-General of the United Nations which had picked up the accusations of the White Helmets, afterwards apologized to Russia for not having verified them before.Meyssan calls the assertion that the Syrian army would make use of barrel bombs an absurdity. For the Syrian army has Russian bombs at their disposal that are more precise so they would have no reason to produce and make use of such weapons whichare ostracized by international law. 2. Concerning the toxic gas and chemical weapons accusations going back to the year 2013: Assad’s counterstatement which was censored by western media and not published said, I quote: “Can a state use chemical or other weapons of mass destruction in a place where their own troops are concentrated?” – Time and again the Assad-regime was accused of using cruel toxic gas. However the pictures and other indications were not able to stand up to critical questioning. Solid evidence for Assad’s guilt arestill missing today. Furthermore there is the sound analysis by former UN-weapons inspector Richard Lloyd and the professor for international security, Theodore Postol. It reveals that the toxic gasrockets had such a short range that they can have only been shot from an area that was then controlled by rebels. So not by the Syrian Army! Also the, as of then, UN-inspector Carla Del Ponte confirmed the use of toxic weapons in Syria by terroriststhat are supported by the west. 3. Concerning the accusations that the Assad-regime would run torture and extermination camps which the online-edition of bild.de picked up on September 29th, 2015: These accusations are based upon a single source of an anonymous, allegedly defected military policeman who is said to have smuggled 55,000 photos out of the country. At least one of these photoswas published on a twitter timeline in advance. This one standing close to the active terrorists in Syria. The corpses shown in the picture could as well be people that were kidnapped and tortured by terrorists. These are the counterstatements. Since they are consequently kept silent by established key media the question has to be considered whether all of this could be an information war by the west. Anintentionallying propaganda to get rid of an unpleasant statesman – unpleasant due to his insubmissiveness to the west? For it would not be the first time that an unpleasant statesman is constantly being vilified as dictator and accused of violating Human Rights. In our new documentary film “Instrumentalizing Warfare (Refugees:AWeapon of War?!) it is shown that Lybia’s former Head of State Muammar al-Gaddafi experienced the same. Gaddafi had to be eliminated – but it wasn’t because of violations of Human Rights as the western politicians and media constantly claimed – but so that the US-government and their masterminds could continue to carry out their global goals. The same is true for Bashar al-Assad. Only with the difference that the Russians upset the US-goals by supporting Assad. So Russia prevented all military advances against Syria through its veto in the UN-Security Council. To conclude: Do not take sides for one party before you have heard both sides – and before you have carefully examined accusations – such as the “barrel bomb accusation” in this case.

from dd.

Sources/Links: http://www.srf.ch/news/international/obama-assad-schlachtet-eigenes-volk-ab
http://alles-schallundrauch.blogspot.ch/2015/09/obama-lugt-vor-der-un-wie-ublich.html
http://www.voltairenet.org/article187660.html
http://www.voltairenet.org/article188923.html
http://www.rtdeutsch.com/33394/international/interview-verweigert-syrische-beobachtungsstelle-fuer-menschenrechte-will-sich-selbst-nicht-beobachten-lassen/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vs2BJDaVr84
http://www.neopresse.com/politik/naherosten/giftgas-syrien-wir-wurden-vorsaetzlich-belogen/
http://info.kopp-verlag.de/hintergruende/europa/gera-id-colm-in/tuerkische-polizei-beschlagnahmt-chemiewaffen-bei-al-nusra-terroristen-auf-dem-weg-nach-syrien.html
https://www.rt.com/op-edge/syrian-opposition-benefits-chemical-attack-791/
https://nocheinparteibuch.wordpress.com/2014/01/21/neue-nummer-der-propaganda-gegen-syrien/