Houla Massacre, Syria: What If?

I suspect this is all part of a Mossad operation starting with the assassination in Lebanon that drove the Syrians out of that country. The recent massacres could have been carried out by Christian Phalangist types that you have in Lebanon.
Israeli agents working in these areas could have encouraged these trigger men to do the killings.
Remember Sabra and Shatila.
 
JihadJane said:
'The United Nations and the Houla Massacre: The Information Battlefield'

Discusses UN General Assembly meeting, compares Syria situation with events leading up to foreign military aggression in Yugoslavia and compiles list of links challenging Western and Arab Assad-baby-killer narrative.
Click to expand...

Ronda Hauben, God bless her. A good source and a keen mind. That's worth a read, I can guarantee.

Cap't, thanks for the thoughts. Obviously too late to re-write it, but it's good to know different views we'll encounter. That's an example of one of the nicer ones, I hope, if I can preach, reach, and provoke outside the choir...
 
you could put together an appendix of the pictures and screencaps you're talking about and host it as a second document
 
MaGZ said:
I suspect this is all part of a Mossad operation starting with the assassination in Lebanon that drove the Syrians out of that country. The recent massacres could have been carried out by Christian Phalangist types that you have in Lebanon.
Israeli agents working in these areas could have encouraged these trigger men to do the killings.
Remember Sabra and Shatila.
Click to expand...

That's neat.

I suspect Libya more likely as the origin of any serious outside influence, but we all have our bias.

ETA: Iraq is another likely route.
 
Last edited:
Media Lens takes a look at the recent Houla massacre reporting in the UK press: 'Shades Of Grey'- Rethinking The Houla Massacre

Interesting:

[...] The Guardian’s lead reporter on Syria is Martin Chulov. In the aftermath of Houla, Chulov was asked on Twitter:

‘Memories of the inhuman inexcusable inaction of Bosnia surfacing?’

Chulov replied:

‘Took a v long time to muster support for a response in Bosnia and Kosovo. Syria will be even more difficult.’

We tweeted Chulov:

‘As a neutral reporter, are you actually supporting Kosovo-style Western intervention in Syria?’

Chulov replied: ‘nope’. [...]
Click to expand...


From the couple of articles i've read from him, his style and use of words make me believe that he is indeed a professional propagandist. btw, recently read about his "Guardian-boy" in a German paper, and in that article, the interview with the boy and the elder protecting him was done via Skype by dapd (German news agency). Exactly same content.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Media Lens takes a look at the recent Houla massacre reporting in the UK press: 'Shades Of Grey'- Rethinking The Houla Massacre

Interesting:




From the couple of articles i've read from him, his style and use of words make me believe that he is indeed a professional propagandist. btw, recently read about his "Guardian-boy" in a German paper, and in that article, the interview with the boy and the elder protecting him was done via Skype by dapd (German news agency). Exactly same content.
Click to expand...

Great article.

Why did you choose those quotes? There's much interestinger stuff in there...
 
Interesting article. It's actually relatively objective. Maybe that's the LA Times version of "Shades of Grey". Not "maybe we didn't have it exactly right", but at least "look, there are other views (but the russkies are evil as we all know)". End of the article:

LA Times said:
The Russian coverage of the conflict is even more objective at times than Western versions, said Maxim Shevchenko, an anchor on the Channel One show "Judge for Yourself," who tries to include experts with different viewpoints as guests.

"I have my own vision and my own position on the issue and it largely coincides with the government's position," he said in an interview. "I more than once met with President Assad, and he is not a tyrant, let alone a cannibal, and I can't believe he would give an order to destroy a village whose population, by the way, was not against him!"

"The recent carnage in Syria was first of all profitable to the opposition backed by a third force which wants to disrupt the peaceful process."
Click to expand...
 
Childlike Empress said:
Interesting article. It's actually relatively objective. Maybe that's the LA Times version of "Shades of Grey". Not "maybe we didn't have it exactly right", but at least "look, there are other views (but the russkies are evil as we all know)". End of the article:
Click to expand...

True, but I see little awareness in it that their own coverage echoes the view presented by Washington (rather than Damascus).
 
Obviously, the possibility of UN intervention had not yet penetrated Assad's dim consciousness when he ordered murderous attacks on what was originally peaceful protesters. That enlightenment came later. However, by then, other despicable packs of power-grubbing murderers had gotten the bright idea of dressing up like Syrian soldiers and slaughtering civilians to make it look like Assaddunnit, bringing on UN intervention.

Yeah. That's it. That's what happened. This needs to be tediously, microscopically investigated, for a long time.
 
Last edited:
JihadJane said:
True, but I see little awareness in it that their own coverage echoes the view presented by Washington (rather than Damascus).
Click to expand...


Indeed. This bit was particularly funny:

LA Times said:
[...] On Thursday, Riad Haddad, Syria's ambassador to Moscow, went before television, radio, online and print reporters.

"Armed groups aided by regional and international players want to make it look as if a civil war is underway in Syria," Haddad said at a news conference. "This is being done to create a pretext for foreign intervention."

Insurgents, regularly referred to by the Syrian government as "armed terrorist groups," are causing dangerous situations, Haddad said, but anything resembling a war is "just in the West's imagination."

The remarks, in the case of many Russian media outlets, were not accompanied by any response from diplomats or opposition activists. [...]
Click to expand...


As if the horror stories in western outlets based on the latest claims of SOHR "activists" or baseless accusations by Hillary or Susan would be accompanied by any response from the Syrian government... :rolleyes:
 
Why should I trust any sides claims about the situation in Syria? Seems to me like both the government and the rebels kill their opponents. Thugs against thugs with the population in between.
 
After the FAZ piece was picked up by several western print outlets (although not in the UK if Media Lens got it right), the author did a follow-up printed Wednesday and elaborates on why he's convinced his version (which is the same i've developed in this thread) and sources are correct. English translation here.

Rainer Hermann said:
The Houla massacre was a turning point in the Syrian drama. There was great worldwide outrage when 108 people were killed there on May 25, among them 49 children. Calls for a military intervention to end the bloodshed became louder and the violence in Syria has since steadily escalated. Based on Arab news channel and the visit of UN observers on the following day, world opinion almost unanimously blamed the regular Syrian army and the Syrian regime's Shabiha militia for the massacre.

In the past week and based on reports from eyewitnesses the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung put this version into question. It reported that the civilians killed were Alawites and Shiites. They were deliberately killed by armed Sunnis in Taldou, a town in the plains of Houla, while fierce fighting between the regular army and Free Syrian Army was taking place at checkpoints around the village. Our report was taken up by many media outlets worldwide and was rejected by many as implausible. We have therefore to ask four questions: Why did the world opinion so far followed a different version? Why does the context of the civil war makes the doubted version plausible? Why are the witnesses credible? What other facts support the report? [...]
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
'BBC world news editor: Houla massacre coverage based on opposition propaganda'

***As quietly as possible, BBC world news editor Jon Williams has admitted that the coverage of last month’s Houla massacre in Syria by the world’s media and his own employers was a compendium of lies.

Datelined 16:23, June 7, Williams chose a personal blog to make a series of fairly frank statements explaining that there was no evidence whatsoever to identify either the Syrian Army or Alawite militias as the perpetrators of the May 25 massacre of 100 people.

By implication, Williams also suggests strongly that such allegations are the product of the propaganda department of the Sunni insurgents seeking to overthrow Bashar al-Assad.
...

Only now does Williams state:

“Given the difficulties of reporting inside Syria, video filed by the opposition on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube may provide some insight into the story on the ground. But stories are never black and white—often shades of grey. Those opposed to President Assad have an agenda. One senior Western official went as far as to describe their YouTube communications strategy as ‘brilliant’. But he also likened it to so-called ‘psy-ops’, brainwashing techniques used by the US and other military to convince people of things that may not necessarily be true.”***
 
Meet the mythical Shabiha, the Daily Fail has pictures!!!

braindead propaganda rag said:
[...] Dr Mousab Azzawi, who runs the Syrian Network for Human Rights from London but had treated some of the Shabiha in Latakia, said recently: 'They were like monsters.

'They had huge muscles, and big bellies and beards. They took steroids to pump up their bodies. I had to talk to them like children as they like people with low intelligence.

'That is what makes them so terrifying — the combination of strength and blind allegiance to the regime.' [...]
Click to expand...


Uhm, ok. I buy it. :rolleyes:
 
You don't have much of a problem buying regime propaganda and the Russian Mafia-state press.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom