Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The current conflict in Syria is a foreign-power engineered putsche
1 view
Skip to first unread message
lo yeeOn
Aug 7, 2012, 4:28:57 PM8/7/12
to
RootsAction circulated a petition:
No to Humanitarian Imperialism in Iran & Syria
http://act.rootsaction.org/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=6306
to say no to humanitarian imperialism in Iran and Syria. So, I signed
the petition with the message:
Indian journalist PREM SHANKAR JHA wrote:
On July 15, an estimated 7,000 rebel fighters owing allegiance to
the Free Syrian Army invaded Damascus, the capital of Syria. In a
Sturm und Drang operation, captured on amateur video by an observer
whose harsh breathing reeks of fear, they raced towards the city in
brand new pick-up trucks over barely marked desert tracks from Iraq
and Jordan, waving Kalashnikovs in the air. Two days later, at 10.00
am, as a bomb planted in the defence headquarters killed four top
generals in the Syrian armed forces and severely injured several of
their advisers, they embarked on a reign of terror in Midan, killing
anyone who was wearing a uniform or appeared hostile to them.
Residents interviewed by the Syrian media after the army took Midan
back said the attackers were Arabs, not Syrians, for they spoke a
different kind of Arabic.
The current conflict in Syria is a foreign-power engineered putsche;
to help our mercenaries to finish a job too big for them is no R2P
humanitarian crisis.
No US/NATO war in Syria. Also no US attacks on Iran.
lo yeeOn
You can sign the petition too if you are opposed to more US
involvements in regime-changes using deception and violent means.
(I leave out Israel in my message not because I don't think Israel is
wrong if it thinks that its own existence depends on attacking other
countries but because I am only an American - not an Israeli - and
therefore in principle not in a position to tell Israel what to do.
In fact, I think Rootsaction is correct in its belief that Israel is a
part of the belligerent US policy against Iran. But I don't think it
should make me tell Israel what it should or should not do. And this
clarification is, I believe, helpful to be put in here.)
lo yeeOn
--------------------
India must think before it acts on Syria
PREM SHANKAR JHA
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/article3735156.ece
Delhi must vote with its BRICS partners the next time a resolution
comes up in the U.N. Security Council. That is the only way to help
the West pull back from a sectarian war
On July 15, an estimated 7,000 rebel fighters owing allegiance to the
Free Syrian Army invaded Damascus, the capital of Syria. In a Sturm
und Drang operation, captured on amateur video by an observer whose
harsh breathing reeks of fear, they raced towards the city in brand
new pick-up trucks over barely marked desert tracks from Iraq and
Jordan, waving Kalashnikovs in the air. Two days later, at 10.00 am,
as a bomb planted in the defence headquarters killed four top generals
in the Syrian armed forces and severely injured several of their
advisers, they embarked on a reign of terror in Midan, killing anyone
who was wearing a uniform or appeared hostile to them. Residents
interviewed by the Syrian media after the army took Midan back said
the attackers were Arabs, not Syrians, for they spoke a different kind
of Arabic.
SURPRISE
The Arab League and the western powers convened a meeting of the
United Nations Security Council within hours. But instead of demanding
that the insurgents abide by Kofi Annan's six-point plan, their draft
resolution condemned Syria for using weapons heavy in this helicopters
case against the marauders. Russia and China's veto did not surprise
anyone. But India's decision not to vote with its BRICS partners and
to toe the western line instead did.
Why did India do this? For it must surely have known even then that
Damascus was only a curtain raiser for the battle that is now being
joined in Aleppo. According to Syrian estimates, 12,000 FSA fighters
have infiltrated Aleppo. Half of them are foreigners from Libya,
Afghanistan, Chechnya Sudan and in short, al-Qaeda.
If there is a bloodbath in Aleppo, the West is bound to table yet
another resolution in the Security Council, this time seeking
permission to use "other means" if necessary to topple Bashar al-Assad
and "save civilian" lives. Will India again vote with the West?
Before it does so, it would do well to remember that its own nation
building project is still incomplete. So whatever conventions it
allows or helps the West establish on the Right to Protect or
Intervene may well come back to haunt it in the years that lie ahead.
New Delhi needs to bear this in mind because there are striking
parallels between what Damascus is facing today and what Delhi faced
in Kashmir in the 1990s. In 2011, Syria had been under the autocratic
rule of the Ba'ath party for 48 years. In 1990, Kashmir too had been
under autocratic rule for all but seven of the previous 40 years.
However, in both countries the autocracy was a stable one. Young
people in particular chafed under the Ba'ath party's rule in Syria
exactly as they chafed against "Delhi's rule" in Kashmir. But while
nearly everyone wanted a change, almost no one wanted it at the cost
of a violent disruption of their lives. In neither case, therefore,
was the state the first to resort to violence: On the contrary, both
insurgencies had to be stoked, so the first to pick up the gun were
the insurgents. In Syria this was done by Salafi/Takfiri Islamists who
crossed the border from Jordan in March 2011 and holed up in the Omari
mosque in Dera'a before launching targeted provocations, and attacks
on police stations and government offices.
A third parallel is the intervention of hostile foreign powers bent on
converting a domestic upsurge demanding political empowerment into a
movement for secession or regime change. In Kashmir, Pakistan did this
by disarming the JKLF cadres still in training in Muzaffarabad in 1990
and creating the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen. In Syria, Turkey and Qatar are
funnelling money and battle hardened jihadis to start a sectarian war
that will overwhelm the state.
Last and most important, like New Delhi, Damascus has been trying to
prevent civil war by offering the insurgents the alternative of the
ballot box. Mr. Assad began, on his own, by lifting all controls on
the Internet in January 2011. Over the next six months, he first tried
to negotiate peace with the Sunni zealots in Dera'a by sacking the
governor and releasing 260 prisoners and 16 clerics, and promising to
repeal the Emergency Laws and the ban on political parties that had
been in place for 48 years. He fulfilled his first promise five days
ahead of schedule on April 20 and his second three months later in
July.
Mr. Assad also set up a drafting committee to frame a new, democratic
constitution for Syria, but neither this nor his other reforms made
the least dent on the hardening resolve of the West and its Arab and
Turkish allies to force Mr. Assad and his regime out of power and
install the puppet Syrian National Council in its place.
Despite this, Mr. Assad persevered with his attempts to make an
orderly transition to democracy. As the task of framing a new
constitution neared completion, he announced that the draft would be
placed before the people in a referendum. Six weeks before the
referendum, he offered an amnesty to all rebels and invited them to
join in the voting. They could well have done so for the draft
constitution not only required an election within three months of its
passing but also contained a clause that would bar Mr. Assad himself
from contesting the presidential election after his current term ended
in 2014. But, egged on by the "Friends of Syria", of whom India was
regrettably one, they chose to boycott the elections and let the
violence continue.
SNEERING SCEPTICISM
The world learned virtually nothing about Mr. Assad's efforts because
the international media, which reported several of his pronouncements,
did so with sneering scepticism and no attempt at analysis. But on
February 26, 2012, 57 per cent of Syria's electorate crowned
Mr. Assad's efforts with success by turning out to endorse the new
constitution. The large turnout showed that the vast majority of
Syrians still wanted a peaceful transition to a secular democracy, and
did not mind Mr. Assad remaining in power to manage the
transition. For the Free Syrian Army, whose leaders knew (just as LTTE
leader Prabakaran did when forced to negotiate with New Delhi in 1987)
that the return of peace would erode most of the support they enjoyed
among the people, the only alternative that remained was to bring in
foreign fighters in the name of jihad.
The result has been a dramatic rise in casualties after February. At
the end of October 2011 - eight months after the uprising began - the
UN's tally was between 6,000 and 7,000 deaths. By February, the figure
had risen to 10,000-11,000. Today the minimum estimate is in excess of
20,000 dead. Christians and Shias have been the main victims in recent
months. 50,000 Christians have been driven out of Homs, leaving less
than a thousand behind. As a result, the number of doctors in the city
has fallen from 850 to less than 50, and functioning hospitals from 45
to 5.
ATTACK ON CHRISTIANS
The killing of Christians has now spread to Damascus. When the Syrian
army retook Midan, the FSA `rebels' dispersed but did not withdraw.
Instead they selectively attacked and killed the wealthy, educated
Christians of Damascus. The first targeted attack took place on July
23. Another occurred over the weekend of August 4-5. U.N. officials in
Damascus have reported a `terrible killing' in the Christian quarter
of Damascus. Another exodus is therefore in the offing: the Archbishop
of the Syrian church told a U.N. official `que dieu me sauve' - only
god can save us.
It is inconceivable that Mr. Assad initiated this escalation because
his successful referendum in February and Kofi Annan's six-point peace
plan, which held the rebels equally responsible for the civilian
deaths and did not endorse the western demand for Mr. Assad to step
down first, had given him everything he wanted. From that point on, he
had nothing to gain and everything to lose from violence. The western
powers have their reasons for studiously ignoring his lack of motive,
but Delhi needs to remember that they are not India's reasons.
When the next resolution condemning the Syrian government comes up in
the Security Council, there are two good reasons why India must vote
against it. The first is to stand by the principle of national
sovereignty that underpins the U.N. Charter and reassure its BRICS
partners that it is not a fair weather friend.
The second is to give the West an escape hatch to avoid compounding
its own mistakes. The recent horrifying rise in sectarian killings;
the growing terror of Syria's Christian population, the beheading of
an international staff member of the Red Cross in Yemen, and the
creeping spread of sectarian violence in Turkey, have triggered a
spate of reappraisals in the New York Times, The Guardian, The
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and other publications. These reveal a
nagging anxiety that the West's intervention is not preparing Syria
for democracy but dragging the entire region towards a no-holds-barred
Sunni-Shia jihad that will douse the candle of reason with blood for
generations to come.
India has a unique moral position in the world today: it is a working
democracy; it threatens no country and is almost completely free from
sectarian conflict. A vote by it against military intervention in
Syria will therefore carry disproportionate weight. It could give the
West a face-saving way of pulling back from a sectarian war in which
it will find itself aligned with the killers of Christians and the
destroyers of the World Trade Centre.
(The writer is a senior journalist.)
No to Humanitarian Imperialism in Iran & Syria
http://act.rootsaction.org/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=6306
to say no to humanitarian imperialism in Iran and Syria. So, I signed
the petition with the message:
Indian journalist PREM SHANKAR JHA wrote:
On July 15, an estimated 7,000 rebel fighters owing allegiance to
the Free Syrian Army invaded Damascus, the capital of Syria. In a
Sturm und Drang operation, captured on amateur video by an observer
whose harsh breathing reeks of fear, they raced towards the city in
brand new pick-up trucks over barely marked desert tracks from Iraq
and Jordan, waving Kalashnikovs in the air. Two days later, at 10.00
am, as a bomb planted in the defence headquarters killed four top
generals in the Syrian armed forces and severely injured several of
their advisers, they embarked on a reign of terror in Midan, killing
anyone who was wearing a uniform or appeared hostile to them.
Residents interviewed by the Syrian media after the army took Midan
back said the attackers were Arabs, not Syrians, for they spoke a
different kind of Arabic.
The current conflict in Syria is a foreign-power engineered putsche;
to help our mercenaries to finish a job too big for them is no R2P
humanitarian crisis.
No US/NATO war in Syria. Also no US attacks on Iran.
lo yeeOn
You can sign the petition too if you are opposed to more US
involvements in regime-changes using deception and violent means.
(I leave out Israel in my message not because I don't think Israel is
wrong if it thinks that its own existence depends on attacking other
countries but because I am only an American - not an Israeli - and
therefore in principle not in a position to tell Israel what to do.
In fact, I think Rootsaction is correct in its belief that Israel is a
part of the belligerent US policy against Iran. But I don't think it
should make me tell Israel what it should or should not do. And this
clarification is, I believe, helpful to be put in here.)
lo yeeOn
--------------------
India must think before it acts on Syria
PREM SHANKAR JHA
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/article3735156.ece
Delhi must vote with its BRICS partners the next time a resolution
comes up in the U.N. Security Council. That is the only way to help
the West pull back from a sectarian war
On July 15, an estimated 7,000 rebel fighters owing allegiance to the
Free Syrian Army invaded Damascus, the capital of Syria. In a Sturm
und Drang operation, captured on amateur video by an observer whose
harsh breathing reeks of fear, they raced towards the city in brand
new pick-up trucks over barely marked desert tracks from Iraq and
Jordan, waving Kalashnikovs in the air. Two days later, at 10.00 am,
as a bomb planted in the defence headquarters killed four top generals
in the Syrian armed forces and severely injured several of their
advisers, they embarked on a reign of terror in Midan, killing anyone
who was wearing a uniform or appeared hostile to them. Residents
interviewed by the Syrian media after the army took Midan back said
the attackers were Arabs, not Syrians, for they spoke a different kind
of Arabic.
SURPRISE
The Arab League and the western powers convened a meeting of the
United Nations Security Council within hours. But instead of demanding
that the insurgents abide by Kofi Annan's six-point plan, their draft
resolution condemned Syria for using weapons heavy in this helicopters
case against the marauders. Russia and China's veto did not surprise
anyone. But India's decision not to vote with its BRICS partners and
to toe the western line instead did.
Why did India do this? For it must surely have known even then that
Damascus was only a curtain raiser for the battle that is now being
joined in Aleppo. According to Syrian estimates, 12,000 FSA fighters
have infiltrated Aleppo. Half of them are foreigners from Libya,
Afghanistan, Chechnya Sudan and in short, al-Qaeda.
If there is a bloodbath in Aleppo, the West is bound to table yet
another resolution in the Security Council, this time seeking
permission to use "other means" if necessary to topple Bashar al-Assad
and "save civilian" lives. Will India again vote with the West?
Before it does so, it would do well to remember that its own nation
building project is still incomplete. So whatever conventions it
allows or helps the West establish on the Right to Protect or
Intervene may well come back to haunt it in the years that lie ahead.
New Delhi needs to bear this in mind because there are striking
parallels between what Damascus is facing today and what Delhi faced
in Kashmir in the 1990s. In 2011, Syria had been under the autocratic
rule of the Ba'ath party for 48 years. In 1990, Kashmir too had been
under autocratic rule for all but seven of the previous 40 years.
However, in both countries the autocracy was a stable one. Young
people in particular chafed under the Ba'ath party's rule in Syria
exactly as they chafed against "Delhi's rule" in Kashmir. But while
nearly everyone wanted a change, almost no one wanted it at the cost
of a violent disruption of their lives. In neither case, therefore,
was the state the first to resort to violence: On the contrary, both
insurgencies had to be stoked, so the first to pick up the gun were
the insurgents. In Syria this was done by Salafi/Takfiri Islamists who
crossed the border from Jordan in March 2011 and holed up in the Omari
mosque in Dera'a before launching targeted provocations, and attacks
on police stations and government offices.
A third parallel is the intervention of hostile foreign powers bent on
converting a domestic upsurge demanding political empowerment into a
movement for secession or regime change. In Kashmir, Pakistan did this
by disarming the JKLF cadres still in training in Muzaffarabad in 1990
and creating the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen. In Syria, Turkey and Qatar are
funnelling money and battle hardened jihadis to start a sectarian war
that will overwhelm the state.
Last and most important, like New Delhi, Damascus has been trying to
prevent civil war by offering the insurgents the alternative of the
ballot box. Mr. Assad began, on his own, by lifting all controls on
the Internet in January 2011. Over the next six months, he first tried
to negotiate peace with the Sunni zealots in Dera'a by sacking the
governor and releasing 260 prisoners and 16 clerics, and promising to
repeal the Emergency Laws and the ban on political parties that had
been in place for 48 years. He fulfilled his first promise five days
ahead of schedule on April 20 and his second three months later in
July.
Mr. Assad also set up a drafting committee to frame a new, democratic
constitution for Syria, but neither this nor his other reforms made
the least dent on the hardening resolve of the West and its Arab and
Turkish allies to force Mr. Assad and his regime out of power and
install the puppet Syrian National Council in its place.
Despite this, Mr. Assad persevered with his attempts to make an
orderly transition to democracy. As the task of framing a new
constitution neared completion, he announced that the draft would be
placed before the people in a referendum. Six weeks before the
referendum, he offered an amnesty to all rebels and invited them to
join in the voting. They could well have done so for the draft
constitution not only required an election within three months of its
passing but also contained a clause that would bar Mr. Assad himself
from contesting the presidential election after his current term ended
in 2014. But, egged on by the "Friends of Syria", of whom India was
regrettably one, they chose to boycott the elections and let the
violence continue.
SNEERING SCEPTICISM
The world learned virtually nothing about Mr. Assad's efforts because
the international media, which reported several of his pronouncements,
did so with sneering scepticism and no attempt at analysis. But on
February 26, 2012, 57 per cent of Syria's electorate crowned
Mr. Assad's efforts with success by turning out to endorse the new
constitution. The large turnout showed that the vast majority of
Syrians still wanted a peaceful transition to a secular democracy, and
did not mind Mr. Assad remaining in power to manage the
transition. For the Free Syrian Army, whose leaders knew (just as LTTE
leader Prabakaran did when forced to negotiate with New Delhi in 1987)
that the return of peace would erode most of the support they enjoyed
among the people, the only alternative that remained was to bring in
foreign fighters in the name of jihad.
The result has been a dramatic rise in casualties after February. At
the end of October 2011 - eight months after the uprising began - the
UN's tally was between 6,000 and 7,000 deaths. By February, the figure
had risen to 10,000-11,000. Today the minimum estimate is in excess of
20,000 dead. Christians and Shias have been the main victims in recent
months. 50,000 Christians have been driven out of Homs, leaving less
than a thousand behind. As a result, the number of doctors in the city
has fallen from 850 to less than 50, and functioning hospitals from 45
to 5.
ATTACK ON CHRISTIANS
The killing of Christians has now spread to Damascus. When the Syrian
army retook Midan, the FSA `rebels' dispersed but did not withdraw.
Instead they selectively attacked and killed the wealthy, educated
Christians of Damascus. The first targeted attack took place on July
23. Another occurred over the weekend of August 4-5. U.N. officials in
Damascus have reported a `terrible killing' in the Christian quarter
of Damascus. Another exodus is therefore in the offing: the Archbishop
of the Syrian church told a U.N. official `que dieu me sauve' - only
god can save us.
It is inconceivable that Mr. Assad initiated this escalation because
his successful referendum in February and Kofi Annan's six-point peace
plan, which held the rebels equally responsible for the civilian
deaths and did not endorse the western demand for Mr. Assad to step
down first, had given him everything he wanted. From that point on, he
had nothing to gain and everything to lose from violence. The western
powers have their reasons for studiously ignoring his lack of motive,
but Delhi needs to remember that they are not India's reasons.
When the next resolution condemning the Syrian government comes up in
the Security Council, there are two good reasons why India must vote
against it. The first is to stand by the principle of national
sovereignty that underpins the U.N. Charter and reassure its BRICS
partners that it is not a fair weather friend.
The second is to give the West an escape hatch to avoid compounding
its own mistakes. The recent horrifying rise in sectarian killings;
the growing terror of Syria's Christian population, the beheading of
an international staff member of the Red Cross in Yemen, and the
creeping spread of sectarian violence in Turkey, have triggered a
spate of reappraisals in the New York Times, The Guardian, The
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and other publications. These reveal a
nagging anxiety that the West's intervention is not preparing Syria
for democracy but dragging the entire region towards a no-holds-barred
Sunni-Shia jihad that will douse the candle of reason with blood for
generations to come.
India has a unique moral position in the world today: it is a working
democracy; it threatens no country and is almost completely free from
sectarian conflict. A vote by it against military intervention in
Syria will therefore carry disproportionate weight. It could give the
West a face-saving way of pulling back from a sectarian war in which
it will find itself aligned with the killers of Christians and the
destroyers of the World Trade Centre.
(The writer is a senior journalist.)
bmo...@nyx.net
Aug 7, 2012, 4:36:13 PM8/7/12
to
Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
regime have anything to do with this.
regime have anything to do with this.
rst9
Aug 7, 2012, 5:12:54 PM8/7/12
to
On Aug 7, 1:36 pm, "bmo...@nyx.net" <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
> Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
> regime have anything to do with this.
As you have said many times, two wrongs do not make it right.
> Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
> regime have anything to do with this.
bmo...@nyx.net
Aug 7, 2012, 6:05:40 PM8/7/12
to
just post non-sequiturs like you did above.
lo yeeOn
Aug 7, 2012, 11:02:48 PM8/7/12
to
In article <bc06b334-242f-433d...@j11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
anything. That in itself just shows how mean-spirited your
bmoore-style snip-n-snipe activity is. Second, you made an assertion
about the Assad regime which is not proven but rather a repetition of
Hillary Clinton's State Department speak. There is no objective
evidence that Assad's government has done anything more evil than any
government in the world. Hillary Clinton and her sycophants liked to
periodically chant the mantra that Assad killed his own people. But
Saudi Arabia, among others, at the nudging of Hillary Clinton and her
employees at the State Department have been financing, arming, and
coordinating at least ten or fifteen thousand mercenaries, many of
them drawn from the former Libyan thuggish rebels and sent them into
Syria to strike at the civilian population with terrorist activities.
In fact, many of the Syrian civil population has supported their
government's response to these armed foreign terrorists' activities.
So, given the situation Assad's government has been under, what it has
done would be equally done or with greater and more violent means by
the US government or the British government or the Russian government.
Even An American academic who has consulted for the US government on
Middle East issues on a continual basis has admitted at least that his
experience with Assad impressed him as being forthright. Such an
assessment can't be said about our Hillary "we'll see what we can do"
Clinton who has done nothing but used the prestige of the US military
power to coerce any sufficiently weak nations to help her accomplish
regime change to governments her neocon bosses do not like.
What Prof. Lesch came away with from his personal interviews with
Assad convinces me and perhaps a few others too (such as those at
Rootsaction) that whatever they are, they aren't evils that you and
your kind would like people to "admit" that they exist in Assad's
government - charges made without a shred of proof!
So, you can throw ad hominem at the messengers of peace; but you have
no stuff or substance to erase the message: that it is not good to
foment violence and in the case against Syria and Iran, it is no
exception.
lo yeeOn
---------------------------------------------------------------
(1) History professor David Lesch saw Syrian President Bashar Al-Asad
as forthright and many Syrians agreed with him.
During that first meeting, Professor Lesch made it clear he was hoping
Face To Face With The Lion Of Damascus: History Professor David Lesch
Meets with President Bashar Al-Asad for Book on Syrian Leader
By Russell Guerrero '83
http://www.trinity.edu/departments/alumni_relations/spotlight/lesch_book.htm
. . .
for a frank dialogue. "I basically said `Mr. President, you know I am
not an apologist for Syria. I'm going to tell it like it is.' And he
said `I know that because I have read some of your writings and you
are very critical of Syria, especially under my father.'"
Surprisingly, Professor Lesch found Mr. al-Asad willing to talk. "I
was pleased with his up-front answers most of the time. Everything
was open. Nothing was off limits." By the end of their first
meeting, Mr. al-Asad was ready to schedule their next interview.
The result of his unfettered access to Mr. al-Asad was the most
personal book Professor Lesch has ever written. "It was sometimes
difficult because, as an academic and as a teacher, you are trained to
be objective, and this is a book where I came out with my opinion,"
says Professor Lesch.
(2) Indian journalist PREM SHANKAR JHA saw through western powers'
propaganda and saw Syrian "rebel" fighters as foreign mercenaried
backed by NATO-GCC states stained with blood and deceit.
(3) S. Lendman tells what Washington is doing to Syria
If sombody is trying to put you in the position of choosing life or
death, what would you do if you're a living being? But Washington is
trying put the Syrian government and the constituents that depend on
it for protection out of existence. So what do you think the targeted
victim of Washington should behave if it is normal? [lo yeeOn]
Nothing Civil About Washington's War on Syria
by Stephen Lendman Tuesday Jul 17th, 2012 12:41 AM
Nothing Civil about Washington's War on Syria
by Stephen Lendman
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/07/17/18717650.php
Insurgents are Washington proxies. Key NATO partners, rogue Arab
League states, and Israel are very much involved.
The same dirty game repeats. Independent states are targeted for
regime change. All options are used. They include full-scale war, mass
killing, and turning nations into charnel houses on the pretext of
liberating them.
American-style freedom is slavery. Mainstream discourse doesn't
explain. It repeats long ago discredited notions about humanitarian
intervention and responsibility to protect (R2P). Protracted violence
and bloodshed hardly reflect it.
Washington-led Western generated violence ravages Syria. On Sunday,
The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) declared ongoing
conflict a civil war.
It's not civil when mostly imported proxies are used. Most Syrians
deplore violence and oppose internal and external groups committing
it.
According to ICRC, Syria is involved in a "non-international armed
conflict." Previous statements said violence occurred only in certain
hotspots. "Hostilities have spread to other areas of the country,"
said ICRC.
"International humanitarian law applies to all areas where hostilities
are taking place."
War rages in Syria. The laws of war apply. ICRC's statement changes
nothing.
In times of war, international law and international humanitarian law
apply. Gertrude Stein's most famous quote is relevant. "A rose is a
rose is a rose," she said. She meant "things are what they are."
A war crime is a war crime is a war crime. So are crimes against
humanity. The Nuremberg Charter calls a crime against peace:
(1) "Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of
aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements
or assurances;" and
(2) "Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the
accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned" above.
It defines war crimes as:
"Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not
limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labor or for
any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory,
murder or illtreatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas,
killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton
destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not
justified by military necessity."
Crimes against humanity are:
"Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman
acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on
political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or
such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with
any crime against peace or any war crime."
"Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime,
or a crime against humanity....is a crime under international law."
Since last year, all of the above apply in Syria.
The 1907 Hague Convention on the Opening of Hostilities includes
similar laws of war.
The US Army Field Manuel 27-10 covers "The Law of Land Warfare."
Section II explains Crimes Under International Law. Paragraph 498
states:
"Any person, whether a member of the armed forces or a civilian, who
commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is
responsible therefor and liable to punishment.
Such offenses in connection with war comprise:
Crimes against peace.
Crimes against humanity.
War crimes."
Paragraph 499 defines War Crimes, saying:
"The term 'war crime' is the technical expression for a violation of
the law of war by any person or persons, military or civilian. Every
violation of the law of war is a war crime."
Paragraph 500 covers Conspiracy, Incitement, Attempts, and Complicity,
saying:
"Conspiracy, direct incitement, and attempts to commit, as well as
complicity in the commission of crimes against peace, crimes against
humanity, and war crimes are punishable."
These provisions apply to all US military and civilian personnel. They
include top commanders, the Secretary of Defense, his subordinates,
and the President and Vice President of the United States.
Moreover, under the Constitution's Supremacy Clause (Article VI,
paragraph 2), all international laws and treaties are the "supreme Law
of the Land."
The UN Charter's Article 2 states:
"The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality
of all its members...."
"All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful
means in such a manner that international peace and security, and
justice, are not endangered."
"All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the
threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political
independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with
the Purposes of the United Nations."
Article 33 states:
"The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to
endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall,
first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation,
conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional
agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own
choice."
In other words, nations may not settle disputes by planning,
instigating, or becoming involved in war. All other means must be
used. Only the Security Council can authorize military action in cases
when one or more nations attack another.
America, key NATO partners, and complicit regional states violated the
laws of war by using proxy forces against Syria. Waging war this way
isn't "civil."
Belligerent states bear full responsibility. Under international law,
they're guilty of crimes of war and against humanity.
The Geneva Conventions and Protocol 1 Additional to the Geneva
Conventions also apply. Their provisions are explicit with regard to
crimes of war and against humanity.
Attacking civilians is strictly prohibited. Western-directed
insurgents target them.
They're victims. So is Syria's government. It threatens no
one. Nonetheless, it's been willfully and illegally attacked. Whether
by NATO or proxy forces makes no difference. Killing is killing is
killing whatever elements are involved.
They're entitled to sue belligerent states at the International Court
of Justice (ICJ). It's the UN's primary judicial organ. It's charged
with settling legal disputes between nations and providing advisory
opinions received from authorized international organizations,
agencies and the General Assembly.
According to Francis Boyle, countries like Iran and Syria can request
emergency hearings. At issue is preventing further economic sanctions,
blockades and/or war.
Washington obstructs peace. It refuses good faith negotiations. It
bears full responsibility for violence ravaging Syria. The ICJ has
legal authority to hold guilty states accountable.
Hoped for never again became perpetual war. It's official US
policy. Holding it responsible is long overdue.
So is prosecuting culpable officials at the International Criminal
Court (ICC). Established by the July 1, 2002 Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court, it has jurisdiction over individuals in
its 121 member states.
When they're unable or unwilling, it's charged with investigating and
trying them for genocide, crimes of war and against humanity. This
type lawlessness is too grave to ignore.
ICC prosecutors function largely as imperial tools. Victims, not
perpetrators are accused. US officials are flagrantly guilty. It's
vital to hold them accountable. Only then might never again be
possible.
Cut off the head of rogue lawlessness and maybe complicit partners
will back off. Sunshine is the best disinfectant. Top US officials
behind bars may be the best deterrent to war.
A Final Comment
Daily events advance the ball for war. On July 15, Mossad-connected
DEBKAfile (DF) headlined "Assad receives last warning to stop moving
his WMD(s): Top generals defect."
Alleged defections of generals, other officers, and entire army units
are spurious. So are reports about Syria moving nerve agents, mustard
gas and cyanide to northern and central locations for possible use.
At issue is hyping fear and advancing the ball for war. DF claims
Western "intelligence channels" gave Assad a "last warning." Leave
these alleged weapons in storage or they'll "be destroyed from the
air."
This type threat comes perilously close to declaring war. Pretexts are
easy to invent. It could come any time.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen
[at] sbcglobal.net.
His new book is titled "How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized
Banking, Government Collusion and Class War"
http://www.claritypress.com/Lendman.html
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to
cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive
Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US
Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are
archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
bmo...@nyx.net <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
>regime have anything to do with this.
First of all, what was in my post that would require my admission of
>Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
>regime have anything to do with this.
anything. That in itself just shows how mean-spirited your
bmoore-style snip-n-snipe activity is. Second, you made an assertion
about the Assad regime which is not proven but rather a repetition of
Hillary Clinton's State Department speak. There is no objective
evidence that Assad's government has done anything more evil than any
government in the world. Hillary Clinton and her sycophants liked to
periodically chant the mantra that Assad killed his own people. But
as the Indian journalist PREM SHANKAR JHA wrote:
On July 15, an estimated 7,000 rebel fighters owing allegiance to
the Free Syrian Army invaded Damascus, the capital of Syria.
And we have learned for nearly a year by now that Qatar, Turkey, and
On July 15, an estimated 7,000 rebel fighters owing allegiance to
the Free Syrian Army invaded Damascus, the capital of Syria.
Saudi Arabia, among others, at the nudging of Hillary Clinton and her
employees at the State Department have been financing, arming, and
coordinating at least ten or fifteen thousand mercenaries, many of
them drawn from the former Libyan thuggish rebels and sent them into
Syria to strike at the civilian population with terrorist activities.
In fact, many of the Syrian civil population has supported their
government's response to these armed foreign terrorists' activities.
So, given the situation Assad's government has been under, what it has
done would be equally done or with greater and more violent means by
the US government or the British government or the Russian government.
Even An American academic who has consulted for the US government on
Middle East issues on a continual basis has admitted at least that his
experience with Assad impressed him as being forthright. Such an
assessment can't be said about our Hillary "we'll see what we can do"
Clinton who has done nothing but used the prestige of the US military
power to coerce any sufficiently weak nations to help her accomplish
regime change to governments her neocon bosses do not like.
What Prof. Lesch came away with from his personal interviews with
Assad convinces me and perhaps a few others too (such as those at
Rootsaction) that whatever they are, they aren't evils that you and
your kind would like people to "admit" that they exist in Assad's
government - charges made without a shred of proof!
So, you can throw ad hominem at the messengers of peace; but you have
no stuff or substance to erase the message: that it is not good to
foment violence and in the case against Syria and Iran, it is no
exception.
lo yeeOn
---------------------------------------------------------------
(1) History professor David Lesch saw Syrian President Bashar Al-Asad
as forthright and many Syrians agreed with him.
During that first meeting, Professor Lesch made it clear he was hoping
Face To Face With The Lion Of Damascus: History Professor David Lesch
Meets with President Bashar Al-Asad for Book on Syrian Leader
By Russell Guerrero '83
http://www.trinity.edu/departments/alumni_relations/spotlight/lesch_book.htm
. . .
for a frank dialogue. "I basically said `Mr. President, you know I am
not an apologist for Syria. I'm going to tell it like it is.' And he
said `I know that because I have read some of your writings and you
are very critical of Syria, especially under my father.'"
Surprisingly, Professor Lesch found Mr. al-Asad willing to talk. "I
was pleased with his up-front answers most of the time. Everything
was open. Nothing was off limits." By the end of their first
meeting, Mr. al-Asad was ready to schedule their next interview.
The result of his unfettered access to Mr. al-Asad was the most
personal book Professor Lesch has ever written. "It was sometimes
difficult because, as an academic and as a teacher, you are trained to
be objective, and this is a book where I came out with my opinion,"
says Professor Lesch.
(2) Indian journalist PREM SHANKAR JHA saw through western powers'
propaganda and saw Syrian "rebel" fighters as foreign mercenaried
backed by NATO-GCC states stained with blood and deceit.
If sombody is trying to put you in the position of choosing life or
death, what would you do if you're a living being? But Washington is
trying put the Syrian government and the constituents that depend on
it for protection out of existence. So what do you think the targeted
victim of Washington should behave if it is normal? [lo yeeOn]
Nothing Civil About Washington's War on Syria
by Stephen Lendman Tuesday Jul 17th, 2012 12:41 AM
Nothing Civil about Washington's War on Syria
by Stephen Lendman
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/07/17/18717650.php
Insurgents are Washington proxies. Key NATO partners, rogue Arab
League states, and Israel are very much involved.
The same dirty game repeats. Independent states are targeted for
regime change. All options are used. They include full-scale war, mass
killing, and turning nations into charnel houses on the pretext of
liberating them.
American-style freedom is slavery. Mainstream discourse doesn't
explain. It repeats long ago discredited notions about humanitarian
intervention and responsibility to protect (R2P). Protracted violence
and bloodshed hardly reflect it.
Washington-led Western generated violence ravages Syria. On Sunday,
The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) declared ongoing
conflict a civil war.
It's not civil when mostly imported proxies are used. Most Syrians
deplore violence and oppose internal and external groups committing
it.
According to ICRC, Syria is involved in a "non-international armed
conflict." Previous statements said violence occurred only in certain
hotspots. "Hostilities have spread to other areas of the country,"
said ICRC.
"International humanitarian law applies to all areas where hostilities
are taking place."
War rages in Syria. The laws of war apply. ICRC's statement changes
nothing.
In times of war, international law and international humanitarian law
apply. Gertrude Stein's most famous quote is relevant. "A rose is a
rose is a rose," she said. She meant "things are what they are."
A war crime is a war crime is a war crime. So are crimes against
humanity. The Nuremberg Charter calls a crime against peace:
(1) "Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of
aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements
or assurances;" and
(2) "Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the
accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned" above.
It defines war crimes as:
"Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not
limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labor or for
any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory,
murder or illtreatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas,
killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton
destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not
justified by military necessity."
Crimes against humanity are:
"Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman
acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on
political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or
such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with
any crime against peace or any war crime."
"Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime,
or a crime against humanity....is a crime under international law."
Since last year, all of the above apply in Syria.
The 1907 Hague Convention on the Opening of Hostilities includes
similar laws of war.
The US Army Field Manuel 27-10 covers "The Law of Land Warfare."
Section II explains Crimes Under International Law. Paragraph 498
states:
"Any person, whether a member of the armed forces or a civilian, who
commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is
responsible therefor and liable to punishment.
Such offenses in connection with war comprise:
Crimes against peace.
Crimes against humanity.
War crimes."
Paragraph 499 defines War Crimes, saying:
"The term 'war crime' is the technical expression for a violation of
the law of war by any person or persons, military or civilian. Every
violation of the law of war is a war crime."
Paragraph 500 covers Conspiracy, Incitement, Attempts, and Complicity,
saying:
"Conspiracy, direct incitement, and attempts to commit, as well as
complicity in the commission of crimes against peace, crimes against
humanity, and war crimes are punishable."
These provisions apply to all US military and civilian personnel. They
include top commanders, the Secretary of Defense, his subordinates,
and the President and Vice President of the United States.
Moreover, under the Constitution's Supremacy Clause (Article VI,
paragraph 2), all international laws and treaties are the "supreme Law
of the Land."
The UN Charter's Article 2 states:
"The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality
of all its members...."
"All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful
means in such a manner that international peace and security, and
justice, are not endangered."
"All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the
threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political
independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with
the Purposes of the United Nations."
Article 33 states:
"The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to
endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall,
first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation,
conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional
agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own
choice."
In other words, nations may not settle disputes by planning,
instigating, or becoming involved in war. All other means must be
used. Only the Security Council can authorize military action in cases
when one or more nations attack another.
America, key NATO partners, and complicit regional states violated the
laws of war by using proxy forces against Syria. Waging war this way
isn't "civil."
Belligerent states bear full responsibility. Under international law,
they're guilty of crimes of war and against humanity.
The Geneva Conventions and Protocol 1 Additional to the Geneva
Conventions also apply. Their provisions are explicit with regard to
crimes of war and against humanity.
Attacking civilians is strictly prohibited. Western-directed
insurgents target them.
They're victims. So is Syria's government. It threatens no
one. Nonetheless, it's been willfully and illegally attacked. Whether
by NATO or proxy forces makes no difference. Killing is killing is
killing whatever elements are involved.
They're entitled to sue belligerent states at the International Court
of Justice (ICJ). It's the UN's primary judicial organ. It's charged
with settling legal disputes between nations and providing advisory
opinions received from authorized international organizations,
agencies and the General Assembly.
According to Francis Boyle, countries like Iran and Syria can request
emergency hearings. At issue is preventing further economic sanctions,
blockades and/or war.
Washington obstructs peace. It refuses good faith negotiations. It
bears full responsibility for violence ravaging Syria. The ICJ has
legal authority to hold guilty states accountable.
Hoped for never again became perpetual war. It's official US
policy. Holding it responsible is long overdue.
So is prosecuting culpable officials at the International Criminal
Court (ICC). Established by the July 1, 2002 Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court, it has jurisdiction over individuals in
its 121 member states.
When they're unable or unwilling, it's charged with investigating and
trying them for genocide, crimes of war and against humanity. This
type lawlessness is too grave to ignore.
ICC prosecutors function largely as imperial tools. Victims, not
perpetrators are accused. US officials are flagrantly guilty. It's
vital to hold them accountable. Only then might never again be
possible.
Cut off the head of rogue lawlessness and maybe complicit partners
will back off. Sunshine is the best disinfectant. Top US officials
behind bars may be the best deterrent to war.
A Final Comment
Daily events advance the ball for war. On July 15, Mossad-connected
DEBKAfile (DF) headlined "Assad receives last warning to stop moving
his WMD(s): Top generals defect."
Alleged defections of generals, other officers, and entire army units
are spurious. So are reports about Syria moving nerve agents, mustard
gas and cyanide to northern and central locations for possible use.
At issue is hyping fear and advancing the ball for war. DF claims
Western "intelligence channels" gave Assad a "last warning." Leave
these alleged weapons in storage or they'll "be destroyed from the
air."
This type threat comes perilously close to declaring war. Pretexts are
easy to invent. It could come any time.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen
[at] sbcglobal.net.
His new book is titled "How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized
Banking, Government Collusion and Class War"
http://www.claritypress.com/Lendman.html
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to
cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive
Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US
Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are
archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
rst9
Aug 8, 2012, 12:24:08 AM8/8/12
to
leader of a nation, and it's up to them to say. One thing is certain,
that America gets into regime change business for any government
America does not like, and Assad, like Gadkafi, is another one the
American government wants to get rid of.
bmo...@nyx.net
Aug 8, 2012, 12:59:24 AM8/8/12
to
On Aug 7, 8:02 pm, acous...@panix.com (lo yeeOn) wrote:
> In article <bc06b334-242f-433d-858c-a84dcfd40...@j11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
to what Assad and his father have done over the last few decades? Try
to be honest.
> That in itself just shows how mean-spirited your
> bmoore-style snip-n-snipe activity is.
Does rstx agree with you?
I guess the murders committed by the Assads have no relevance to the
problems in Syria. Is that what you're saying? Or will you just ignore
this question?
> Second, you made an assertion
> about the Assad regime which is not proven but rather a repetition of
> Hillary Clinton's State Department speak. There is no objective
> evidence that Assad's government has done anything more evil than any
> government in the world.
You deny the murders commmitted by the Assads? Do you deny the
Holocaust too?
> In article <bc06b334-242f-433d-858c-a84dcfd40...@j11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> bmo...@nyx.net <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
> >Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
> >regime have anything to do with this.
>
> First of all, what was in my post that would require my admission of
> anything.
So it's reasonable to discuss the situation in Syria without reference
> bmo...@nyx.net <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
> >Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
> >regime have anything to do with this.
>
> First of all, what was in my post that would require my admission of
> anything.
to what Assad and his father have done over the last few decades? Try
to be honest.
> That in itself just shows how mean-spirited your
> bmoore-style snip-n-snipe activity is.
I guess the murders committed by the Assads have no relevance to the
problems in Syria. Is that what you're saying? Or will you just ignore
this question?
> Second, you made an assertion
> about the Assad regime which is not proven but rather a repetition of
> Hillary Clinton's State Department speak. There is no objective
> evidence that Assad's government has done anything more evil than any
> government in the world.
Holocaust too?
bmo...@nyx.net
Aug 8, 2012, 1:07:25 AM8/8/12
to
On Aug 7, 9:24 pm, rst9 <rst9w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 7, 3:05 pm, "bmo...@nyx.net" <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 7, 2:12 pm, rst9 <rst9w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 7, 1:36 pm, "bmo...@nyx.net" <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>
> > > > Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
> > > > regime have anything to do with this.
>
> > > As you have said many times, two wrongs do not make it right.
>
> > You are another one who won't admit that Assad is a bad guy. You will
> > just post non-sequiturs like you did above.
>
> Whether he's a good guy or a bad guy is NOT for me to say.
Why not? You give your opinion on just about everything. Why is this
> On Aug 7, 3:05 pm, "bmo...@nyx.net" <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 7, 2:12 pm, rst9 <rst9w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 7, 1:36 pm, "bmo...@nyx.net" <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>
> > > > Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
> > > > regime have anything to do with this.
>
> > > As you have said many times, two wrongs do not make it right.
>
> > You are another one who won't admit that Assad is a bad guy. You will
> > just post non-sequiturs like you did above.
>
> Whether he's a good guy or a bad guy is NOT for me to say.
different?
> He's a
> leader of a nation, and it's up to them to say.
> One thing is certain,
> that America gets into regime change business for any government
> America does not like, and Assad, like Gadkafi, is another one the
> American government wants to get rid of.
They're obviously bad guys.
rst9
Aug 8, 2012, 1:14:22 AM8/8/12
to
On Aug 7, 9:59 pm, "bmo...@nyx.net" <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
> On Aug 7, 8:02 pm, acous...@panix.com (lo yeeOn) wrote:
>
> > In article <bc06b334-242f-433d-858c-a84dcfd40...@j11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > bmo...@nyx.net <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
> > >Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
> > >regime have anything to do with this.
>
> > First of all, what was in my post that would require my admission of
> > anything.
>
> So it's reasonable to discuss the situation in Syria without reference
> to what Assad and his father have done over the last few decades? Try
> to be honest.
>
> > That in itself just shows how mean-spirited your
> > bmoore-style snip-n-snipe activity is.
>
> Does rstx agree with you?
You know my style, bmoore. I like wild-turkey shoot. It's fun, and I
> On Aug 7, 8:02 pm, acous...@panix.com (lo yeeOn) wrote:
>
> > In article <bc06b334-242f-433d-858c-a84dcfd40...@j11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > bmo...@nyx.net <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
> > >Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
> > >regime have anything to do with this.
>
> > First of all, what was in my post that would require my admission of
> > anything.
>
> So it's reasonable to discuss the situation in Syria without reference
> to what Assad and his father have done over the last few decades? Try
> to be honest.
>
> > That in itself just shows how mean-spirited your
> > bmoore-style snip-n-snipe activity is.
>
> Does rstx agree with you?
get lots of exercise.
rst9
Aug 8, 2012, 1:21:25 AM8/8/12
to
On Aug 7, 10:07 pm, "bmo...@nyx.net" <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
> On Aug 7, 9:24 pm, rst9 <rst9w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 7, 3:05 pm, "bmo...@nyx.net" <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 7, 2:12 pm, rst9 <rst9w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Aug 7, 1:36 pm, "bmo...@nyx.net" <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
> > > > > regime have anything to do with this.
>
> > > > As you have said many times, two wrongs do not make it right.
>
> > > You are another one who won't admit that Assad is a bad guy. You will
> > > just post non-sequiturs like you did above.
>
> > Whether he's a good guy or a bad guy is NOT for me to say.
>
> Why not? You give your opinion on just about everything.
> Why is this different?
I don't give a shit about Syria or Assad.
> On Aug 7, 9:24 pm, rst9 <rst9w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 7, 3:05 pm, "bmo...@nyx.net" <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 7, 2:12 pm, rst9 <rst9w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Aug 7, 1:36 pm, "bmo...@nyx.net" <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
> > > > > regime have anything to do with this.
>
> > > > As you have said many times, two wrongs do not make it right.
>
> > > You are another one who won't admit that Assad is a bad guy. You will
> > > just post non-sequiturs like you did above.
>
> > Whether he's a good guy or a bad guy is NOT for me to say.
>
> Why not? You give your opinion on just about everything.
> Why is this different?
Same with Libya and Gadkafi.
bmo...@nyx.net
Aug 8, 2012, 1:26:20 AM8/8/12
to
On Aug 7, 10:14 pm, rst9 <rst9w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> You know my style, bmoore. I like wild-turkey shoot. It's fun, and I
> get lots of exercise.
Many of your posts give the impression that you're *drinking* Wild
> You know my style, bmoore. I like wild-turkey shoot. It's fun, and I
> get lots of exercise.
Turkey.
rst9
Aug 8, 2012, 11:18:37 AM8/8/12
to
stuff since the 1970s.
lo yeeOn
Aug 9, 2012, 12:50:05 AM8/9/12
to
In article <aaf3f1ac-6b0f-4320...@k21g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
if you had so much evidence against Assad and his father? This Assad
only came to power in 2000. What did he do? I have yet to see you
provide any evidence to support your claim.
And if you are talking about his father, what did he do and why did
nobody do anything about him during his thirty year rule?
Were the Secretaries of State in those three decades stupid or are the
New American Century's Secretaries of State more reckless and more
ready to do the bidding for the neocons who want America to lord over
the whole world?
And when it comes to stirring up a fight called Arab Spring by Hillary
Clinton's State Department in the year of 2011, how many people were
killed as a result of this externally instigated fight using foreign
mercenaries and keeping them employed with foreign paychecks and
foreign arms and communication equipment, as well as providing a lot
of political cover for their terrorist activities to make Assad the
fall guy? And why should the thousands, if not tens of thousands,
suffer just because we want Assad out of office?
And whatever happens to the idea of democracy that the people should
be free to choose their own government?
It is well known that Assad's government until at least this Spring
enjoyed the support from a majority of the Syrian people - a fact the
mainstream media in the West has suppressed. But what the US State
Department and its covert arms have been doing in Syria is to reject
the will of the majority of the Syrian people and furthermore to
deprive them of their right to live, to live in peace, and to have a
livelihood.
It is one thing that those who are opposed to the government in Syria
worked to overthrow the government but another for Hillary Clinton to
put pressure on Erdogan and to enlist a bunch of sheikhs and kings in
Arabia who are themselves dictators of their own peoples to hire a
bunch of gangsters, arm them, and then shake the Syrian society loose
with bloody terrorism, and then call that revolution.
Those who have studied the modern Chinese revolution know that a real
and successful revolution comes through years and perhaps decades of
hard work and preparation and not only not from foreign backing but
despite of its active opposition.
The articles I have extensively cited have shown the West's dirty
hands in Libya and now Syria.
And our motive is not in these little countries' people's interest but
only in the interest of the powers-that-be in Washington, which
desires to weaken and isolate nations that aren't our vassal states,
one by one. (They now think that it's the time to destroy Iran, which
would make some elements in the Israeli government very happy in the
short term, and for that reason, they want to destroy Syria and
perhaps Lebanon first. And they may then move against Russia and then
China. One by one, cut them done because they are standing in our
imperial hegemonic way.)
None of the bloodshed we initiated in the Middle East has ever meant
well for the people, just as Steve Lendman has said in his article
which I quoted.
I dare say that if there were another more powerful country than ours
that attempted similar mischief in our land as we have done in Libya
and Syria, we would see the FBI, the National Guard, and the Home Land
Security Special Forces all over our streets squashing not only those
who are linked to the violence but those who haven't. I dare say that
because Uncle Sam has already been spying on us without warrant and
Uncle Obama has already authorized the assassinations of American
citizens without indictment, much less after a trial.
The sleazy neocons and their sycophants like you figure that all we
have to do is to paint Assad as a bad guy. Then any blood that flows
as a result of our foreign policy and our covert activities will be
just more guilt to lay at Assad's doorstep. This is precisely why I
quoted different articles pinpointing the parties that are the trouble
makers.
I made a point and support it with ample evidentiary support. I have
never said you would not be allowed to discuss anything or anybody's
flaws. It's you who has accusation and zero substance. It's in fact
the nature of a discussion to have a point and a counterpoint back and
forth. But sleazy type like you just throws out ad homenim at the
messenger and brings in non sequiturs to confuse the discussion. So
far, sleazy bmoore has not provided any substance for his responses.
Shame on you, but that is to be expected because shameful things are
exactly what Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, and Victoria Nuland, et
al. have been doing. They are a bunch of people spewing forth deceit
from their mouths to perform their jobs.
Now, either you tell us what is wrong with the opinions expressed in
the articles I have attached to support my viewpoint or stop giving
the non sequitur:
>So it's reasonable to discuss the situation in Syria without
>reference to what Assad and his father have done over the last
>few decades? Try to be honest.
To make it simple for you: You should try to be honest and answer the
question of whether we had the right to declare war against Imperial
Japan when it attacked Pearl Harbour in 1941 (and if we did, why don't
Syria and Iran and other nations have the right to defend themselves
from us?). Or do you want to first discuss how our forefathers had
murdered nearly all the American Indians so as to live on the vast
land that used to belong to them, land which Imperial Japan then
wanted to share with us, but in accordance to their will?
If you are too clueless, then let me just give you a hint. What
Hillary Clinton is doing to Assad is exactly what Imperial Japan
wanted to do to America, except that the Japanese were a little more
forthright about their ambition. But as Steve Lendman tells us, what
Washington is doing to Syria is nothing civil and nothing good.
My original post asserted that Washington is doing a putsch on
Syria's current government. And the three articles attached below
provide ample support to that point of view. And so if you're doing
it, if you're trying to murder somebody, it hardly matters what he or
she did decades ago. You're still committing a murder! Case closed.
Finally, I would like to quote Ms. Aisling Byrne for the insightful
observation she made at least nine months ago in an interview with
Ekaterina Kudashkina:
. . .it's very important to understand that, and that's why the
media, the propaganda claims that this is simply a popular uprising
that we see in Syria - we have pro-democracy protesters that are
being brutally killed and tortured and etc. by Assad and his
security forces. It's not completely true, in fact it is far from
the truth. And there are mysterious stad forces, there are armed
gangs and there is a lot of foreign intervention really pushing
this case to keep this narrative as sort of the main narrative. And
it is very important to prosect it, to really understand what's
happening in Syria.
And it is worthwhile to know that S. Lendman concluded that both the
civilians and the Syrian government are victims of Washington's crime
against Syria:
"Attacking civilians is strictly prohibited. Western-directed
insurgents target them.
"They're victims. So is Syria's government. It threatens no one.
Nonetheless, it's been willfully and illegally attacked. Whether by
NATO or proxy forces makes no difference. Killing is killing is
killing whatever elements are involved."
Therefore, all people of conscience, Americans especially, ought to
oppose Washington's criminal activity in Syria. And that's the
ultimate message of my original post.
lo yeeOn
--------------------------------------------------------------------
For context, I am reposting my original rebuttal to bmoore. In that
post, I also included the opinions of three observers of this current
crisis in Syria. These opinions form an integral part of the view I
try to get across under the heading:
The current conflict in Syria is a foreign-power engineered putsch
In article <bc06b334-242f-433d...@j11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
bmoore-style snip-n-snipe activity is. Second, you made an assertion
and your kind would like (to force) people to "admit" exist in Assad's
government - charges you made without a shred of proof!
The current conflict in Syria is a foreign-power engineered putsch;
it for protection out of existence. So how do you think the targeted
bmo...@nyx.net <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>On Aug 7, 8:02�pm, acous...@panix.com (lo yeeOn) wrote:
>> In article
><bc06b334-242f-433d-858c-a84dcfd40...@j11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
>>
>> bmo...@nyx.net <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>> >Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
>> >regime have anything to do with this.
>>
>> First of all, what was in my post that would require my admission of
>> anything.
>
>So it's reasonable to discuss the situation in Syria without reference
>to what Assad and his father have done over the last few decades? Try
>to be honest.
Precisely the point, why didn't you do something for the last 40 years
>On Aug 7, 8:02�pm, acous...@panix.com (lo yeeOn) wrote:
>> In article
><bc06b334-242f-433d-858c-a84dcfd40...@j11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
>>
>> bmo...@nyx.net <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>> >Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
>> >regime have anything to do with this.
>>
>> First of all, what was in my post that would require my admission of
>> anything.
>
>So it's reasonable to discuss the situation in Syria without reference
>to what Assad and his father have done over the last few decades? Try
>to be honest.
if you had so much evidence against Assad and his father? This Assad
only came to power in 2000. What did he do? I have yet to see you
provide any evidence to support your claim.
And if you are talking about his father, what did he do and why did
nobody do anything about him during his thirty year rule?
Were the Secretaries of State in those three decades stupid or are the
New American Century's Secretaries of State more reckless and more
ready to do the bidding for the neocons who want America to lord over
the whole world?
And when it comes to stirring up a fight called Arab Spring by Hillary
Clinton's State Department in the year of 2011, how many people were
killed as a result of this externally instigated fight using foreign
mercenaries and keeping them employed with foreign paychecks and
foreign arms and communication equipment, as well as providing a lot
of political cover for their terrorist activities to make Assad the
fall guy? And why should the thousands, if not tens of thousands,
suffer just because we want Assad out of office?
And whatever happens to the idea of democracy that the people should
be free to choose their own government?
It is well known that Assad's government until at least this Spring
enjoyed the support from a majority of the Syrian people - a fact the
mainstream media in the West has suppressed. But what the US State
Department and its covert arms have been doing in Syria is to reject
the will of the majority of the Syrian people and furthermore to
deprive them of their right to live, to live in peace, and to have a
livelihood.
It is one thing that those who are opposed to the government in Syria
worked to overthrow the government but another for Hillary Clinton to
put pressure on Erdogan and to enlist a bunch of sheikhs and kings in
Arabia who are themselves dictators of their own peoples to hire a
bunch of gangsters, arm them, and then shake the Syrian society loose
with bloody terrorism, and then call that revolution.
Those who have studied the modern Chinese revolution know that a real
and successful revolution comes through years and perhaps decades of
hard work and preparation and not only not from foreign backing but
despite of its active opposition.
The articles I have extensively cited have shown the West's dirty
hands in Libya and now Syria.
And our motive is not in these little countries' people's interest but
only in the interest of the powers-that-be in Washington, which
desires to weaken and isolate nations that aren't our vassal states,
one by one. (They now think that it's the time to destroy Iran, which
would make some elements in the Israeli government very happy in the
short term, and for that reason, they want to destroy Syria and
perhaps Lebanon first. And they may then move against Russia and then
China. One by one, cut them done because they are standing in our
imperial hegemonic way.)
None of the bloodshed we initiated in the Middle East has ever meant
well for the people, just as Steve Lendman has said in his article
which I quoted.
I dare say that if there were another more powerful country than ours
that attempted similar mischief in our land as we have done in Libya
and Syria, we would see the FBI, the National Guard, and the Home Land
Security Special Forces all over our streets squashing not only those
who are linked to the violence but those who haven't. I dare say that
because Uncle Sam has already been spying on us without warrant and
Uncle Obama has already authorized the assassinations of American
citizens without indictment, much less after a trial.
The sleazy neocons and their sycophants like you figure that all we
have to do is to paint Assad as a bad guy. Then any blood that flows
as a result of our foreign policy and our covert activities will be
just more guilt to lay at Assad's doorstep. This is precisely why I
quoted different articles pinpointing the parties that are the trouble
makers.
I made a point and support it with ample evidentiary support. I have
never said you would not be allowed to discuss anything or anybody's
flaws. It's you who has accusation and zero substance. It's in fact
the nature of a discussion to have a point and a counterpoint back and
forth. But sleazy type like you just throws out ad homenim at the
messenger and brings in non sequiturs to confuse the discussion. So
far, sleazy bmoore has not provided any substance for his responses.
Shame on you, but that is to be expected because shameful things are
exactly what Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, and Victoria Nuland, et
al. have been doing. They are a bunch of people spewing forth deceit
from their mouths to perform their jobs.
Now, either you tell us what is wrong with the opinions expressed in
the articles I have attached to support my viewpoint or stop giving
the non sequitur:
>So it's reasonable to discuss the situation in Syria without
>reference to what Assad and his father have done over the last
>few decades? Try to be honest.
question of whether we had the right to declare war against Imperial
Japan when it attacked Pearl Harbour in 1941 (and if we did, why don't
Syria and Iran and other nations have the right to defend themselves
from us?). Or do you want to first discuss how our forefathers had
murdered nearly all the American Indians so as to live on the vast
land that used to belong to them, land which Imperial Japan then
wanted to share with us, but in accordance to their will?
If you are too clueless, then let me just give you a hint. What
Hillary Clinton is doing to Assad is exactly what Imperial Japan
wanted to do to America, except that the Japanese were a little more
forthright about their ambition. But as Steve Lendman tells us, what
Washington is doing to Syria is nothing civil and nothing good.
My original post asserted that Washington is doing a putsch on
Syria's current government. And the three articles attached below
provide ample support to that point of view. And so if you're doing
it, if you're trying to murder somebody, it hardly matters what he or
she did decades ago. You're still committing a murder! Case closed.
Finally, I would like to quote Ms. Aisling Byrne for the insightful
observation she made at least nine months ago in an interview with
Ekaterina Kudashkina:
. . .it's very important to understand that, and that's why the
media, the propaganda claims that this is simply a popular uprising
that we see in Syria - we have pro-democracy protesters that are
being brutally killed and tortured and etc. by Assad and his
security forces. It's not completely true, in fact it is far from
the truth. And there are mysterious stad forces, there are armed
gangs and there is a lot of foreign intervention really pushing
this case to keep this narrative as sort of the main narrative. And
it is very important to prosect it, to really understand what's
happening in Syria.
And it is worthwhile to know that S. Lendman concluded that both the
civilians and the Syrian government are victims of Washington's crime
against Syria:
"Attacking civilians is strictly prohibited. Western-directed
insurgents target them.
"They're victims. So is Syria's government. It threatens no one.
Nonetheless, it's been willfully and illegally attacked. Whether by
NATO or proxy forces makes no difference. Killing is killing is
killing whatever elements are involved."
oppose Washington's criminal activity in Syria. And that's the
ultimate message of my original post.
lo yeeOn
--------------------------------------------------------------------
For context, I am reposting my original rebuttal to bmoore. In that
post, I also included the opinions of three observers of this current
crisis in Syria. These opinions form an integral part of the view I
try to get across under the heading:
The current conflict in Syria is a foreign-power engineered putsch
bmo...@nyx.net <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
>regime have anything to do with this.
First of all, what was in my post that would require my admission of
anything? That in itself just shows how mean-spirited your
>Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
>regime have anything to do with this.
First of all, what was in my post that would require my admission of
bmoore-style snip-n-snipe activity is. Second, you made an assertion
about the Assad regime which is not proven but rather a repetition of
Hillary Clinton's State Department speak. There is no objective
evidence that Assad's government has done anything more evil than any
Hillary Clinton's State Department speak. There is no objective
evidence that Assad's government has done anything more evil than any
government in the world. Hillary Clinton and her sycophants liked to
periodically chant the mantra that Assad killed his own people. But
as the Indian journalist PREM SHANKAR JHA wrote:
On July 15, an estimated 7,000 rebel fighters owing allegiance to
the Free Syrian Army invaded Damascus, the capital of Syria.
And we have learned for nearly a year by now that Qatar, Turkey, and
Saudi Arabia, among others, at the nudging of Hillary Clinton and her
employees at the State Department have been financing, arming, and
coordinating at least ten or fifteen thousand mercenaries, many of
them drawn from the former Libyan thuggish rebels and sent them into
Syria to strike at the civilian population with terrorist activities.
In fact, many of the Syrian civil population have supported their
periodically chant the mantra that Assad killed his own people. But
as the Indian journalist PREM SHANKAR JHA wrote:
On July 15, an estimated 7,000 rebel fighters owing allegiance to
the Free Syrian Army invaded Damascus, the capital of Syria.
And we have learned for nearly a year by now that Qatar, Turkey, and
Saudi Arabia, among others, at the nudging of Hillary Clinton and her
employees at the State Department have been financing, arming, and
coordinating at least ten or fifteen thousand mercenaries, many of
them drawn from the former Libyan thuggish rebels and sent them into
Syria to strike at the civilian population with terrorist activities.
government's response to these armed foreign terrorists' activities.
So, given the situation Assad's government has been under, what it has
done would be equally done or with greater and more violent means by
the US government or the British government or the Russian government.
Even an American academic who has consulted for the US government on
So, given the situation Assad's government has been under, what it has
done would be equally done or with greater and more violent means by
the US government or the British government or the Russian government.
Middle East issues on a continual basis has admitted at least that his
experience with Assad impressed him as being forthright. Such an
assessment can't be made of our Hillary "we'll see what we can do"
experience with Assad impressed him as being forthright. Such an
Clinton who has done nothing but used the prestige of the US military
power to coerce any sufficiently weak nations to help her accomplish
regime change to governments her neocon bosses do not like.
What Prof. Lesch came away with from his personal interviews with
Assad convinces me and perhaps a few others too (such as those at
Rootsaction) that whatever they are, they aren't the "evils" that you
power to coerce any sufficiently weak nations to help her accomplish
regime change to governments her neocon bosses do not like.
What Prof. Lesch came away with from his personal interviews with
Assad convinces me and perhaps a few others too (such as those at
and your kind would like (to force) people to "admit" exist in Assad's
government - charges you made without a shred of proof!
lo yeeOn
Aug 9, 2012, 12:57:45 AM8/9/12
to
In article <bc06b334-242f-433d...@j11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
bmo...@nyx.net <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
bmo...@nyx.net <bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>Note that Lo Yawn will *never* admit that the evils of the Assad
>regime have anything to do with this.
>regime have anything to do with this.
First of all, what was in my post that would require my admission of
anything? That in itself just shows how mean-spirited your
bmoore-style snip-n-snipe activity is. Second, you made an assertion
about the Assad regime which is not proven but rather a repetition of
Hillary Clinton's State Department speak. There is no objective
evidence that Assad's government has done anything more evil than any
government in the world. Hillary Clinton and her sycophants liked to
periodically chant the mantra that Assad killed his own people. But
anything? That in itself just shows how mean-spirited your
bmoore-style snip-n-snipe activity is. Second, you made an assertion
about the Assad regime which is not proven but rather a repetition of
Hillary Clinton's State Department speak. There is no objective
evidence that Assad's government has done anything more evil than any
government in the world. Hillary Clinton and her sycophants liked to
periodically chant the mantra that Assad killed his own people. But
as the Indian journalist PREM SHANKAR JHA wrote:
On July 15, an estimated 7,000 rebel fighters owing allegiance to
the Free Syrian Army invaded Damascus, the capital of Syria.
On July 15, an estimated 7,000 rebel fighters owing allegiance to
the Free Syrian Army invaded Damascus, the capital of Syria.
RootsAction circulated a petition:
No to Humanitarian Imperialism in Iran & Syria
http://act.rootsaction.org/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=6306
to say no to humanitarian imperialism in Iran and Syria. So, I signed
the petition with the message:
Indian journalist PREM SHANKAR JHA wrote:
On July 15, an estimated 7,000 rebel fighters owing allegiance to
the Free Syrian Army invaded Damascus, the capital of Syria. In a
Sturm und Drang operation, captured on amateur video by an observer
whose harsh breathing reeks of fear, they raced towards the city in
brand new pick-up trucks over barely marked desert tracks from Iraq
and Jordan, waving Kalashnikovs in the air. Two days later, at 10.00
am, as a bomb planted in the defence headquarters killed four top
generals in the Syrian armed forces and severely injured several of
their advisers, they embarked on a reign of terror in Midan, killing
anyone who was wearing a uniform or appeared hostile to them.
Residents interviewed by the Syrian media after the army took Midan
back said the attackers were Arabs, not Syrians, for they spoke a
different kind of Arabic.
The current conflict in Syria is a foreign-power engineered putsch;
No to Humanitarian Imperialism in Iran & Syria
http://act.rootsaction.org/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=6306
to say no to humanitarian imperialism in Iran and Syria. So, I signed
the petition with the message:
Indian journalist PREM SHANKAR JHA wrote:
On July 15, an estimated 7,000 rebel fighters owing allegiance to
the Free Syrian Army invaded Damascus, the capital of Syria. In a
Sturm und Drang operation, captured on amateur video by an observer
whose harsh breathing reeks of fear, they raced towards the city in
brand new pick-up trucks over barely marked desert tracks from Iraq
and Jordan, waving Kalashnikovs in the air. Two days later, at 10.00
am, as a bomb planted in the defence headquarters killed four top
generals in the Syrian armed forces and severely injured several of
their advisers, they embarked on a reign of terror in Midan, killing
anyone who was wearing a uniform or appeared hostile to them.
Residents interviewed by the Syrian media after the army took Midan
back said the attackers were Arabs, not Syrians, for they spoke a
different kind of Arabic.
bmo...@nyx.net
Aug 9, 2012, 1:43:16 AM8/9/12
to
Did your bad English ever cause communication problems at Lockheed?
rst0
Aug 9, 2012, 2:42:10 PM8/9/12
to
What a life!!!!
There are a lot more important issues to pick on!!!!
bmo...@nyx.net
Aug 9, 2012, 4:28:30 PM8/9/12
to
Satish
Aug 9, 2012, 8:50:24 PM8/9/12
to
On Aug 9, 11:42 am, rst0 <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
inadequacies.
74-year old rst0 was born in China but has lived in USA since 1949. An
US citizen as he is, 74-year old rst0 is a schizophrenic traitor.
He uses "we" to mean USA when he is into US-bashing. But he uses "we"
to mean the Beijing regime when he mouths support for the CCP
dictatorship's imperialist agenda.
Here's rst0's sorry history of double dealing and outright treason:
rst0 was born in a village in China. He came to USA as a 11-year old
in 1949to be united with his biological father. He obtained a secret
clearance from US government to work on advanced weapons systems at
Lockheed. It is clear that rst0 had thought it wise not to reveal that
his heart was with the bandit regime in Beijing when he applied for a
secret clearance and worked for a defence contractor like Lockheed.
rst0 has retired and continues to live with his gf in USA. He lives
off pensions from Lockheed and from US social security. But he has
chosen to to supplement his US pensions with an allowance of 50 cents/
post on the newsgroup from the CCP dictatorship in China.
But, of course, rst0 is well knows which side of the toast is
buttered. For all his rantings about "evil USA" and "virtuous CCP-
dictatorship in China", he has stayed put in USA. That's the reason
that he doesn't go back to the land of his heart and birth. He
continues to live in USA even as he insists, like a Quisling, on being
a running dog of CCP imperialism working 24/7 on the internet to earn
his bone of 50 cents/page from the CCP regime.
****************
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party
The 50 Cent Party are Internet commentators (网络评论员, 網絡評論員, wǎnglù
pínglùn yuán) hired by the government of the People's Republic of
China (both local and central) or the Communist Party to post comments
favorable towards party policies in an attempt to shape and sway
public opinion on various Internet message boards. The commentators
are said to be paid for every post that either steers a discussion
away from anti-party or sensitive content on domestic websites,
bulletin board systems, and chatrooms, or that advances the Communist
party line.
*************************
74-year old rst0 will do himself a big favor if he enrolls himself in
some adult education school. Otherwise patriotically challenged rst0
will continue to make a spectacle of himself by revealing his
appalling ignorance in everything from history to English. And if rstx
can't get himself to do that, he should stop bilking USA and go back
to where his heart really resides, namely, the village of his birth in
China under CCP-dictatorship. That would be the honest thing to do. Of
course, it is another matter that his gf will refuse to follow rst0 to
CCP-land where any deviation of his newsgroup posts from the official
CCP-line will right away lead him to re-education through labor ( 勞動教
養 ).
Chinese-Americans are by and large a patriotic lot. But there are a
few bad apples who go proactive with their bid to serve the colonial
agenda of CCP-dictatorship. These bad apples had often worked with
defense contractors like Lockheed, Boeing etc. but when opportunity
came they betrayed USA by selling company and US secrets to the CCP-
dictatorship. When caught with their pants down, these bad apples
inevitably landed in jail.
rst0, USA respects your freedom of speech. Unlike the CCP-dictatorship
in China, the US government is not going to monitor your posts on the
newsgroup and go after you for your rantings on the internet. You can
bark with impunity without any fear of reprisal by the US government.
But you will make a grave mistake if you ever try to bite the hand
that feeds you by selling Lockheed and US secrets to the CCP-
dictatorship. You will be eventually caught and spend the rest of your
golden years inside jail cells.
Try to be like the normal Chinese-Americans. Ambassador Gary Locke is
a good role model. He has won nothing but admiration from the
ordinary Chinese under CCP-dictatorship.He is far more respected by
the ordinary folks in China than the stinking fat cats in the party
politburo.
As a retired 74-year old, you have ample time in your hand. Your idle
brain has become the devil's workshop. You are 24/7 on the internet
pushing the evil agenda of the CCP-dictatorship in China. But if you
have any brain, you will bark but not bite to avoid ending up in jail
like a few Chinese Americans have for selling US to the CCP-
dictatorship in China for pecuniary gains.
China-born aerospace engineer Dogfang Greg Chung is the same age as 74-
year old rstx. rstx would be wise to steer himself away from the path
of treason that has earned the 74-year old Dongfan Gref Chung a 15
year prison sentence. Here's Dogfang Greg Chung's shameful story:
********************
http://articles.latimes.com/print/2010/feb/09/local/la-me-chinese-spy9-2010feb09
9-2-2010
Chinese-born engineer gets 15 years in spying for China
Dongfan 'Greg' Chung, who worked with Boeing and Rockwell
International, was accused of providing information on the space
shuttle and Delta IV rocket.
By Patrick J. McDonnell
A Chinese-born aerospace engineer who had access to sensitive material
while working with a pair of major defense contractors in Southern
California was sentenced Monday to more than 15 years in prison for
acquiring secret space shuttle data and other information for China.
U.S. District Judge Cormac J. Carney in Santa Ana imposed a 188-month
prison term on Dongfan "Greg" Chung, 73, a naturalized U.S. citizen
who lives in Orange.
Carney declared that he could not "put a price tag" on national
security and sought to send a signal to China to "stop sending your
spies here," according to the U.S. attorney's office.
Chung, who worked at Boeing's Huntington Beach plant, denied being a
spy and said he was gathering documents for a book, not for espionage.
His attorneys argued that much of the material was already available
on the public record.
At his sentencing, Chung professed his love for the United States,
even as prosecutors depicted him as a spy who would compromise U.S.
national security.
"Giving China advanced rocket technology is not in the United States'
national interest," said Assistant U.S. Atty. Greg Staples. "There is
a voracious appetite for U.S. technology in China."
Whether loyalty to his homeland or financial gain was Chung's motive
remained unclear. The case is one of a number of prosecutions that
have shed light on alleged Chinese efforts to gain access to U.S.
technology and research through espionage.
Chung was the first suspect tried with attempting to help a foreign
nation under the terms of the 1996 Economic Espionage Act, passed to
help prevent pilfering of sensitive economic information. Chung chose
to have the case heard by the judge rather than a jury.
Chung was convicted last year on charges of economic espionage and
acting as an agent for more than three decades while employed by
Rockwell International and Boeing Co.
When Chung was convicted, Carney said the case revealed Chung's
"secret life" as a "spy" for China. The case against him arose from an
investigation into another engineer, Chi Mak, who worked in the United
States and obtained sensitive military information for China. Mak and
several relatives were convicted of providing defense information to
China, the U.S. attorney's office said. Carney sentenced Mak to more
than 24 years in prison in 2008.
Federal authorities said Chung stole restricted technology and trade
secrets, including data related to the space shuttle and the Delta IV
rocket.
"This case demonstrates our resolve to protect the secrets that help
protect the United States, as well as the important technology
advancements developed by scientists working for companies that
provide crucial support to our national security programs," acting
U.S. Atty. George S. Cardona said Monday in a statement.
Chung held a "secret" security clearance when he worked at Rockwell
and Boeing on the space shuttle program, authorities said. He retired
in 2002 but the next year returned to Boeing as a contractor, a
position he held until September 2006, the U.S. attorney's office
said.
Between 1985 and 2003, Chung made trips to China to deliver lectures
on technology involving the space shuttle and other programs, the
government said. During those trips, Chung met with Chinese government
officials, including military agents, U.S. authorities said.
http://articles.latimes.com/print/2010/feb/09/local/la-me-chinese-spy9-2010feb09
*****************
rst9
Aug 9, 2012, 9:08:41 PM8/9/12
to
Satish is an immoral and unethical asshole liar.
0 new messages