أحمد جبريل.. الرجل الذي بقي وفياً للبندقيّة

Visual search query image
كاتب وباحث من الأردن

09/07/2021

حسام عبد الكريم

المصدر: الميادين نت

لم تكبّله الأيديولوجيا، ولم يكن يميِّز بين إسلامي ويساري ووطني وقومي عربي، ما دامت فلسطين هي الهدف، والبندقية هي السبيل. بالنسبة إلى أحمد جبريل، فلسطين تجمعنا، والثورة أمنا وأبونا، وكفى!

Visual search query image
أحمد جبريل.. الرجل الذي بقي وفياً للبندقيّة

الرفيق المناضل والأخ المجاهد أحمد جبريل في ذمة الله. هو من الجيل الأول المؤسّس للثورة الفلسطينية في ستينيات القرن الماضي؛ جيل البندقية والجبال والأغوار والكهوف والأنهار، جيل الـ”أر بي جي” والكلاشنكوف؛ الجيل الذي نهض من غبار نكبة فلسطين ليرفع راية الثورة والمقاومة في أحلك الظروف وأصعبها.

لم يلِن يوماً ولم يهن. بقيت بوصلته نحو القدس، وظلّ طريقهُ الكفاح المسلّح. لم يتلوّن ولم يتلوّث، وبقي ثابتاً على مواقفه، وقابضاً على البندقية. ابتعد عن السياسة ودهاليزها. لم تكن فلسطين بالنسبة إليه طاولة مفاوضات أو جولة مباحثات أو “أوسلو” ومناطق ولم تكن أيضاً حدود 67، بل هي كلّ فلسطين، من البحر إلى النهر، ولم يعرف غيرها. (A,B,C)

في العام 1985، نجح أحمد جبريل في عقد أول وأهم صفقة تبادل أسرى مع العدو الإسرائيلي، استطاع من خلالها تأمين إطلاق سراح 1150 مجاهداً ومناضلاً فلسطينياً من سجون العدو، من بينهم الشيخ أحمد ياسين والفدائي الياباني، بطل عملية اللد، كوزو أوكاموتو، وغيرهما من الفدائيين ذوي الأحكام العالية، في مقابل الإفراج عن مجموعة من جنود العدو.

في العام 1987، كان له دور في التمهيد لانطلاقة الانتفاضة الفلسطينية الأولى، بعد أن كان وراء العملية الفدائية الكبيرة والفريدة من نوعها التي نفّذت بواسطة الطائرات الشراعية عبر الحدود اللبنانية، وهي عملية الشهيد خالد أكر، التي كان لها صدى واسع جداً في أوساط الشعب الفلسطيني في الداخل المحتل على وجه الخصوص، إذ رفعت المعنويات والهمم، وأثارت موجة من الحماس، وأعادت الثقة بالمقاومة والثورة.

فعلاً، لم يمضِ سوى أسبوعين بعدها حتى اندلعت الانتفاضة الفلسطينية الكبرى. وقد ساهمت إذاعته “القدس – الإذاعة العربية الفلسطينية على طريق تحرير الأرض والإنسان”، التي كان إرسالها ينطلق من دمشق في الحشد باتجاه الانتفاضة الشعبية، عن طريق بثّ بياناتها ونداءاتها. وكان الناس يضبطون أجهزة الراديو على تردّداتها، في زمن لم يكن فيه إنترنت وفضائيات.

في العام 2002، قدَّم ابنه البكر شهيداً في درب الثورة. كان جهاد أحمد جبريل يتولّى مسؤولية التنظيم العسكري وتهريب الأسلحة إلى الأرض المحتلة حين تعرض لعملية اغتيال غادرة على يد الموساد أودت بحياته، ولكنها زادت أباه عزماً وإصراراً على المضي في طريق الثورة.

لم تكبّله الأيديولوجيا، ولم يكن يميِّز بين إسلامي ويساري ووطني وقومي عربي، ما دامت فلسطين هي الهدف، والبندقية هي السبيل. بالنسبة إلى أحمد جبريل، فلسطين تجمعنا، والثورة أمنا وأبونا، وكفى!

عاش عفيفاً نظيفَ اليد. لم يتاجر بالقضية، ولم يبنِ قصوراً، ولم يكنز مالاً. بقي في مخيم اليرموك في دمشق إلى أن مات شريفاً.

رحم الله أبا جهاد.

فيديوات متعلقة

أبو جهاد… الذي لم يرتَح أبداً

معن بشور

الخميس 8 تموز 202

مقابلة معن بشور بانوراما اليوم – 09-07-2021

في الحديث عن قائد كبير كالراحل أحمد جبريل (والد الشهيد جهاد جبريل)، تقفز إلى الذاكرة محطّات في رحلة المجاهد المميّز الذي حُفر اسمه في ذهني، مذْ سمعْت به لأوّل مرّة في أواسط ستينيات القرن الماضي من زملاء لي في الجامعة الأميركية، كانوا يشكّلون تنظيماً فلسطينياً واسع الانتشار اسمه «جبهة التحرير الفلسطينية»، وسمعت يومها أن من بين قادته الأبرز ضابطاً في سلاح الهندسة يدعى أحمد جبريل، وهو خبير في التخطيط لعمليات نوعية كانت تهزّ كيان العدو.

(أ ف ب )


مع الأيام، بدأ اسم أحمد جبريل يلمع في سماء المقاومة الفلسطينية، وبدأنا نسمع عن عمليات فدائية نوعية استخدم فيها هذا القائد علومه العسكرية ليرتقي بها على كلّ المستويات، ولعلّ الآلاف من الأسرى المحررين يذكرون دوره مع رفاقه في «الجبهة الشعبية – القيادة العامة» في عمليتَي تبادل للإفراج عنهم كان الشيخ المجاهد الشهيد أحمد ياسين في واحدة منهما. وكان يرافق هذا الإسهامَ النوعي في الكفاح المسلح الفلسطيني، حرصٌ مبدئي حادّ لدى هذا القائد على التمسّك بلاءات عبد الناصر: «لا صلح، لا تفاوض، لا اعتراف» مع الكيان الصهيوني، وهو موقف لم يساوم أبو جهاد يوماً عليه أو يهادن في شأنه.

لكن ما شدّني إلى الرجل الكبير، بشكل خاص، في ما بعد، أيّامٌ أمضيناها في مبنى في شارع فرن الحطب في المصيطبة في بيروت، حيث كان يقطن رفيقنا الأستاذ بشارة مرهج، وحيث كان يقع مقابله المركز الرئيس لـ»تجمّع اللجان والروابط الشعبية» آنذاك. يومها، جاء أبو جهاد إلى منزل رفيقه الصديق الراحل فضل شرورو في البناية ذاتها، وحاول أن يبقي وجوده سرّياً كي لا يعرّض المبنى وساكنيه لخطر القصف الإسرائيلي، الذي لم يكن يوفّر أيّ مبنى أو مكتب يتواجد فيه قائد فلسطيني كبير إلا ويقصفه من دون رحمة، وهذا ما حصل مع بناية عكر في الصنائع، حيث قصفها طيران العدو بقنبلة فراغية أدّت إلى هدم المبنى بكامله واستشهاد العشرات من ساكنيه بعد أن خرج الرئيس الشهيد ياسر عرفات منه قبل القصف بلحظات.

كان الراحل الكبير، رحمه الله، قد ترك مشفاه في يوغسلافيا حيث عولج من مرض في القلب، على ما أذكر، وحضر إلى بيروت ليشارك في ملحمة الدفاع عنها في وجه الغزو الإسرائيلي والحصار الطويل في مثل هذه الأيام عام 1982. وفي الأوقات القليلة التي كنّا نلتقي بها فيها هذا الرجل، كنّا نلمس فيه صلابة استثنائية وعزيمة لم يستطع المرض أن يؤثر فيهما، ورؤية واضحة لحركة المعركة، ومواكبة دقيقة لكلّ تفصيل من تفاصيلها، وثقة بقدرة المقاومتَين الفلسطينية واللبنانية، ومعهما الجيش العربي السوري والمتطوعون العرب، على الصمود رغم التفاوت الكبير في موازين القوى. سألته يومها كيف تترك المستشفى في يوغسلافيا وتأتي إلى بيروت المحاصَرة وأنت في هذه الحالة الصحية الدقيقة؟ كان جوابه واضحاً: أُفضّل ألف مرّة أن أستشهد مع رفاقي في معركة الدفاع عن الثورة الفلسطينية على أن أموت على سريري في مستشفى بعيداً عن أرض المعركة. الصلابة عينها، والعزيمة نفسها، رأيناهما حين زرناه في دمشق نعزّيه بنجله الشهيد جهاد الذي استهدفه الموساد الصهيوني في بيروت، بسبب دوره في تزويد الانتفاضة الثانية (انتفاضة الأقصى) بالسلاح. كان في عين القائد الكبير دمعة، لكن إلى جانبها تصميم على مواصلة الكفاح حتى النفس الأخير.

قد يختلف البعض الفلسطيني مع أبي جهاد في هذا الموقف أو الاجتهاد أو ذاك، لكنّ الكلّ الفلسطيني لا يختلف على نقائه وشجاعته ومبدئيّته وصدقه واستعداده الكبير للتضحية دفاعاً عن فلسطين ولبنان وسوريا، كما ظهر خلال الحرب الكونية عليها ولا سيّما في مخيم اليرموك.

رحمه الله، وألهم عائلته ورفاقه وشعبه جميل الصبر والسلوان.من ملف : 

أحمد جبريل: فلسطين النفس الأخير

Syria Sitrep: Joint Statement by the Representatives of Iran, Russia and Turkey

Syria Sitrep:  Joint Statement by the Representatives of Iran, Russia and Turkey

JULY 08, 2021

Joint Statement by the Representatives of Iran, Russia and Turkey on the 16th International Meeting on Syria in the Astana Format, Nur-Sultan, 7-8 July 2021
https://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/4809709

The representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Russian Federation and the Republic of Turkey as guarantors of the Astana format:

Reaffirmed their strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic as well as to the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and highlighted that these principles should be universally respected and complied with;

Expressed their determination to continue working together to combat terrorism in all forms and manifestations and stand against separatist agendas aimed at undermining the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Syria as well as threatening the national security of neighboring countries. Condemned the increasing terrorist activities in various parts of Syria which result in loss of innocent lives including the attacks targeting civilian facilities. Agreed to continue their cooperation in order to ultimately eliminate DAESH/ISIL, Al-Nusra Front and all other individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with Al-Qaeda or DAESH/ISIL, and other terrorist groups, as designated by the UN Security Council, while ensuring the protection of civilians and civilian infrastructure in accordance with international humanitarian law. Expressed serious concern with the increased presence and terrorist activity of “Hayat Tahrir al‑Sham” and other affiliated terrorist groups as designated by the UN Security Council that pose threat to civilians inside and outside the Idlib de-escalation area;

Reviewed in detail the situation in the Idlib de-escalation area and highlighted the necessity to maintain calm on the ground by fully implementing all agreements on Idlib;

Discussed the situation in the northeast of Syria and agreed that long-term security and stability in this region can only be achieved on the basis of preservation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country. Rejected all attempts to create new realities on the ground, including illegitimate self-rule initiatives under the pretext of combating terrorism. Reaffirmed their determination to stand against separatist agendas in the east of the Euphrates aimed at undermining the unity of Syria as well as threatening the national security of neighboring countries. Expressed concern, in this regard, with the increasing hostilities against civilians. Reiterated their opposition to the illegal seizure and transfer of oil revenues that should belong to the Syrian Arab Republic;

Condemned continuing Israeli military attacks in Syria which violate the international law, international humanitarian law, the sovereignty of Syria and neighboring countries, endanger the stability and security in the region and called for cessation of them;

Expressed their conviction that there could be no military solution to the Syrian conflict and reaffirmed their commitment to advance viable and lasting Syrian-led and Syrian-owned, UN-facilitated political process in line with the UN Security Council Resolution 2254;

Emphasized the important role of the Constitutional Committee in Geneva, created as a result of the decisive contribution of the Astana guarantors and in furtherance of the decisions of the Syrian National Dialogue Congress in Sochi;

Expressed the need for the early holding of the 6th round of the Drafting Commission of the Syrian Constitutional Committee in Geneva. In this regard, reaffirmed their determination to support the Committee’s work through continuous interaction with the Syrian parties to the Constitutional Committee and the UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for Syria Geir O. Pedersen, as facilitator, in order to ensure its sustainable and effective functioning;

Expressed the conviction that the Committee in its work should respect the Terms of Reference and Core Rules of Procedure to enable the Committee to implement its mandate of preparing and drafting for popular approval a constitutional reform as well as achieving progress in its work and be governed by a sense of compromise and constructive engagement without foreign interference and externally imposed timelines aimed at reaching general agreement of its members;

Reiterated grave concern at the humanitarian situation in Syria and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which presents a profound challenge to all Syria’s health system, socio-economic and humanitarian situations. Rejected all unilateral sanctions, which are in contravention of international law, international humanitarian law and the UN Charter, particularly in the face of the pandemic.

Emphasized the need to increase humanitarian assistance to all Syrians throughout the country without discrimination, politicization and preconditions. In order to support the improvement of the humanitarian situation in Syria and the progress in the process of the political settlement, called upon the international community, the United Nations and its humanitarian agencies, to enhance the assistance to Syria, inter alia by developing early recovery projects, including the restoration of basic infrastructure assets – water and power supply facilities, schools and hospitals as well as the humanitarian mine action in accordance with the international humanitarian law;

Highlighted the need to facilitate safe and voluntary return of refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) to their original places of residence in Syria, ensuring their right to return and right to be supported. In this regard, called upon the international community to provide the necessary assistance to Syrian refugees and IDPs and reaffirmed their readiness to continue interaction with all relevant parties, including the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and other specialized international agencies;

Welcomed the successful operation on mutual release of detainees on 2 July within the framework of the Working Group on the Release of Detainees / Abductees, Handover of Bodies and Identification of Missing Persons. The operation confirmed the willingness of Syrian parties to strengthen the mutual trust with the assistance of the Astana guarantors. It also reaffirmed the determination of the Astana guarantors to increase and expand their cooperation within the Working Group.

Took note with appreciation the participation of delegations of Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon as observers of the Astana format as well as representatives of the United Nations and the ICRC;

Expressed their sincere gratitude to the Kazakh authorities for hosting in Nur-Sultan the 16th International Meeting on Syria in the Astana format;

Decided to convene the 17th International Meeting on Syria in the Astana format in Nur-Sultan before the end of 2021 taking into consideration the pandemic situation. Also recalled the Joint Statement of 1 July 2020 to hold the next Tripartite Summit in the Islamic Republic of Iran as soon as conditions permit.

المقاومة في سورية والعراق إلى التصعيد

July 08 2021

ناصر قنديل

كما في كل مرة يقع الأميركيون وجماعاتهم في المنطقة بوهم نابع من طريقة تفكيرهم، فيظنون أن مجرد الدخول في التفاوض مع إيران سيعني تجميد ساحات الصراع التي تقاتل فيها قوى المقاومة بوجه الاحتلال، فيتوهّمون أن إيران ستضغط في فلسطين كي لا تقوم مقاومة شعبية أو عسكرية بوجه الاحتلال، لأن الحكومة الجديدة في الكيان في الحضن الأميركي وتحتاج الى انتصارات تظهرها أمام المستوطنين بمظهر قوة، ويتوقعون أن تجمّد قوى المقاومة في اليمن قتالها لمجرد أن واشنطن قالت إنها تؤيد وقف الحرب، وينتظرون التهدئة مع القوات الأميركية في سورية والعراق وعدم معاملتها كقوات احتلال، لأن واشنطن تنظر لهذا الوجود كورقة مساومة لاحقة عندما تنتهي من الاتفاق مع إيران.

حدث ذلك من قبل، ففي عام 2015 عندما قام جيش الاحتلال بقرار من رئيس حكومة الكيان يومها بنيامين نتنياهو بالإعلان عن العزم على فرض قواعد اشتباك على المقاومة، رداً على معادلات أعلنها الأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله، وكان اغتيال الشهيد جهاد مغنية، وتوقع نتنياهو وردّد خلفه كل جماعة أميركا في المنطقة، أن حزب الله لن يردّ، وأن إيران المنخرطة في التفاوض ستضغط على المقاومة لمنع الرد لأنه يخرب المسار التفاوضيّ، ولكن الواقع كان أن المقاومة ردّت وبقسوة، وفرضت معادلاتها، والذي ضغط على حليفه لعدم الرد كان الأميركي، الذي قال بلسان الرئيس الأميركي باراك أوباما لنتنياهو تعليقاً على ردّ المقاومة، إن الضربة موجعة لكنها لا تستحق حرباً، فأعلن نتنياهو العضّ على الجراح، كما قال.

في سورية والعراق احتلال أميركي والحق الطبيعي لقوى المقاومة هو خوض المواجهة حتى انسحاب هذه القوات. وهذا حق وطني منفصل عما يدور في المفاوضات الأميركية مع إيران، وإيران تفكر بهذه الطريقة. وهذا ما يعلمه الأميركي من تجاربه السابقة مع إيران، قبل توقيع الاتفاق النووي عام 2015، ففي كل مرة كان الأميركي يرغب بفتح التفاوض حول الملفات الإقليمية كانت تردّ إيران بأن التفاوض محصور بالملف النووي، وبعد توقيع الاتفاق في كل مرة كان الأميركي يحاول عبر الوسطاء طلب التدخل الإيراني مع فريق من قوى المقاومة، كان الجواب الإيراني أن قوى المقاومة هي قوى مستقلة بقرارها وإيران لا تقبل بمطالبتها بالضغط على هذه القوى، وأنه عندما يكون هناك لدى الخصوم المحليين لهذه القوى شيء يستحق التحدث مع هذه القوى فإن إيران يمكن أن تسهل اللقاء، لا أكثر ولا أقل، وليس أدل على ذلك من تجربة أنصار الله في اليمن، قبل تفاهم استوكهولم حول الحديدة وبعده.

مقياس قوى المقاومة في سورية والعراق، ينطلق من حسابات سورية وعراقية. ففي العراق هناك قرار من البرلمان العراقي بانسحاب القوات الأميركية تقابله واشنطن بالمراوغة، والاستهداف الأميركي الأخير لقوى المقاومة على الحدود العراقية السورية إعلان حرب يجب أن تدفع قوات الاحتلال الأميركي ثمنه، وأن تدرك أن قوى المقاومة جاهزة للمواجهة المفتوحة حتى رحيل الاحتلال، وفي سورية عدا عن عملية الاستهداف، يصرّح الأميركيّون بنهبهم لنفط سورية، ويقومون بحماية مجموعات انفصاليّة تشاركهم نهب القمح والنفط، ويعلن الأميركيون ربط بقائهم بمصير الحدود بين بلدين شقيقين سيدين هما سورية والعراق، بهدف قطع التواصل بينهما، بينما تتحرّك القوات الأميركية عبر الحدود مستبيحة كل مقوّمات سيادة البلدين، وتنقل ثرواتهما المنهوبة عبر الحدود، وتتخذ من المناطق الكردية قواعد للعبث بوحدة البلدين، ما يجعل عمليات المقاومة في سورية، كما في العراق، رداً مشروعاً وطبيعياً.

الذي يجب أن يكون مستغرباً هو البقاء الأميركي في العراق وسورية، بينما يحزم الأميركي حقائبه في أفغانستان للرحيل، رافضاً تسلم قوى قاتلت الإرهاب أرض بلادها، مخلفاً وراءه في أفغانستان تشكيلات اتهمها بالإرهاب بعد عشرين عاماً من الفشل في الحرب التي شنها على أفغانستان. وبالمناسبة كان الرئيس باراك أوباما يقول إنه سينسحب من العراق لأن لا مبرر للبقاء، ويبقى في أفغانستان لأن الحرب هناك جزء من الحرب العالمية على الإرهاب، ويأتي الرئيس جو بايدن ويقلب الأولويات، ويتوقع أن لا يكون درس الانسحاب الأميركي من أفغانستان هو أن الأميركي لا تحكمه قواعد ولا مبادئ ولا استراتيجيات، فهو يبقى حيث لا ينزف ويرحل حيث ينزف، لذلك عليه أن يتوقع أنه سينزف حتى يقرّر الرحيل، من دون أن يغيب عن تفكير قوى المقاومة أن الأميركي لا يمانع الانسحاب من أفغانستان رغم توصيفاته للحرب بحرب على الإرهاب طالما لا تداعيات للانسحاب على أمن كيان الاحتلال، بينما يتمسك ببقائه في سورية والعراق لفرض معادلات تتصل بالحدود بين البلدين وبحدود سورية مع الجولان المحتل، طلباً لأمن كيان الاحتلال، فتصير حرب المقاومة مع الاحتلال الأميركي امتداداً طبيعياً لالتزام قوى المقاومة بمعركتها مع كيان الاحتلال.

PFLP-GC Chief, Ahmad Jibril, Dies in Damascus, Who is Palestinian Leader Ahmad “Abou Jihad” Jibril?

07/07/2021

The Secretary General of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command, Ahmad Jibril, died on Wednesday in Damascus at 83.

Sources close of the late leader mentioned that he died of sickness at one of hospitals in the Syrian capital.

Jibril founded the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command in 1968. He carried out several attacks on Zionist targets and administered two deals to swap prisoners with the Zionist entity in 1979 and 1985 according to which around 1200 Palestinians were released from the Israeli jails.

Jibril was one of Syria’s and Iran’s allies and fiercely opposed all the settlement agreements between the PLO ( Palestine Liberation Organization) and the Israeli enemy.

‘Israel’ classified Jibril as one of its arch foes and attempted to kidnap him several times.

SourceAl-Manar English Website

Hezbollah Offers Condolences on Demise of Palestinian Resistance Commander Ahmad Jibril: He Devoted His Life Palestine 

 July 7, 2021

manar-00919240016215451213

Hezbollah offered on Wednesday the striving Palestinian people deep condolences and its jihadi factions as well as the command and members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command over the demise of the Movement’s Secretary General, Ahmad Jibril, hoping Holy God grants the senior Palestinian leader His Wide Mercy.

In a statement, Hezbollah mentioned that Jibril’s life was full of resistance, jihad, redemption and sacrifice on the road to Palestine, adding the he sacrificed his son ‘Jihad’ for the sake of the pure Palestinian soil.

Hezbollah indicated that Jibril used to believe in the continuous strife as the only path to liberation and unity among the resistance groups on the various fronts, recalling that he used to move from one righteous battle to another.

The statement mentioned that Jibril was characterized by solid determination,deep spirituality, heroic bravery, and distinct qualities that enabled him to occupy this adequate position in the history of Palestine and the region.

Hezbollah considered that the Palestinian people lost a prominent figure of honor and redemption, adding, “What condoles us is that our Umma (nation) and Palestinian people are following his path to liberation, resistance and victory”.

It is worth mentioning that Jibril had died of sickness on Wednesday in Damascus at 83.

Source: Al-Manar English Website

Who is Palestinian Leader Ahmad “Abou Jihad” Jibril?

Source: Al-Mayadeen

Ahmad Jibril is the founder and secretary general of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command (PFLP-GC). He believed in armed struggle against “Israel” to liberate Occupied Palestine, and died on Wednesday in Damascus.

Visual search query image
Who is Palestinian Leader Ahmad “Abou Jihad” Jibril?

Ahmad Jibril (Abou Jihad) is a Palestinian leader who founded the PFLP-GC. He was the Secretary General from its inception in 1968 until his death on Wednesday in Damascus.

“Abou Jihad” believed in the armed struggle to liberate Palestine, to which end he founded the PFLP-GC, a leftist nationalist Palestinian group that split from the PFLP, and chose to establish its headquarters in Damascus.  The group executed many operations against the Israeli occupation.

Early Life

Ahmad Jibril was born in 1938 in the village of Yazur in the suburbs of occupied Yafa to a Palestinian father and Syrian mother. They were forced to emigrate to Syria during the Nakba in 1948 and settled in the city of Quneitra with his uncles. After receiving his high school diploma in 1956, Jibril moved to Cairo to receive an “academic-military formation,” graduating from the military academy in 1959.

Politics

During his studies in Egypt, Jibril became acquainted with the General Union of Palestinian Students, at which point he grew to become more acquainted with the idea of armed struggle.

In 1959, Jibril founded the “Palestine Liberation Front,” after the “Algeria Liberation Front,” which had influenced him. He would later merge with several leftist and nationalist movements to found the “Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine” in 1967. The movement was led by George Habash, while Jibril led its military wing. He would later decide to break from Habash’s front to found in 1968 the “Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command,” which today carries out important operations against the Israeli occupation.

Jibril was also firmly against any negotiations with “Israel” in 1974 and remained close to Syria.

Military Operations

The “Al-Khalisa” operation of 1974 was one of the first guerilla operations executed by the “PFLP-GC.” Three guerilla fighters entered the settlement of “Kiryat Shmona,” north of Palestine, killing and wounding tens of Israelis.

The front was also experienced in kidnapping Israeli soldiers and exchanging them with Palestinians in Israeli prisons, like the “Al-Jalil” operation of 1985 in which 3 Israeli soldiers were exchanged with 1150 prisoners.

In November 1987, two of its fighters used a light paraglider, landing near “Kiryat Shmona,” and killed two Israeli soldiers before being martyred themselves.

The PFLP-GC also carried out a large number of operations against the Israeli occupation during the occupation of the South of Lebanon between 1978-2000.

In 2002, “Israel” assassinated Jibril’s son, Jihad Jibril, the head of the front’s military wing in Tallet al-Khayyat, Beirut, by planting explosives on his vehicle. “Israel” considered Ahmad Jibril one of its worst enemies and had attempted to kidnap and assassinate him on numerous occasions.

Al-Mayadeen had broadcast a documentary entitled “Ahmad Jibril” in Arabic last year. This 12-episode documentary showcases the Palestinian freedom fighter’s memoirs, life, and approach to the Palestinian cause in all stages, beginning from when he laid down the principles for the Palestinian revolution. 

The work is biographical and highlights many important stages in the history of the contemporary Palestinian revolution, and many of the nation’s causes, through the lens of a Palestinian Pan-Arab freedom fighter that refused to settle on the Palestinian cause; a man who was one of the most important and greatest military leaders of the Palestinian cause.

Related Videos

Related news

Syrians Celebrate Fourth of July by Bombing US Occupiers in Deir Ezzor

 ARABI SOURI 

Biden forces bombed in Al Omar oil field - US army - Britain - France NATO

The fireworks of the Fourth of July celebrations in Syria were louder as the Syrian resistance bombed the base housing the USA and its allied forces illegally deployed to steal the Syrian oil at the Al Omar oil field in Deir Ezzor, the base was attacked with missiles yesterday Sunday 04 July 2021, the second attack on the same base in less than one week.

At least 2 missiles hit the complex housing the oil thieves in the Al Omar oil field complex in the southeastern countryside of Deir Ezzor, the missiles caused 4 explosions, local sources and sources from the US-sponsored Kurdish SDF separatist terrorists confirmed. The oil thieves positioned in this illegal military complex are from state members of NATO, the ‘North Atlantic Terrorism Alliance’, namely from the United States of America, Britain, and France.

We’re waiting for truthful information from one or more of the war ministries of the USA, UK, and France, so far, their informal sources and the SDF are claiming there were no casualties in the attack despite the strong explosions. The Pentagon and its allies, especially the British, have proved throughout their history to not be reliable for news about their casualties or their goals, the war on Iraq should always serve as a reminder when sourcing news from these organizations.

Biden forces in Al Omar oil field bombed on the fourth of july - US army - Britain - France NATO
A still from a short video published on social media by the Eastern Pulse showing flames of fire at the housing complex in the Al Omar Oil field, Deir Ezzor.

This is the second time in less than a week the same illegal Biden forces military base is attacked, the previous attack was on the evening of the 28th of last month June which caused significant damage to buildings within the housing complex. The June 28th attack was in retaliation to a criminal cross-borders bombing carried out by Biden forces on the day earlier against the Syrian city of Bu Kamal which killed a child and injured 3 other civilians in Syria and killed 4 PMU soldiers in the Al Qaim on the Iraqi side of the borders. The Iraqi PMU soldiers were guarding the borders against ISIS attacks before Biden killed them.

Unlike the Russians, and other Syrian allies, all other presence in Syria including NATO forces are illegal under the international law and the charter of the United Nations which the USA, Britain, France are permanent members of its Security Council and are ‘entrusted by the world to preserve peace and security by abiding by the UN Charter,’ which obviously they don’t. The NATO members of the UNSC use the world’s top council as launchpads for their illegal wars across the planet when they manage to get resolutions of the UNSC in their favor, and as a platform to demonize other members of the UNSC when they can’t get away with resolutions to justify their illegal wars.

This attack also comes amid growing anger among the Syrians, notably among the tribes in the Syrian provinces of Hasakah, Deir Ezzor, and Raqqa, who are being oppressed by the US-sponsored Kurdish SDF terrorists and are seeing their country’s riches of oilwheat, even barley being stolen by the US oil thieves and smuggled into Iraq. The resistance in the region is growing and becoming bolder against both the occupiers and their local proxies and unless Biden gathers himself up soon and remembers where Syria is and that he is deploying his forces illegally in this country which is literally on the other side of the planet from the USA, he will have to increase the production of body bags for his troops there.

The Fourth of July celebrated in the USA as their Independence Day comes at times the US still has a large number of forces illegally occupying other countries around the world, Syria is one of them. Hypocrisy starts here and has no end in US politics.

To help us continue please visit the Donate page to donate or learn how you can help us with no cost on you.
Follow us on Telegram: http://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Massive Blasts Hit US Base in Syria’s Deir Ez-Zor

05/07/2021

Massive Blasts Hit US Base in Syria’s Deir Ez-Zor

By Staff, Agencies

The United States occupation’s biggest military base in Syria has been hit by a number of “massive” explosions, according to reports.

The blasts rocked the outpost located in Syria’s al-Omar Oilfield in the Arab country’s eastern Deir Ez-Zor province, the reports said on Sunday.

In further details, Yemen’s al-Masirah television network cited Syrian sources which described the blasts as “successive” explosions.

Additionally, the so-called Syrian Observatory for Human Rights monitor, also told Saudi-owned al-Arabiya TV that the oilfield had been hit by a number of rockets.

Meanwhile, Russia Today Arabic quoted Farhad Shami, head of the Office of Media and Information for the US-backed so-called Syrian Democratic Forces [SDF] terrorist group, as saying “two rockets” had landed on the western periphery of the oilfield.

Other reports, however, claimed that the blasts were caused as a result of “training” activity taking place among foreign forces there.

Washington led scores of its allies as part of the coalition into the Arab country and neighboring Iraq in 2014 under the pretext of fighting Daesh [the Arabic acronym for terrorist ‘ISIS/ISIL’ group].

Various reports and regional officials, however, provided evidence of the coalition’s role in relocating Daesh’s elements about in both the countries.

In Syria, the United States has been trying to keep a tight control over certain strategic areas, including the eastern oilfield, where it is engaged in large-scale theft of the country’s crude oil.

The Iraqi parliament and the Syrian government have both ruled the US-led coalition’s operation in the countries as illegal.

This is not the first time the American occupation forces come under attack in either country.

The latest of the attacks to target the occupation forces in Syria came on June 28 after US President Joe Biden ordered airstrikes along Iraq and Syria’s common border.

American warplanes struck one location in Iraq and two in Syria, with the Pentagon alleging the targets to be “facilities” used by Iraqi resistance groups to stage drone attacks on American interests.

According to Iraq’s Sabereen News, four Iraqi fighters were martyred in the attack on the headquarters of the 14th Brigade of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units, also known in Arabic as Hashd al-Shaabi anti-terror umbrella organization, which features some resistance groups. A reporter with state-run SANA news agency also said the offensive had claimed the life of one child and injured three others.

The Iraqi groups vowed to retaliate for the atrocity following the American aerial attacks.

Inclusive Biden Junta Smuggles Additional 37 Oil Tankers Stolen from Syria

 ARABI SOURI 

US forces steal Syrian oil in Hasakah northeast Syria - Iraq - Kurds - SDF

Biden’s junta, the most inclusive and colorful regime in the history of the USA, accelerates plundering of the riches of the Syrian people while flooding the media with statements of their care for the Syrian people while depriving the Syrians of their oil in order to feed ISIS terrorists in Iraq.

The latest convoy of 37 tankers loaded with stolen Syrian oil was spotted by the locals in the Suweidia village in the northern countryside of Al-Yarubiya area, the convoy was heading toward the borders with Iraq through the illegal crossing of the Al-Walid.

In addition to the oil tankers, the convoy included refrigerated lorries and trucks loaded with large sealed boxes.

The following video, and the featured image still taken from it, published by Sputnik News shows oil tankers stolen by Biden forces 3 months ago:

Terrorists of the US-sponsored Kurdish SDF separatist armed group were guarding the convoy in several 4 x 4 machine guns mounted vehicles.

This ongoing theft of Syrian riches continues at times the Syrian people face extreme shortages of oil, wheat, and produce all over the country where more than 16.5 million people live, the theft is increasing at the same time the US and other NATO officials continue their anti-Syria propaganda to allow the opening of more border crossings under the UN protection to facilitate the smuggling of terrorists and weapons in, and the stolen Syrian oil, grains, and other produce out of the country.

Prior to the beginning of the US-led war of terror waged against Syria, the country was self-sufficient in oil and wheat, there were even exports of the excesses of these two main essentials, and ever since the US officials started their anti-Syria propaganda to allow open borders only in areas under the control of terrorist groups like Idlib, the country started importing both oil and wheat and the same US regime tried to pirate oil shipments heading to Syria and blocked the access of Syria’s banking system to international markets to facilitate the imports of these items.

It is hypocrisy at its peak by the most degenerate criminals no matter which of the only two parties who run it is in power, they only compete on spoils of the wars they wage abroad and against their own people in high taxation and poor services and development.

A group of Syria’s legal advisors and the country’s public judiciary body are recording the US theft of Syria’s oil, wheat, grains, and other riches, among other war crimes committed by the USA and its allies in Syria, and have prepared a file to sue the United States and its cronies, the outcomes of these lawsuits will ensure that US citizens and dutiful taxpayers funding now the US crimes will pay the reparations for all the souls killed, the people suffered, the infrastructure destroyed, and the riches stolen.

To help us continue please visit the Donate page to donate or learn how you can help us with no cost on you.
Follow us on Telegram: http://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.

The Wrong Pentagon Policy

30 JUNE 2021

By Slavisha Batko Milacic

Source

The Wrong Pentagon Policy

The Syrian “liberation movements” have been fighting the legitimate Assad regime and its allied Russian military for 11 years now. But their arsenals are only getting bigger and bigger. How come?

Modern warfare is waged with high-tech weapons. Each battle fought eats up loads of ammunition and modern weapons systems need spare parts and fuel. All this meaning that no military action is possible without an advanced economy and supplies. Even terrorist organizations forced to go deep into the underground have to set up laboratories and workshops to produce homemade explosives and weapons. Incidentally, it is exactly this “underground industry” that makes them vulnerable to the intelligence services. Therefore, one might think that large and internationally outlawed groups of terrorists and separatists simply can’t exist for long because they will be left with virtually nothing to fight with.

The Syrian “liberation movements” have been fighting the legitimate Assad regime and its allied Russian military for 11 years now.(1) But their arsenals are only getting bigger and bigger. How come?

Bulgarian journalist Dilyana Gaitandzhieva published an investigation that points to a direct connection between the Pentagon and the provision of arms to a radical group opposing both Syria and the United States. As part of their campaign of self-promotion, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham has posted online a number of videos where the militants are seen using US-made TOW anti-tank missiles, whose serial numbers are clearly visible in the propaganda videos. According to official military procurement documents, the TOW missile systems were supplied to the US Marine Corps from 2012 to 2019. According to information, openly available at govtribe.com, Raytheon Company landed a $783 million W31P4Q12C0265 contract for the supply of TOW missile systems to the USMC.

Shortly after the deal was completed in June 2019, the missile systems featured front and center in propaganda videos circulated by the terrorist group, while Washington had announced a reward of up to $10 million for information leading to the identification or location of the group’s leader, Abu Muhammad al-Julani. Moreover, the TOW missile system is not a Kalashnikov assault rifle. Training a TOW operator is a rather lengthy and complex process. Even if we assume that several such units were seized in battle or stolen, the question is who trained Hayat Tahrir al-Sham specialists capable of using them? Besides, videos of very expensive TOW missile launches made for propaganda purposes prove that the extremists have more than enough such missiles at their disposal. Neither do they experience any shortages of less sophisticated and more reliable weapons, such as Kalashnikov assault rifles, RPG-7s and 12.7 mm DShK machine guns.

The method of getting Soviet-made arms to Iraqi and Syrian extremists is both simple and straightforward. Huge amounts of weapons and ammunition are purchased from Serbian, Bulgarian and Romanian gun factories for Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan, as well as for US auxiliary forces. Back in 2017, the Bulgarian arms industry set an absolute arms export record of $1.2 billion. Arms production is on the rise in Serbia and Romania also. Bulgarian arms dealer Emilian Gebrev is cleaning out ammunition from long-term storage depots all across Eastern Europe.

However, Eastern European arms suppliers, including such big ones as Serbian Zastava, Romanian U.M. Cugir and Carfil, as well as the Bulgarian Arsenal, actually controlled by Gebrev, are not always allowed into the lucrative Middle Eastern market as Pentagon keep acting as go-betweens, who directly receive money from their own government. In 2020 alone, eight US companies inked $350 million worth of official contracts with the Pentagon for the supply of “non-American standard” weapons. All of these companies – TLG Worldwide, Multinational Defense Services LLC, Greystone CS3 LLC, Global Ordnance LLC, UDC USA, Inc., Culmen International, Blane International Group, Inc., and Sierra Four Industries Corp officially operate in the United States, and information about these transactions is also part of the country’s public procurement system. (2) There are two questions that arise here. First, how does the Pentagon benefit from this?

Well, the answer is simple enough. The Pentagon never learns from its past mistakes and continues to believe that it can control radical groups, who use their weapons mainly against Russian soldiers and pro-Assad forces. The lion’s share of oil produced by Islamist-controlled groups is being sold via a chain of intermediaries, which allows Pentagon and its Saudi allies to fully recoup their arms charity. During its heyday, the entire ISIS economy (if one can so describe the economy of such a quasi-state, of course) was working for war. Money and property extorted from the controlled population and thousands of barrels of oil were turned into weapons and ammunition, or used to train armed groups. Even though ISIS was ultimately phased out and formally even broken up, the whole scheme kept working. As a result, the Pentagon has been able to keep the arms supplies fully under control without paying a thing.

Regardless of the number of go-betweens in this scheme, in fact, the Pentagon handles the supply of weapons to terrorists.

At first glance, the second question looks more complicated. Why did the Pentagon actually act as the organizer of the supply of “Soviet-style” weapons to terrorist groups? ZU-23 anti-aircraft guns, DShK machine guns, Kalashnikov assault rifles, ATGL hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers and their heavy ATGL-H companions, supplied from Bulgaria, are all copies of Soviet models. These are weapons of the Warsaw Pact countries that are purchased for American arms-supply schemes in Serbia, Romania and the Czech Republic. It looks like the Pentagon has no desire to move the Middle East region to NATO standards. In reality, however, everything is simple. The less sophisticated the weapons, the easier it is to hide the routes of their supply and even their origin. If casualties among US nationals can’t be avoided, it is better to have them killed by weapons used by the Russians and their allies and blame Moscow and Damascus for unwarranted attacks on the US military and its allies.

Investigations into the supply of arms to terrorists have appeared in the European media for several years now, but the situation has not changed. “Merchants of death” like E m I I an G e brev continue to goldbrick, while Pentagon stick to its unsophisticated schemes. As a result, the people of Syria and Iraq suffer, Europe suffers as refugees keep flowing in. Because of all of the above, the new US administration, led by President Joe Biden, must bring order to the Pentagon and prevent the Pentagon from working independently and against the interests of Europe and the United States.

NATO at UNSC Sheds Tears Only for Al Qaeda Terrorists in Idlib

 MIRI WOOD 

Al Qaeda HTS Hayat Tahrir Sham Nusra Front Jabhat Nusra terrorists in Idlib, Syria - NATO Turkey

June 25 was the most recent gathering of the NATO junta at the UNSC during which the western supremacists lie about Syria and wail over al Qaeda terrorists still occupying parts of Idlib. The neo Sykes-Picot assemblage has either become more arrogant in flinging lies, or has grown weary of engagement in the same monkey dung-flinging; statements and tweets from US, UK, and France were so off-kilter from the UN’s synopsis page as to make a researcher need to clarify if there was one, or two, anti-Syria meetings on that date.

Boots on, the author will try to wade through the morass of chaos, and try to find some coherence, beginning with the curious title the UN website gave to the meeting: “Amid Little Forward Movement, Warring Parties in Syria Must Take Concrete Steps on Potential Common Ground Issues, Special Envoy Says.”

Al Qaeda HTS Hayat Tahrir Sham Nusra Front Jabhat Nusra terroristsin Idlib, Syria - NATO Turkey
One might wonder at the ‘common ground’ Geir O. Pedersen might find with similarly armed terrorists in his neighborhood.

UN Special Envoy for Syria, Geir Pedersen actually claimed the possibility “common ground” exists between armed savages who kidnap, behead, bomb, slaughter intellectuals, turn cancer university hospitals into rubble, if only “mutual and reciprocal actions could begin to make a positive difference for Syrians, and give impetus to a political process.”

Envoy calls for common ground between terrorists and civilized persons.
Which NATO country would claim common ground between terrorists and civilized human beings?

To better grasp Pedersen’s special diplomacy, a glimpse at some of his recent tweets may be useful.

On 3 June, he reported on meeting with the ISSG Humanitarian Task Force in Geneva, though the media chose not to report on it. The Syria-less, International Syria Support Group — not to be confused with the rotten, secret diplomatic meeting that launched a UN frenzy against Syria in early 2018 — made international headlines throughout 2016; details on its colonialist goals for the SAR are found in The Devil is in the Detail. Given the discussion was to have been on al Hol (administered by SDF terrorists under the protection of American military illegals), Rukban, (administered by the ISIS-offshoot terrorists, Maghawir Thawra, under the protection of American illegals), and that water, Syrian, is never discussed in the UN, it might have required a follow-up tweet, statement, or even a NATO news report.

On 14 June, he tweeted his followers to read his full statement of condemnation of an alleged bombing of an alleged hospital in Afrin, Syria. He did not mention that the bombing was part of an ongoing firefight between NATO Turkey terrorists and NATO SDF terrorists. The photos of the alleged incident involved the White Helmets, of in the genre of CGI and an empty, messy, building, with a wall having been used for target practice. According to OCHA’s propaganda Reliefweb site, this unhospital in Afrin is [illegally] run by the CIA, the State Department, and the always illegally in Syria and always embedded with terrorists, SAMS (it is not to be confused with the unhospital of the same name in Idlib, run by a Brit terrorist).

Pederson made no follow-up condemnations at the UNSC meeting; as noted in Syria News above hyperlinked report, “this will pose a bit of a dilemma for the NATO klan at the UN, as the tripartite aggressors support Turkey in all of its atrocities against Syria, and simultaneously support the SDF in all of its atrocities against Syria. There may also be a bit of a problem given the UN only holds meetings to condemn the bombings of unhospitals to blame Syria, and is deaf, dumb, blind when the terrorists the klan supports turn to rubble actual hospitals.”

Meek ‘strong condemnation’ as SDF terrorists also NATO-owned.

The Spec. diplomat’s briefing was of the standard anti-Syria, western savior imperialism. He called for the release of alleged ”detainees” (though the UN synopsis did not quote him as demanding the right to inspect Syrian prisons, as he has in the past), again called for what is tantamount to another unilateral cessation of hostilities, which is imperialist speak for letting the savages continue to decimate the Syrian Arab Republic.

Where was the concern of the UN humanitarian bastards when terrorists abducted dozens of Syrian children in the aftermath of the massacre in al Rashidin? Where was that righteous concern when hundreds of Syrian waited in the Faiha Stadium for the release of over 3,000 kidnapped Syrians, who were exchanged for arrested terrorists?

Did the NATO junta ruling the UN even feign any interest in the thousands of Syrians found in mass graves in areas liberated from the terrorists, of which only some have been identified through forensic studies?

Look upon these vermin and their works, and despair; these are the filth which with the UN Special Envoy dares to suggest civilized human beings should find ”common ground.”

Jolani oversees kidnapping of children in Idlib
Kidnapped child comforting other kidnapped children after being FX’d for a White Helmets production, in Idlib.
US ISIS terrorists in Syria: Sweida, Quneitra, Daraa, Deir Ezzor
victims of un backed terrorists
UN silent when terrorists killed soldiers and al Kindi hospital blown up.
Eleven soldiers of the al Kindi University Cancer Hospital about to be slaughtered by NATO supported FSA freedom fighter terrorists, 21 December 2013. How did NATO stenography journalists report on their kidnappings and murders?
Terrorist in Idlib 'feed' head of murdered Syrian soldier.
al-Qaeda necrophiliacs in Idlib, supported by the US and ignored by NATO stenographer journalists
Idlib 2013, when Jolani was put in charge of the human garbage.
Idlib 2013. The FSA terrorist grilled the severed head of a Syrian soldier. What degenerate normalizes such atrocities?
Terrorists call for bombing bakery.
Jolani and his humanitarian resistance
Mom butchered so unborn baby could be carved out and used as war porn by NATO supported terrorists.
ISIS terrorists child recruits were made to murder 25 soldiers in 2015.
ISIS child recruits were made to murder 25 soldiers in 2015.
UN expects Syria to find common ground with psychotic terrorists.
White Helmets humanitarians on the corpses of murdered Syrian soldiers whose boots have been stolen.

Study these heinous photos of the savages dressed in human bodies, and of their atrocities. Consider that this filth is what savior Pedersen demands civilized society find common ground.

Then, marvel at his follow-up threats that there are simultaneously “worrying signs that Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL/Da’esh) may be strengthening and noting that other listed groups remain at large” — though this threat is nothing new. Our treasonous Strangelove’s at the Pentagon threatened to revive ISIS in September 2019; the recent war criminal bombings of Syria and Iraq, by the aggregate Biden-Pentagon-Harris-State Department-Dr. Jill-Nance presidency suggests that the genocidal revival is about to go live.

Is it possible to get more sadistic and arrogant than this?

NATO armed, funded, and facilitated the transportation of the world’s human garbage into Syria. The NATO junta that has destroyed the UN has supported the human vermin as ‘freedom fighters.’ NATO US founded both al Qaeda and ISIS terrorists.

The pro tempore Security Council presidents are permitted to invite celebrity guests to address Security Council meetings. They are always part of the NATO clique, though presented as independent persons who just happen to be on the exact page of the rabid hyenas of the UN.

Poor little Estonia finally got its turn and was forced to draw from some very slim pickins.’ unlike the glamourous fake physician about whom a fake documentary that was nominated for a 5th columnist Oscar, that the US ambassador presented to the junta meeting.

The poor little temporary president was stuck with a somebody that nobody knows. Even the US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield confused her women’s group with another women’s group that has appeared to have been created by the NATO clique of the UN.

‘Abeer Hussein’ was introduced as “a member of the Syrian Women’s Political Movement.” Not to be confused with the UN-created “Syrian Women’s Advisory Board” — as was done by Thomas-Greenfield — this alleged Syrian women’s group was founded in Paris, France, in October 2017 and then did not even make the US 501(c) fake charity status, to give it some veneer of legitimacy. Nonetheless, the ‘founding document’ — written in perfect English though the meeting was in France — sounded as though written by our Strangelove friends at the US State Department.

‘Hussein’ is not on the list of the alleged 28 ‘Syrian’ women founding sisters, in France, which is not Syria (though the French imperialists have never forgiven Syrians for Evacuation Day).

She functioned as the anticipated Charlie McCarthy routine to the NATO terrorists-supporting junta’s ventriloquism (marionette wiring was not required): She whined that 2254 has not yet been imposed, bleated for a Sykes-Picot — “transitional’ — governance, demanded the release of jailed criminals (as the NATO war criminals and their media propagandists have told us since 2011, the SAR is that paradoxical Utopia, where nobody is a criminal, yet the jails are overflowing), bleated a smidgeon about controlling some armed groups (not “terrorists;” never “terrorists”), condemned the fact that mostly foreign terrorists were not permitted to vote in the election; of course declared “the election is a fraud`,” because only western supremacists who collectively are responsibly for genocide against sovereign countries have the tyrannical right to dictate which elections are fair and which are not (and the allegedly fair ones merely coincidental in friendship to NATO).

Syrian Women’s Political Movement first — and only? — meeting was in Paris, France.

Syrian Women’s Political Movement first — and only? — meeting was in Paris, France.

Thomas-Greenfield confused one NATO Syrian women’s group with another.
UN brought in the NATO Syrian Women’s Advisory Board.
NATO Syrian women’s groups either are not Syrian, or are amenable to stabbing their Syrian sisters in the back.

This anemic celebrity claimed to be “an eyewitness to what women suffer.”

How, then, has she — like other allegedly Syrian women brought to tap dance for the junta at the UN — been blind to the kidnappings of real Syrian women and their children, to their public executions, to the slaughter of their husbands, sons, daughters, grandchildren, physicians, and friends?

How do these ”Syrian women” align themselves with the terrorists who commit femicide, who blow up children, who keep women prisoners, who commit the most unspeakable of horrors — including carving late term fetuses from their mothers’ wombs to use propaganda photo opportunities — of the kind that would make Satan blush in envy?

These terrorists are criminally insane and should be incarcerated for the rest of their lives. The only creatures worse than these violent degenerates are the filthy scum in fine clothing, the fraudulent diplomats who hold allegiance to other unindicted war criminals and who sully the UN with cheap filthy liars.

Take a good look at the following album of Syrian women who were kidnapped, brutalized, murdered, whose children were butchered. Make especial note to compare the face of the young woman abducted in al Sweida, after the massacre by the terrorists so beloved by the utter filth that the UN NATO klan brings into the former bastion of peace and security.

image-International Women's Day
Terrorists kidnapped women & their kids & Channel 4 cheered the terrorists as saviors.
Terrorists kidnapped women & their kids & Channel 4 cheered the terrorists as saviors.
Syrian women are invisible in Idlib. This is what the Wahhabi terrorists think of them.
UN brings in fake Syrian women who support terrorist crimes against Syrian women.
international-women's-day
Women and their children held by moderate kidnappers including al Jazeera.
Syrian women put into cages are not considered part of the #MeToo movement.
femicide -Murdered Syrian women's bodies stepped on by NATO moderate opposition members.
Murdered Syrian women’s bodies stepped on by NATO moderate opposition members.
image-Latakia Freed Women and Children with President Assad and First Lady Asma
Latakia Freed Women and Children with President Assad and First Lady Asma
Terrorists bombed Syrian women enjoying a day in the park.
An afternoon in the park was interrupted by moderate mortars. These 2 (or 3) Syrians women were among 8 murdered in Sebil Park, 22 July. Terrorists committed this atrocity.
Professor Dannoun’s legs were blown off when terrorists remotely detonated a bomb in her car.
Syrian woman murdered by foreign-armed, foreign terrorists in Idlib, 2015, for ‘adultery.’ Ignoring this act of femicide, MSM used her to whitewash other factions of al-Qaeda.
Congress dogs of war silent.
Near-term fetus carved from mother’s womb. Congress silent.
How did a White Helmet come into possession of a dead fetus & why does this pervert play with the body?
Terrorist massacred, kidnapped Syrian women in al Sweida
Sweida: Some of the 14 captives; UN silent.
NATO junta was silent over terrorists the massacre.
Thawrwat Fadel Abou Ammar. Her nose was broken before she was murdered.
Terrorists murdered Yousef walking home from school.
Yousef was killed by NATO terrorists sniper, while walking home from school.
Yousef’s mom collapsed when given the news that terrorists murdered her baby. What fraud ever marketed by the UN ever grieved with her?
syrian-democratic-forces
The face of dignified grief. Syrian mom, Souri Habib Ali holds the names of her 6 children killed while defending their country from NATO-backed terrorists.
utterly repulsive dalmatian
Utterly repulsive Dalmatian, friend of terrorists who commit femicide of Syrian women, dared to talk about their ‘rights.’
Criminally lying women brought into UN ignore brutality against Syrian women by western-owned terrorists.
Mother of Syrian Journalist Martyr Khalid Al Khatib carrying his coffin. Murdered by NATO terrorists.
Journalist Yara Abbas, assassinated May 2013 by the terrorists still supported on the occasion of International Women’s Day.
Syrian superstar star Raghda to the right in a pro Syrian government rally. Her father to the left kidnapped by FSA terrorists forced-dressed him with their flag before they tortured him to death.
international-women's-day
Dr. Bouthaina Shaaban, advisor to President al Assad
Syrian Vice President, Dr. Najah al Attar
Syrian Vice President, Dr. Najah al Attar.
international-women's-day
How dare these uppity Syrian women decide on their own president? Don’t they know elections are only valid if overseen by US colonialists?
femicide Syrian women voting, 3 June 2014.
Syrian women voting, 3 June 2014.
Our First Lady is always surrounded by love. How dare the West demand regime change?
femicide - Latakia Freed Women and Children with President Assad and First Lady Asma
Latakia Freed Women and Children with President Assad and First Lady Asma

The P3 mobsters engaged in their standard echolalia, followed by the repetition compulsion of the usual UN House Servants. In imperial fashion, the French, US, and UK saviors of the Syrian Arabs declared their presidential vote to be null and void — the antithesis of its patriotic meaning — that only a new election under their noblesse oblige would be recognized by them.

Western terrorists supports don't have leaders who can safely walk among their citizens.
We ask the NATO junta that supports terrorists in Syria, when any of their leaders were safe among their citizenry.

These tripartite aggressors renewed their collective fantasy for what is tantamount to a new Sykes-Picot to be imposed on the SAR, ignored their countries dumping of terrorists into the Levantine republic, ignored their illicit “sanctions” as the causation of humanitarian needs, and continued to demand their supremacist right to invade the country via the forced openings of fraudulent “humanitarian corridors.” Additionally, the junta hypocritically demanded full access to prisons in Syria (the US has the largest number of incarcerates in the western world; the UK has unlawfully detained Julian Assange for more than one year; France’s incarceration rate is over capacity (and of course, we shall never forget the Macron regime’s mass enucleation and other maiming campaign against the Gilets Jaunes).

As already noted, US Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield confused two NATO dummy women’s groups, and later issued a statement that had little relationship to the UN synopsis. France’s Nicolas de Riviere viciously played stick and carrot, suggesting illicit sanctions would be removed were Syria to suddenly relinquish its sovereignty via the “political settlement” with the terrorists, even while claiming the country “has becoming a breeding ground” for said terrorists (countless numbers of which are of French origin).

The UK’s James Paul Roscoe stood in for Barbara Woodward, who was apparently occupied in giving an interview to the House of Saud’s al Arabiya, during which she added ten million to the census of Syrians living under al Qaeda and assorted other terrorists gangs (many of British origin, which of course was not mentioned). Roscoe cheered the “vital work” of the previously unknown women’s group, also yakked about imaginary detainees, and demanded that “medical professionals” — likely chosen by the NATO junta, and of the ilk of the criminal who sadistically chuckled that he criminally performed surgeries without anesthetics — enter Syrian jails (British incarceration has dropped, as the UK dumped a few thousand of its criminals into society at large, because of COVID, making a bit of room for anti-lockdown detainees, and also accounting for the increase in violent crimes, particularly knifings.).

H.E. Nebenzia continues to be a rare voice of sanity, in a swamp of unindicted war criminals.
UK’s ‘diplomat’ needs a new course in Syria’s census. Here she lies that 13.5 million live under terrorists.

His Excellency Bassam Sabbagh addressed the Security Council, maintaining pristine diplomatic language, despite having to address the criminals ruling the UN, the criminals who have destroyed, and continue to destroy his country.

He reminded the NATO junta controlling the United Nations that the “constitutional entitlement” of Syrian Arabs to raise their voices to the world in the re-election Dr. Bashar al Assad as their president — rejecting terrorists including American and Turkish criminals. He emphatically stated that”there is no link between the elections and Resolution 2254,” and that Syria continues to fulfill its obligations to the Constitutional Committee.

He decried the “deceptive slogans” of the P3 (and their underlings) and condemned their violations of the principles of International Law, and of the UN Charter. He reminded the NATO klan of the Erdogan regime’s ongoing ethnic cleansing of Syria, of its Turkification process within parts of his country. He denounced the ongoing aggression by the US, Turkey, and Israel, specifically, all of which violate Syria’s national sovereignty.

He denounced the silence of this gang of thugs, regarding the US regime’s criminal entry into his country, “like thieves,” but with the impunity of traveling “from New York to New Jersey,” last month.

Ambassador Sabbagh condemned support for terrorists against his country.
H.E. Bassam Sabbagh condemned the breach of International Law in ‘some members’ support of terrorists against his country.

Excellency Sabbagh was referring to the US illegal delegation led by Acting Secretary of State, Joey Hood — whose very name sounds like mafioso schivoso out of a mobster movie — went into Syria to meet with SDF terrorists. These American criminals flaunted their supremacy in announcing their criminality and sheer contempt for Syrian Arabs, on its official website (this is the same criminal US that pretends to want to put an end to domestic, systemic racism, whose criminal media run non-stop reports on this synthetic endeavor, while stretching its colonial wingspan and attempting to crush complex thought that all forms of racism are the bastard offspring of imperialism).

Continuing to throw pearls before swine, Mr. Sabbagh reminded all that while the NATO klan bray about “detainees” they ignore the thousands of Syrian Arabs who have been abducted, and are still missing, and of the general amnesty decrees issued by President Assad.

The Syrian diplomat noted that his country will be presenting a bill to the criminal Americans, for the theft of Syrian food grains, for the looting of Syria’s oil, for the destruction of Syria’s infrastructure, and for compensation to Syrian Arabs maimed, and family survivors of Syrian Arabs slaughtered by US-sponsored terrorists.https://www.youtube.com/embed/47HMLtv6J0I?start=1&feature=oembedhttps://www.youtube.com/embed/71PBlU-ftEE?start=19&feature=oembed

We remind the NATO tyrants ruling the UN that President Assad promised his people that “every inch” of the Syrian Arab Republic will be liberated from the terrorists unleashed by this vile klan that defames the noble principles of the United Nations Charter.

— Miri Wood

Postscript:

The exaggerated incoherence of the 25 June UNSC meeting may have been caused by it being a haphazard, anti-Syria postscript to the 23 June gathering in support of the NATO humanitarian hyenas addressed by SG Guterres — to not only renew UNSCR 2533 (2020), but also return to UNSCR 2165 (2014). As the unhooded klansmen and their stenographers lie that Russia is responsible for making Syrians go hungry, we hyperlink the statements of Excellencies Vassily Nebenzia and Bassam Sabbagh. Compare to the UNSC phony ‘debate’ on the humanitarian corridor to Gaza.

RECOMMENDED:

Syria News welcomes our readers to help support our work:

To help us continue please visit the Donate page to donate or learn how you can help us with no cost on you.
Follow us on Telegram: http://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.

Canada’s government is seeking to silence Canadian journalists at home and abroad with a draconian censorship bill

moi

 

Eva Bartlett

RT.com

As a Canadian journalist, I could be subject to a censorship bill which, if passed in Senate, means the government in Canada can effectively shadow-ban and censor my voice into oblivion, along with other dissenting voices.

After seeing his tweet on the issue of Bill C-10, recently passed in the House of Commons, I spoke with Canadian journalist Dan Dicks about this. He explained that the bill is being presented as being about Canada bringing Big Tech companies under the regulation of the CRTC (Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission), to have them display more Canadian content.

“But what people are missing,” he cautioned, “is that there were clauses put into this bill, protections for certain publishers and content creators that would protect people like myself and yourself.”

Those clauses, he said, were recently removed from the bill, leading many content-creating Canadians aware of the bill to worry they will be treated the same as a broadcaster or a programmer, subject to the regulations of the CRTC.

The bottom line is that, beyond the mumbo jumbo of the government, this is the latest attack on freedom of expression, and on dissent. 

“It really appears that it’s a backdoor to be able to control the free flow of information online, and to begin to silence voices that go against the status quo,” Dicks said, warning that fines for violators could follow.

“It’s not looking good for individual content creators. Anybody who has any kind of a voice or a significant audience, where they have the ability to affect the minds of the masses, to reach millions of people, they are going to be the ones who are on the chopping block moving forward.”

Names like James Corbett come to mind. Although based in Japan, as a Canadian he would be subject to the bill. And with his very harsh criticisms of many issues pertaining to the Canadian government, he is a thorn they would surely be happy to remove under the pretext of this bill.

Or Dicks, who likewise creates videos often critiquing Canadian government actions.

Or researcher Cory Morningstar, authors Maximilian Forte, Mark Taliano, Yves Engler, or outspoken physicist Denis Rancourt, to name a handful of dissenting voices. Agree or not with their opinions, they have the right to voice them.

Or myself. I’ve been very critical of Canada’s Covid policies and hypocrisy, as well as Canada’s whitewashing of terrorism in Syria, support to neo-Nazis in Ukraine, and unwavering support for Israel which is systematically murdering, starving, and imprisoning Palestinian civilians–including children.

An article on the Law & Liberty website, which describes itself as focussing on “the classical liberal tradition of law and how it shapes a society of free and responsible persons,” notes the bill enables “ample discretion to filter out content made by Canadians that doesn’t carry a desirable ideological posture and [to] prioritize content that does.”

The article emphasizes that the bill violates Canadians’ right to free expression, as well as “the right to express oneself through artistic and political creations, and the right to not be unfairly suppressed by a nebulous government algorithm.”

It noted that Canadians with large followings, like Jordan Peterson, Gad Saad and Steven Crowder, “each enjoy audiences which far exceed any cable television program.”

As with my examples above, these prominent Canadian voices likewise risk shadow-banning under this bill.

But, worse, there is another bill, C-36, that also portends heavy censorship: the “Reducing Online Harms” bill. This one not only involves censorship, but hefty fines and house arrests for violators

The same  Law & Liberty article notes, “Canada is also expected to follow the template of Germany’s NetzDG law, which mandates that platforms take down posts that are determined to constitute hate speech—which requires no actual demonstrated discrimination or potential harm, and is thus mostly subjective—within 24 hours or to face hefty fines. This obviously will incentivize platforms to remove content liberally and avoid paying up.”

The Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF), rightly, contests this bill, noting, “the proposed definition of hate speech as speech that is ‘likely’ to foment detestation or vilification is vague and subjective.” 

Maxime Bernier, leader of the People’s Party of Canada, is likewise extremely critical of the bills.

Trudeau has made every issue about race, gender and religion since his election. Now he wants to criminalize everyone who disagrees with his tribalist vision.C-36 is the worst attack ever against free speech in Canada.https://t.co/6Z5EefmviP— Maxime Bernier (@MaximeBernier) June 25, 2021

The CCF points out the potential complete loss of Canadians’ fundamental rights with these bills.

It should be common sense that these bills are extremely dangerous to Canadians, however cloaked in talk of levelling playing fields and of combating hate speech they may be.

Biden Forces in Al Omar Oil Field Get Bombed Back by the Resistance

 ARABI SOURI 

Illegal US military base for Biden forces in Al Omar Oil field in Deir Ezzor - Syria come under attack

Biden forces illegally occupying the Al Omar oil field in northeastern Syria get bombed back by the resistance forces less than a day after Biden forces bombed posts used by the resistance to guard the Syrian – Iraqi borders against ISIS.

Rocket missiles fell on the residential compound housing the oil thieves in the US military in the Al Omar oil field east of the city of Deir Ezzor, northeast of Syria in the early evening yesterday 28 June 2021.

The video is also on BitChute.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/embed?mid=1rkE8G7uxAirceWku60-zXdIguYt6CTPs

Biden air forces flew combing sorties over the area trying to figure out from where the missiles were believed to have come from.

Al Omar oil field is the largest oil field in Syria, the oil field does not need any democracy spreading, any free speech promoting, or any ‘inclusiveness’ or ‘diversity’ which the US regimes need to force export to, the oil produced by this field is smuggled by the Biden forces into Iraq, the same task that was formerly carried out by Trump forces who took over from ISIS which was selling the oil to the regime of the Turkish madman Erdogan instead.

Ever since ISIS handed over Al Omar oil field to the Kurdish SDF terrorists under the supervision of the Trump forces, the ISIS terrorists never carried out any attack against the oil field and only attacked the Syrian army and its allies across the Syrian desert east of the country, and attacked the Iraqi army and PMU across the Iraqi open desert west of the country.

The rockets attack came about 18 hours after the Biden forces bombed buildings across the Syrian – Iraqi borders targeting and killing a Syrian child and injuring 3 other civilians in Bu Kamal on the Syrian side of the border, and killing 4 PMU fighters on the Iraqi side of the border, the PMU fighters guard the borders against ISIS terrorists.

After Biden forces carried out their heinous attack late night bombing against Syria and Iraq, the Secretary-General of the United Nations António Guterres called on all parties for restrain, that couldn’t have been applied at the time since the Iraqi PMU did not attack US forces inside the USA, now, however, after the US illegal forces in Syria got attacked, the UN chief’s call for restrain can be considered, if Biden doesn’t want loads of body bags flying back home.

To help us continue please visit the Donate page to donate or learn how you can help us with no cost on you.
Follow us on Telegram: http://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.

Breaking: Biden Bombs Syria and Iraq; Psychopaths Claim ‘Self-Defense’

Breaking News - syria news

MIRI WOOD 

The Biden regime has again bombed Syria and has also bombed Iraq. At approximately 0100 Damascene time, Biden regime bomber jets targeted two neighborhoods in Abukamal, eastern Deir Ezzor near the border, and one in Iraq.

One Syrian child was murdered, three other civilians were injured and several homes destroyed in this most recent Biden regime war crime on Syrian territories, four Iraqi troops were killed on Iraqi territories.

 most recent Biden regime war crime on Syrian territories, four Iraqi troops were killed on Iraqi territories.

Syria and Iraq bombed, and war criminals lie self defense.


The psychopath Dr. Strangelove’s of the Pentagon, CENTCOM, and the US Department of Defense outrageously claimed “self defense.” Calling deadly bombs “precision airstrikes,” the mass-murderers perversely twisted international law on war crimes: “As a matter of international law, the United States acted pursuant to its right of self-defense,” under the guise of protecting “US interests in Iraq” which the same criminal liars and unindicted war criminals declared were being ”targeted” by “Iran-back groups.”

The US degenerate liars neglected to mention in their self-victimized statement that the US has no interests in Iraq (or in Syria), and that in January 2020, the Iraqi Parliament politely voted for the yanqui putos to leave their country. Instead of leaving the country it destroyed, the US launched a criminal plot to incite a civil war in Iraq.

The Biden regime forces are also criminally in Syria — a war crime — and continuing to steal Syrian grain, Syrian oil, and occasionally to murder indigenous Syrians. Invasion, occupation, theft of food and Syria’s oil are also war crimes.

Biden commits new war crimes against Syria

— Miri Wood

Postscript: We offer a reminder that not all US politicians are Arab-hating war criminals. Former Senator Mike Gravel died yesterday at the age of 91. Here is a short video from a debate when he ran for president, and called out the warmongers on stage with him:


Addendum by Arabi Souri:

This latest illegal war crime added to the very long list of war crimes committed by the consecutive regimes of the United States in both Syria and Iraq takes place merely two days after the PMU, the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Units, carried out a formal military parade in Baghdad under the supervision and in the attendance of the Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi who confirmed the PMU is an integral body of the Iraqi armed forces and on the eve of the tripartite summit in Baghdad with the Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi and Jordan’s King Abdullah.

The Iraqi PMU military parade on 26 June 2021 in Baghdad:

We’re not sure who is really advising the head of the ‘most inclusive and diverse’ junta at the White House after the Israeli Netanyahu is removed from power after decades of dictating the US foreign policies in the region and far beyond, or what guides the US policies in the region, it’s obviously not related to any US interests and is seen in the region as demented Joe Biden who vowed to u-turn on Trump’s policies is sewing more body bags for US soldiers sent to plunder the wealth of both Syria and Iraq, the victims of the war crimes and their families and tribesmen will not sit idle and will seek harder revenge, the US ‘strategists’ should know this by now.

Feel free to try out Syria News‘ donate button:

To help us continue please visit the Donate page to donate or learn how you can help us with no cost on you.
Follow us on Telegram: http://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.

Related


Syrian FM Dr Faisal Mikdad: western hypocrisy on humanitarian assistance

Iraqi resistance vows revenge after murderous US airstrikes

29/06/2021

الرئيس بشار الأسد بكامل حيويّته لقاء الساعات الثلاث…

*أستاذ العلوم السياسية والعلاقات الدولية، والأمين العام المساعد للتجمع العربيّ الإسلاميّ لدعم خيار المقاومة، ورئيس الجمعيّة العربيّة للعلوم السياسيّة.
 د. جمال زهران*

لم يكن لقاءً عادياً أو معتاداً، كسابقه من اللقاءات التي تجاوزت العشرة، بل كان لقاءً مختلفاً، بل وفريداً للغاية. فصباح يوم الاثنين 14 يونيو/ حزيران من الساعة 11 صباحاً وحتى الساعة الثانية بعد الظهر، ولمدة ثلاث ساعات متصلة وبلا توقف نهائياً، كان اللقاء مع الرئيس الدكتور بشار الأسد بكامل حيويته وشبابه يرحب بنا، وبكلمات مقتضبة بسيطة، ثم يتيح الفرصة لجميع الحضور والبالغ عددهم 25 رمزاً من رموز العمل السياسي والحزبي والوطني، في أغلب الدول العربية، بطرح أسئلتهم وهمومهم على الرئيس، ويجيب على كلّ نقطة طرحت من دون تردّد.

من حيث الشكل أولاً: فقد تمّ ترتيب اللقاء على أعلى المستويات، بهدف تقديم خالص التهنئة للرئيس بتجديد ثقة الشعب السوري، وتقديم التهاني للشعب السوري، بالتدافع والتدفق نحو صناديق الانتخابات في يوم «ماراثوني» طويل بدأ من السابعة صباحاً واستمر حتى منتصف الليل، بعد أن تمّ التمديد لخمس ساعات وفقاً لما نص عليه الدستور والقانون، لاختيار من يريد من المرشحين الثلاثة الكبار في القيمة والمكانة، وبإرادته الحرة الأبية، وكان الاختيار صائباً بتجديد الثقة في الرئيس الأسد، وسط متابعة العالم والإقليم، ومتابعة منظمات حقوقية عالمية.

ومن حيث الشكل ثانياً: فإنه قد تمّ التنبيه علينا قبل مقابلة الرئيس الأسد، ألا يرتدي أحد الحضور «الكمامة» نهائياً، وفي المقابل عدم مصافحة الرئيس أو احتضانه كما كان معتاداً من قبل، الأمر الذي يعكس تحدياً أكبر في مواجهة وباء كورونا، ويؤكد، أنّ مَن انتصر على الإرهاب، لا بدّ أنه سينتصر على الوباء الكورونيّ!

ومن حيث الشكل ثالثاً: فإنه بمجرد وصول السيارات، إلى مبنى الرئاسة، ننزل فنجد باباً وقد انفتح، ونجد الرئيس بشوشاً في استقبالنا يأتي إلينا بحيويّته المعتادة ليستقبلنا فرداً فرداً، ثم يدعونا جميعاً لدخول القاعة للجلوس في جلسة دائرية تضمّ جميع الحضور، وقد شاركتنا السيدة الدكتورة بثينة شعبان (المستشار السياسي الأول للرئيس بشار)، طوال الجلسة، وهي تجلس في منتصف الجانب الأيمن وبعيداً عن الرئيس، وتمسك ورقة وقلماً، لتكتب وقائع اللقاء والحوار الذي تمّ فيه.

ومن حيث الشكل رابعاً: فإنّ الرئيس بشار، يجلس في المنتصف وعن يمينه وعن يساره وفي مواجهته، جميع الحضور في شكل دائري، يتسم بالأسريّة والعائليّة، والودّ، وليست أمامه لا «ترابيزة» يضع عليها أوراقاً، وليس أمام أحد ذلك أيضاً، ولا يمسك ورقة ولا قلماً، ويردّ في لباقة ووضوح وشفافية يلمسها مَن يلقاه عن قرب، على كلّ نقطة يثيرها أيّ من الحضور، من دون تردّد، الأمر الذي يعكس ويؤكد امتلاكه ناصية الرؤية القوميّة العروبيّة الواضحة، التي هي المعين الأساسي، بل والبوصلة لكل سياساته. وأشهد أنه لم يترك أيّ كلمة أو تساؤل رئيسي أو فرعي، لأيّ من الحضور، إلا وأجاب عليه أو علق عليه وبإسهاب بلا نظير.

ومن حيث الشكل خامساً: بعد مرور نصف ساعة من بداية اللقاء، سأله منسق الوفد، هل هناك وقت محدّد ننتهي عنده سيادة الرئيس، حتى يتمّ تحديد عدد المتحدثين الآخرين، وتقديراً لقيمة الوقت عندكم، قال على الفور: «لا… لا سقف للوقت معكم، فأنتم الشعب العربي هنا في سورية، ممثلو الشعب في كلّ قطر، وأنا أحبّ أن أستمع إلى صوت الشعب ورأيه، بلا قيود أو حواجز أو سقف زمني، على عكس اللقاءات الرسميّة، المحدّدة الوقت والأشخاص والتي تتسم بالطابع الرسمي. أما الحديث مع الشعب العربي برموزه القوميين والمقاومين والمناضلين، فهو أمر مختلف وممتع، وأستفيد منه، ويساعدني في تفهّم المحيط العربيّ الحقيقيّ وتطلعات شعبنا العربي في كلّ قُطر، وهمومه، وآماله. ولا شك في أنّ هذا أمر نادر الحدوث في أي قٌطر عربي. فالمعتاد أن يحدث اللقاء مع الرئيس، ليتحدث واحد أو اثنين، ثم يتحدث الرئيس لدقائق، ثم التقاط صورة تذكارية، وينتهي الأمر في أقلّ من 20 دقيقة، وهو ما شاهدته كثيراً، وعشته واقعياً، حتى لا يتصوّر أحد أيّ شبهة انحياز لشخص الرئيس الأسد. فعندما يخصص الرئيس الأسد ثلاث ساعات للحوار مع نحو 25 شخصية عربية، كلّ لها وزنها في الوطن العربي، فهذا شيء كبير، ويمثل لقاء «القيمة» لحق الشعب العربي في الحوار مع الرؤساء الحقيقيين الذين يمثلونه في قمة السلطة. علماً بأنه سبق أن شاركت في لقاء مع الرئيس الأسد منذ سنوات بسيطة، استمرّ 4 ساعات، وكتبت وقائع ما دار في ذلك اللقاء. ومن ثم فهذا ليس بأمر جديد في لقاءات الرئيس بشار الأسد، أعانه الله على مهامه القوميّة والوطنية.

ومن حيث الشكل سادساً: فإنني عندما التقيته مباشرة عند الدخول، كنت قد أعددت كتابي عن سورية: رمز الصمود والمقاومة، لإهدائه له، فما كان منه فوراً، أن ردّ عليّ، لقد وصلني منذ نصف ساعة من د. نجاح العطار (نائبة الرئيس)! والمعنى أنّ السيد الرئيس يتمتع بالذهن الحاضر، بكونه يتذكر أنّ الكتاب ذاته وصله وأكيد اطلع عليه، والدليل حضور هذا الكتاب في ذهنه، والتعليق المباشر عليه عند مجرد تسليمه لسيادته.

ومن حيث الشكل سابعاً: عندما بدأ اللقاء بعد جلوس الرئيس، دعانا إلى البدء بالتعارف، وبدأ باليمين، وكنت أجلس على يساره، وعندما وصل دوري، قال، لا.. لا… د. جمال أعرفك جداً، فاستأذنت سيادته لتأكيد جديد، فوافق، فقلت له، بالإضافة إلى أنني الأمين العام المساعد الأول للتجمع العربي والإسلامي لدعم خيار المقاومة، فإنني أصبحت الآن رئيساً للجمعية العربية للعلوم السياسية منذ عامين، وباعتبارها جمعية عروبيّة قوميّة، ولها دستور مقاوم ضدّ الاستعمار والصهيونية منذ عام 1985، وحتى الآن، فإنني أدعو سيادتكم لدعمها ورعاية نشاطاتها والإذن لتنظيم مؤتمراتنا العلميّة هنا في دمشق قلعة العروبة، فابتسم ببشاشة وجهه المعروفة، وقال طبعاً موافق، وأشار إلى الدكتورة بثينة، لمتابعة الأمر والاستجابة لما يطلبه د. جمال وفوراً، وشكرني.

وعلى الرغم من أنّ آخر واقعتين من حيث الشكل، تخصّني شخصياً، إلا أنّ الإشارة لهما واجبة، لتعلقهما بطبيعة شخصية الرئيس بشار الأسد وذهنه الحاضر وعروبته فكراً وسلوكاً، وهو صانع القرار السياسيّ في الوطن العربي، الذي تعرّض بلده سورية الحبيبة، لأكبر مؤامرة في التاريخ، حيث تكالب عليها الذئاب، ولم يكن هؤلاء يدركون أنّهم يدخلون عرين «الأسد»، ولن يخرجوا منها إلا جثثاً مفحمة. واستطاع الرئيس الأسد أن ينتصر بمثلث القوة والصمود، وأركانه هي (القائد والشعب والجيش). والحمد لله، على أنّ سورية تمكنت من الانتصار وكسر مؤامرة «المصيدة»، ولم تُصب بالانهيار، كما حدث مع بلدان عربية شقيقة. أما ما حدث من عصف ذهني في اللقاء، فذلك هو ما سيتضمّنه المقال المقبل بإذن الله.

ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ

Iraqi and Syrian resistance hit US Military Base in Eastern Syria with at least 8 rockets

29/06/2021

TV report on Muslim Brotherhood’s varying stances towards Israel

June 27, 2021

Description:

A TV report on the divergent political stances towards Israel of the Muslim Brotherhood’s various branches across the Arab and Islamic world.

Source: Al Mayadeen TV (You Tube)

Date: June 7, 2021

(Note: Please help us keep producing independent translations by contributing a small monthly amount here )

Transcript:

UAE’s foreign minister Abdullah Bin Zayed put the name of the Muslim Brotherhood next to (the names of) Hezbollah and Hamas in a striking statement in which he attacked both resistance groups.

The Muslim Brotherhood movement however, no longer has a unified (political) direction, as it has undergone radical shifts following the so-called Arab Spring, especially when branches of (the movement) came to power in Egypt, Tunisia and Morocco. (The movement( was also strongly present in the Syrian crisis. (During this time), the objective of the US and the West in general was to support the movement’s branches in order to develop a new policy that accepts Israel, then normalizes (relations) with it.

It is normal for the branches of the movement in different countries to have their differences. However, with its rise into positions of power and its need to deal with projects such as the “Deal of the Century” and the subsequent surrender (to Israel) agreements,  the movement has witnessed a deep divergence in attitudes and (political) positioning.

In Morocco, for example,  the Justice and Development Party faced a dilemma in relation to its convictions (on the one hand), and the needs of the government (on the other), but this did not prevent it from normalizing (relations) with Israel.

In Tunisia, the Renaissance movement (Ennahda) has stifled – on many occasions – the (parliamentary initiative) to criminalize any normalization with the Israeli occupation, despite Ennahda expressing its support for the Palestinian people and its opposition to normalization.

While in power, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt adhered to the Camp David Accords, (thereby) obliterating the history of the movement, However, after losing power, it rejected the American Deal of the Century and its implications.

The harm caused by the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood to the current fighting against the submissive (‘peace’) projects (with Israel), and the provocative stances of some of its leaders against the Palestinian resistance factions during the “Sword of al-Quds” battle also goes without saying.

Many labels have been used (by the movement) to justify abandoning (its) principles, such as rationality and keeping ‘in touch’ with the (changing) circumstances. In fact, Qatar and Turkey acted as the supporter and the model for some of the Brotherhood branches, in that Doha maintains strong relations with Tel-Aviv, while Ankara has official relations with the Israeli entity.

However, unlike the aberration and illusions of the aforementioned branches of the Muslim Brotherhood, other branches in Algeria and Jordan have taken honorable positions against normalization (with Israel) to the point where they called for direct confrontation against the ‘Deal of the Century’ and the Gulf normalization projects with Israel. 


Subscribe to our mailing list!

Related Posts:

Article by Sergey Lavrov, Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs, “The Law, the Rights and the Rules”, Moscow, June 28, 2021

Article by Sergey Lavrov, Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs, “The Law, the Rights and the Rules”, Moscow, June 28, 2021

June 27, 2021

https://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/4801890

The frank and generally constructive conversation that took place at the June 16, 2021 summit meeting between presidents Vladimir Putin and Joseph Biden in Geneva resulted in an agreement to launch a substantive dialogue on strategic stability, reaffirming the crucial premise that nuclear war is unacceptable. The two sides also reached an understanding on the advisability of engaging in consultations on cybersecurity, the operation of diplomatic missions, the fate of imprisoned Russian and US citizens and a number of regional conflicts.

The Russian leader made it clear, including in his public statements, that finding a mutually acceptable balance of interests strictly on a parity basis is the only way to deliver …The Russian leader made it clear, including in his public statements, that finding a mutually acceptable balance of interests strictly on a parity basis is the only way to deliver on any of these tracks. There were no objections during the talks. However, in their immediate aftermath, US officials, including those who participated in the Geneva meeting, started asserting what seemed to be foregone tenets, perorating that they had “made it clear” to Moscow, “warned it, and stated their demands.” Moreover, all these “warnings” went hand in hand with threats: if Moscow does not accept the “rules of the road” set forth in Geneva in a matter of several months, it would come under renewed pressure.

Of course, it has yet to be seen how the consultations to define specific ways for fulfilling the Geneva understandings as mentioned above will proceed. As Vladimir Putin said during his news conference following the talks, “we have a lot to work on.” That said, it is telling that Washington’s ineradicable position was voiced immediately following the talks, especially since European capitals immediately took heed of the Big Brother’s sentiment and picked up the tune with much gusto and relish. The gist of their statements is that they are ready to normalise their relations with Moscow, but only after it changes the way it behaves.

It is as if a choir has been pre-arranged to sing along with the lead vocalist. It seems that this was what the series of high-level Western events in the build-up to the Russia-US talks was all about: the Group of Seven Summit in Cornwall, UK, the NATO Summit in Brussels, as well as Joseph Biden’s meeting with President of the European Council Charles Michel and President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen.

These meetings were carefully prepared in a way that leaves no doubt that the West wanted to send a clear message: it stands united like never before and will do what it believes to be right in international affairs, while forcing others, primarily Russia and China, to follow its lead. The documents adopted at the Cornwall and Brussels summits cemented the rules-based world order concept as a counterweight to the universal principles of international law with the UN Charter as its primary source.

In doing so, the West deliberately shies away from spelling out the rules it purports to follow, just as it refrains from explaining why they are needed. After all, there are already thousands of universal international legal instruments setting out clear national commitments and transparent verification mechanisms. The beauty of these Western “rules” lies precisely in the fact that they lack any specific content.When someone acts against the will of the West, it immediately responds with a groundless claim that “the rules have been broken” (without bothering to present any evidence) and declares its “right to hold the perpetrators accountable.” The less specific they get, the freer their hand to carry on with the arbitrary practice of employing dirty tactics as a way to pressure competitors. During the so-called “wild 1990s” in Russia, we used to refer to such practices as laying down the law.

To the participants in the G7, NATO and US-EU summits, this series of high-level events signalled the return by the United States into European affairs and the restored consolidation of the Old World under the wing of the new administration in Washington. Most NATO and EU members met this U-turn with enthusiastic comments rather than just a sigh of relief. The adherence to liberal values as the humanity’s guiding star provides an ideological underpinning for the reunification of the “Western family.” Without any false modesty, Washington and Brussels called themselves “an anchor for democracy, peace and security,” as opposed to “authoritarianism in all its forms.” In particular, they proclaimed their intent to use sanctions to “support democracy across the globe.” To this effect, they took on board the American idea of convening a Summit for Democracy. Make no mistake, the West will cherry pick the participants in this summit. It will also set an agenda that is unlikely to meet any opposition from the participants of its choosing. There has been talk of democracy-exporting countries undertaking “enhanced commitments” to ensure universal adherence to “democratic standards” and devising mechanisms for controlling these processes.

The revitalised Anglo-American Atlantic Charter approved by Joseph Biden and Boris Johnson on June 10, 2021 on the sidelines of the G7 Summit is also worth noting. It was cast as an updated version of the 1941 document signed by Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill under the same title. At the time, it played an important role in shaping the contours of the post-war world order.

However, neither Washington, nor London mentioned an essential historical fact: eighty years ago, the USSR and a number of European governments in exile joined the 1941 charter, paving the way to making it one of the conceptual pillars of the Anti-Hitler Coalition and one of the legal blueprints of the UN Charter.

By the same token, the New Atlantic Charter has been designed as a starting point for building a new world order, but guided solely by Western “rules.” Its provisions are ideologically tainted. They seek to widen the gap between the so-called liberal democracies and all other nations, as well as legitimise the rules-based order. The new charter fails to mention the UN or the OSCE, while stating without any reservations the adherence by the Western nations to their commitments as NATO members, viewed de facto as the only legitimate decision-making centre (at least this is how former NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen described NATO’s role). It is clear that the same philosophy will guide the preparations for the Summit for Democracy.

Labelled as “authoritarian powers,” Russia and China have been designated as the main obstacles to delivering on the agenda set out at the June summits. From a general perspective, they face two groups of grievances, loosely defined as external and internal. In terms of international affairs, Beijing is accused of being too assertive … Russia stands accused of adopting an “aggressive posture”in a number of regions. This is the way they treat Moscow’s policy aimed at countering ultra-radical and neo-Nazi aspirations in its immediate neighbourhood, where the rights of Russians, as well as other ethnic minorities, are being suppressed, and the Russian language, education and culture rooted out. They also dislike the fact than Moscow stands up for countries that became victims to Western gambles, were attacked by international terrorists and risked losing their statehood, as was the case with Syria.

Still, the West reserved its biggest words to the inner workings of the “non-democratic” countries and its commitment to reshape them to fit into the Western mould. This entails bringing society in compliance with the vision of democracy as preached by Washington and Brussels. This lies at the root of the demands that Moscow and Beijing, as well as all others, follow the Western prescriptions on human rights, civil society, opposition treatment, the media, governance and the interaction between the branches of power. While proclaiming the “right” to interfere in the domestic affairs of other countries for the sake of promoting democracy as it understands it, the West instantly loses all interest when we raise the prospect of making international relations more democratic, including renouncing arrogant behaviour and committing to abide by the universally recognised tenets of international law instead of “rules.” By expanding sanctions and other illegitimate coercive measures against sovereign states, the West promotes totalitarian rule in global affairs, assuming an imperial, neo-colonial stance in its relations with third countries. They are asked to adopt the democratic rule under the model of the Western choosing, and forget about democracy in international affairs, since someone will be deciding everything for them. All that is asked of these third countries is to keep quiet, or face reprisals.

Clearheaded politicians in Europe and America realise that this uncompromising policy leads nowhere, and are beginning to think pragmatically, albeit out of public view, recognising that the world has more than just one civilisation. They are beginning to recognise that Russia, China and other major powers have a history that dates back a thousand years, and have their own traditions, values and way of life. Attempts to decide whose values are better, and whose are worse, seem pointless. Instead, the West must simply recognise that there are other ways to govern that may be different from the Western approaches, and accept and respect this as a given. No country is immune to human rights issues, so why all this high-browed hubris? Why do the Western countries assume that they can deal with these issues on their own, since they are democracies, while others have yet to reach this level, and are in need of assistance that the West will generously provide.

International relations are going through fundamental shifts that affect everyone without exception. Trying to predict where it will take us is impossible. Still, there is a question: messianic aspirations apart, what is the most effective form of government for coping with and removing threats that transcend borders and affect all people, no matter where they live? Political scientists are beginning to compare the available toolboxes used by the so-called liberal democracies and by “autocratic regimes.” In this context, it is telling that the term “autocratic democracy” has been suggested, even if timidly.

These are useful considerations, and serious-minded politicians who are currently in power, among others, must take heed. Thinking and scrutinising what is going on around us has never hurt anyone. The multipolar world is becoming reality.Attempts to ignore this reality by asserting oneself as the only legitimate decision-making centre will hardly bring about solutions to real, rather than farfetched challenges. Instead, what is needed is mutually respectful dialogue involving the leading powers and with due regard for the interests of all other members of the international community. This implies an unconditional commitment to abide by the universally accepted norms and principles of international law, including respecting the sovereign equality of states, non-interference in their domestic affairs, peaceful resolution of conflict, and the right to self-determination.

Taken as a whole, the historical West dominated the world for five hundred years. However, there is no doubt that it now sees that this era is coming to a close, while clinging to the status it used to enjoy, and putting artificial brakes on the objective process consisting in the emergence of a polycentric world. This brought about an attempt to provide a conceptual underpinning to the new vision of multilateralism. For example, France and Germany tried to promote “effective multilateralism,” rooted in the EU ideals and actions, and serving as a model to everyone else, rather than promoting UN’s inclusive multilateralism.

By imposing the concept of a rules-based order, the West seeks to shift the conversation on key issues to the platforms of its liking, where no dissident voices can be herd. This is how like-minded groups and various “appeals” emerge. This is about coordinating prescriptions and then making everyone else follow them. Examples include an “appeal for trust and security in cyberspace”, “the humanitarian appeal for action”, and a “global partnership to protect media freedom.” Each of these platforms brings together only several dozen countries, which is far from a majority, as far as the international community is concerned. The UN system offers inclusive negotiations platforms on all of the abovementioned subjects. Understandably, this gives rise to alternative points of view that have to be taken into consideration in search of a compromise, but all the West wants is to impose its own rules.

At the same time, the EU develops dedicated horizontal sanctions regimes for each of its “like-minded groups,” of course, without looking back at the UN Charter. This is how it works: those who join these “appeals” or “partnerships” decide among themselves who violates their requirements in a given sphere, and the European Union imposes sanctions on those at fault. What a convenient method. They can indict and punish all by themselves without ever needing to turn to the UN Security Council. They even came up with a rationale to this effect: since we have an alliance of the most effective multilateralists, we can teach others to master these best practices. To those who believe this to be undemocratic or at odds with a vision of genuine multilateralism, President of France Emmanuel Macron offered an explanation in his remarks on May 11, 2021: multilateralism does not mean necessity to strike unanimity, and the position of those “who do not wish to continue moving forward must not be able to stop … an ambitious avant-garde” of the world community.

Make no mistake: there is nothing wrong with the rules per se. On the contrary, the UN Charter is a set of rules, but these rules were approved by all countries of the world, rather than by a closed group at a cosy get-together.

An interesting detail: in Russian, the words “law” and “rule” share a single root. To us, a rule that is genuine and just is inseparable from the law. This is not the case for Western languages. For instance, in English, the words “law” and “rule” do not share any resemblance. See the difference? “Rule” is not so much about the law, in the sense of generally accepted laws, as it is about the decisions taken by the one who rules or governs. It is also worth noting that “rule” shares a single root with “ruler,” with the latter’s meanings including the commonplace device for measuring and drawing straight lines. It can be inferred that through its concept of “rules” the West seeks to align everyone around its vision or apply the same yardstick to everybody, so that everyone falls into a single file.

While reflecting on linguistics, worldview, sentiment, and the way they vary from one nation or culture to another, it is worth recollecting how the West has been justifying NATO’s unreserved eastward expansion towards the Russian border. When we point to the assurances provided to the Soviet Union that this would not happen, we hear that these were merely spoken promises, and there were no documents signed to this effect.There is a centuries-old tradition in Russia of making handshake deals without signing anything and holding one’s word as sacrosanct, but it seems unlikely to ever take hold in the West.

Efforts to replace international law by Western “rules” include an immanently dangerous policy of revising the history and outcomes of the Second World War and the Nuremberg trials verdicts as the foundation of today’s world order. The West refuses to support a Russia-sponsored UN resolution proclaiming that glorifying Nazism is unacceptable, and rejects our proposals to discuss the demolition of monuments to those who liberated Europe. They also want to condemn to oblivion momentous post-war developments, such as the 1960 UN Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, initiated by our country. The former colonial powers seek to efface this memory by replacing it with hastily concocted rituals like taking a knee ahead of sports competitions, in order to divert attention from their historical responsibility for colonial-era crimes.

The rules-based order is the embodiment of double standards. The right to self-determination is recognised as an absolute “rule” whenever it can be used to an advantage. This applies to the Malvinas Islands, or the Falklands, some 12,000 kilometres from Great Britain, to the remote former colonial territories Paris and London retain despite multiple UN resolutions and rulings by the International Court of Justice, as well as Kosovo, which obtained its “independence” in violation of a UN Security Council resolution. However, if self-determination runs counter to the Western geopolitical interests, as it happened when the people of Crimea voted for reunification with Russia, this principle is cast aside, while condemning the free choice made by the people and punishing them with sanctions.

Apart from encroaching on international law, the “rules” concept also manifests itself in attempts to encroach on the very human nature. In a number of Western countries, students learn at school that Jesus Christ was bisexual. Attempts by reasonable politicians to shield the younger generation from aggressive LGBT propaganda are met with bellicose protests from the “enlightened Europe.” All world religions, the genetic code of the planet’s key civilisations, are under attack. The United States is at the forefront of state interference in church affairs, openly seeking to drive a wedge into the Orthodox world, whose values are viewed as a powerful spiritual obstacle for the liberal concept of boundless permissiveness.

The insistence and even stubbornness demonstrated by the West in imposing its “rules” are striking. Of course, domestic politics is a factor, with the need to show voters how tough your foreign policy can get when dealing with “autocratic foes” during every electoral cycle, which happen every two years in the United States.

Still, it was also the West that coined the “liberty, equality, fraternity” motto. I do not know whether the term “fraternity” is politically correct in today’s Europe from a “gender perspective,” but there were no attempts to encroach on equality so far. As mentioned above, while preaching equality and democracy in their countries and demanding that other follow its lead, the West refuses to discuss ways to ensure equality and democracy in international affairs.

This approach is clearly at odds with the ideals of freedom. The veil of its superiority conceals weakness and the fear of engaging in a frank conversation not only with yes-men and those eager to fall in line, but also with opponents with different beliefs and values, not neo-liberal or neo-conservative ones, but those learned at mother’s knee, inherited from many past generations, traditions and beliefs.

It is much harder to accept the diversity and competition of ideas in the development of the world than to invent prescriptions for all of humanity within a narrow circle of the like-minded, free from any disputes on matters of principle, which makes the emergence of truth all but impossible. However, universal platforms can produce agreements that are much more solid, sustainable, and can be subject to objective verification.

This immutable truth struggles to make it through to the Western elites, consumed as they are with the exceptionalism complex. As I mentioned earlier in this article, right after the talks between Vladimir Putin and Joseph Biden, EU and NATO officials rushed to announce that nothing has changed in the way they treat Russia. Moreover, they are ready to see their relations with Moscow deteriorate further, they claimed.

Moreover, it is an aggressive Russophobic minority that increasingly sets the EU’s policy, as confirmed by the EU Summit in Brussels on June 24 and 25, 2021, where the future of relations with Russia was on the agenda. The idea voiced by Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron to hold a meeting with Vladimir Putin was killed before it saw the light of day. Observers noted that the Russia-US Summit in Geneva was tantamount to a go-ahead by the United States to have this meeting, but the Baltic states, siding with Poland, cut short this “uncoordinated” attempt by Berlin and Paris, while the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry summoned the German and French ambassadors to explain their governments’ actions. What came out of the debates at the Brussels summit was an instruction to the European Commission and the European Union External Action Service to devise new sanctions against Moscow without referring to any specific “sins,” just in case. No doubt they will come up with something, should the need arise.

Neither NATO, nor the EU intend to divert from their policy of subjugating other regions of the world, proclaiming a self-designated global messianic mission.The North-Atlantic Treaty Organisation is seeking to proactively contribute to America’s strategy for the Indo-Pacific Region, clearly targeted at containing China, and undermining ASEAN’s role in its decades-long efforts to build an inclusive cooperation architecture for Asia-Pacific. In turn, the European Union drafts programmes to “embrace” geopolitical spaces in its neighbourhood and beyond, without coordinating these initiatives even with the invited countries. This is what the Eastern Partnership, as well as a recent programme approved by Brussels for Central Asia, are all about. There is a fundamental difference between these approaches and the ones guiding integration processes with Russia’s involvement: the CIS, the CSTO, EurAsEC and the SCO, which seek to develop relations with external partners exclusively on the basis of parity and mutual agreement.

With its contemptuous attitude towards other members of the international community, the West finds itself on the wrong side of history.

Serious, self-respecting countries will never tolerate attempts to talk to them through ultimatums and will discuss any issues only on an equal footing.

As for Russia, it is high time that everyone understands that we have drawn a definitive line under any attempts to play a one-way game with us. All the mantras we hear from the Western capitals on their readiness to put their relations with Moscow back on track, as long as it repents and changes its tack, are meaningless. Still, many persist, as if by inertia, in presenting us with unilateral demands, which does little, if any, credit to how realistic they are.

The policy of having the Russian Federation develop on its own, independently and protecting national interests, while remaining open to reaching agreements with foreign partners on an equal basis, has long been at the core of all its position papers on foreign policy, national security and defence. However, judging by the practical steps taken over the recent years by the West, they probably thought that Russia did not really mean what it preached, as if it did not intend to follow through on these principles. This includes the hysterical response to Moscow’s efforts to stand up for the rights of Russians in the aftermath of the bloody 2014 government coup in Ukraine, supported by the United States, NATO and the EU. They thought that if they applied some more pressure on the elites and targeted their interests, while expanding personal, financial and other sectoral sanctions, Moscow would come to its senses and realise that it would face mounting challenges on its development path, as long as it did not “change its behaviour,” which implies obeying the West. Even when Russia made it clear that we view this policy by the United States and Europe as a new reality and will proceed on economic and other matters from the premise that we cannot depend on unreliable partners, the West persisted in believing that, at the end of the day, Moscow “will come to its senses” and will make the required concessions for the sake of financial reward. Let me emphasise what President Vladimir Putin has said on multiple occasions: there have been no unilateral concessions since the late 1990s and there never will be. If you want to work with us, recover lost profits and business reputations, let us sit down and agree on ways we can meet each other half way in order to find fair solutions and compromises.

It is essential that the West understands that this is a firmly ingrained worldview among the people of Russia, reflecting the attitude of the overwhelming majority here. The “irreconcilable” opponents of the Russian government who have placed their stakes on the West and believe that all Russia’s woes come from its anti-Western stance advocate unilateral concessions for the sake of seeing the sanctions lifted and receiving hypothetical financial gains. But they are totally marginal in Russian society. During his June 16, 2021 news conference in Geneva, Vladimir Putin made it abundantly clear what the West is after when it supports these marginal forces.

These are disruptive efforts as far as history is concerned, while Russians have always demonstrated maturity, a sense of self-respect, dignity and national pride, and the ability to think independently, especially during hard times, while remaining open to the rest of the world, but only on an equal, mutually beneficial footing. Once we put the confusion and mayhem of the 1990s behind us, these values became the bedrock of Russia’s foreign policy concept in the 21st century. The people of Russia can decide on how they view the actions by their government without getting any prompts from abroad.

As to the question on how to proceed on the international stage, there is no doubt that leaders will always play an important role, but they have to reaffirm their authority, offer new ideas and lead by conviction, not ultimatums. The Group of Twenty, among others, is a natural platform for working out mutually acceptable agreements. It brings together the leading economies, young and old, including the G7, as well as the BRICS and its like-minded countries. Russia’s initiative to form a Greater Eurasian Partnership by coordinating the efforts of countries and organisations across the continent holds a powerful consolidating potential. Seeking toEfforts to bring more democracy to international relations and affirm a polycentric world order include reforming the UN Security Council by strengthening it with Asian, African and Latin American countries, and ending the anomaly with the excessive representation of the West in the UN’s main body.

facilitate an honest conversation on the key global stability matters, President Vladimir Putin suggested convening a summit of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council that have special responsibility for maintaining international peace and stability on the planet.

Regardless of any ambitions and threats, our country remains committed to a sovereign and independent foreign policy, while also ready to offer a unifying agenda in international affairs with due account for the cultural and civilisational diversity in today’s world. Confrontation is not our choice, no matter the rationale. On June 22, 2021, Vladimir Putin published an article “Being Open, Despite the Past,” in which he emphasised: “We simply cannot afford to carry the burden of past misunderstandings, hard feelings, conflicts, and mistakes.” He also discussed the need to ensure security without dividing lines, a common space for equitable cooperation and inclusive development. This approach hinges on Russia’s thousand-year history and is fully consistent with the current stage in its development. We will persist in promoting the emergence of an international relations culture based on the supreme values of justice and enabling all countries, large and small, to develop in peace and freedom. We will always remain open to honest dialogue with anyone who demonstrates a reciprocal readiness to find a balance of interests firmly rooted in international law. These are the rules we adhere to.

‘Many US commentators have never BEEN to countries they comment on, see entire world from Washington perspective’ – Stephen Kinzer

moi

June 27, 2021, RT.com

-by Eva K Bartlett

Much of Western media is a mixture of sensationalist accusations and fear mongering about ‘enemy’ states. It is difficult to find perspectives divorced from US foreign policy, American journalist Stephen Kinzer has told RT.

I asked the author and journalist Stephen Kinzer how the corporate media came to be so devoid of honest content and discussed the rise of censorship by Big Tech.

Kinzer is a Boston Globe columnist and formerly a correspondent for the New York Times. With over two decades of experience reporting from around the world, including areas being targeted by American imperialism, Kinzer can offer a much needed critique on the state of journalism today.

He started as an independent journalist in Central America in the mid-70s, when few journalists were going there, later reporting from Central Asia, Turkey, the Caucasus, and Europe.

I’m sometimes asked why I developed a different perspective on the world than many other people who comment in the American press,” he told RT. “I always seem to be the skunk at the foreign policy garden party. Why is that?

Upon reflection, I think it has to do with the way that I learned about the world. Many people who write about the world in the United States learned about the world the same way: they went to international relations schools, they went to work on congressional staffs, then they worked at think tanks. And they’re very steeped in this Washington-centric view of the world.”

Unlike such journalists and commentators, Kinzer learned journalism by going places and writing firsthand what he saw and heard.

I learned about the world from the perspective of the people who were the victims of American foreign policy. I was in the places where people were getting bombed. I saw American foreign policy from the perspective of the rest of the world.”

Having myself learned journalism the same way, I appreciated his words. And I had a followup question about the concept of journalistic qualifications, something my detractors have claimed I lack.

According to Kinzer, there are many qualifications for being a journalist that are much more important than what school you went to or what you studied.

The most important one is independent thinking. The great curse of our press in the West is willingness to accept the official narrative,” he said. 

In his view, many American journalists are merely stenographers. 

They’re sitting down at a press conference, they write down what some government spokesman says, then they go and print that in a newspaper. You hardly even need to have a sentient human there, you can get an algorithm to probably put most of those stories together.

And when you want to have a story that’s very well-sourced, they call the State Department, and the Defense Department, and several think tanks, and some congressmen. And they think, ‘Well I sure covered the landscape on this one!’”

But that, Kinzer argues, is not what covering the landscape is about. 

The great qualification you need for a journalist is the confidence to go out and see for yourself, and believe that your eyes are actually telling you more than press releases from some other country.

Indeed, much of the lies and war propaganda about Syria, for example, have come from journalists situated in Istanbul, Beirut, or North America, most who have never been to Syria, or if they have – not in the past decade.

It’s amazing to see how many people have built reputations as commentators on foreign countries and world affairs who have never been there, have no idea, beyond vague tropes, of what those countries are,” Kinzer said. “It’s because they are seeing the entire world from Washington’s perspective, and don’t think there is any other perspective worth having,” he added.

It’s truly amazing, I’ve seen the decline of this profession into such willing subservience. We don’t have any core of regular columnists or people trying to challenge established narratives. We do have voices that pop up periodically, but they’re so drowned out by the regular columnists who just voice the same tropes over and over again,” Kinzer said. 

The intellectual laziness of the American press in covering the world has never been as extreme as it is now. It’s just as dangerous in most of what’s called NATO countries to be contradicting the narrative as it is in the United States.”

Tremendous desire of CIA to control news 

In 2014, German journalist and editor, Udo Ulfkotte, told RT he had been forced to publish works not written by him under his own name (or risk being fired), including things “written by agents of the CIA and other intelligence services, especially the German secret service.” 

According to Kinzer, the CIA “has had a massive, long-term effort to influence” the Western media dating back to the Cold War era. 

The CIA has placed its own people, people who are on its payroll, in the offices of major news outlets over many decades. There was a large project the CIA called ‘Operation Mockingbird’ aimed specifically at trying to influence the US press, and particularly what the US press writes about the world,” he said. 

He recalled that in 1954, “when the CIA was planning to overthrow the government of Guatemala… because its president was ‘communist’, a New York Times reporter there started writing stories saying that actually the president is not communist and that land reform is only answering a desperate need of starving Guatemalans.” 

At CIA Director Allen Dulles’ request, the publisher agreed to keep the correspondent, Sydney Gruson, out of Guatemala. 

Now that’s an extreme example. But, the motivation behind it is still there. There is a tremendous desire on the part of the CIA to control news.” 

While not surprised that the CIA would interfere in journalism, Kinzer was emphatic about his disgust that journalists toe the line.

What I don’t like is that journalists go along with this! Power has so many levers, why should journalists become yet another one of them. We are the ones that are supposed to be questioning. It’s the job of reporters not to submit themselves to that.

‘Press a button, and the narrative changes’

Kinzer also noted how media narratives can suddenly change, like a switch has been flipped. 

It’s so interesting that when power decides to change the narrative, it happens right away.

I can remember just six months ago turning on my PBS News Hour, in the US, and seeing a very longreport with General Dunford and Kelly Ayotte and a bunch of these right wingers who had come up with a big report about Afghanistan. And it was about why we can’t leave Afghanistan, we have to stay. It was a 10-minute report, and no other voices, nobody came on to say, ‘Wait a minute, that’s nonsense.’ Everybody was saying, ‘We have to stay in Afghanistan forever.’

Suddenly, the president of the United States decides, OK, we’re gonna withdraw. And now, suddenly, it’s acceptable to say, ‘That whole Afghanistan thing was a disaster.’ Somebody just has to press a button, then the narrative changes, then everybody is allowed to say what the president said. But if you had said it one day before, you would have been in a lot of trouble.

You have to wait for the general narrative to change, then you can change your narrative, but don’t do it until power tells you it is acceptable to change.”

Later in our conversation, he gave the example of writing about Israel, which he said was hard to do, until recently.

Suddenly, in recent weeks even, it’s become a little more OK to be critical of Israeli policies, because some people in Washington are now a little more critical.

Big Tech censorship on the rise

In the past several years, there has been an increase in social media giants deciding what content is acceptable and what “violates” so-called “community standards.” And as I wrote recently, it has gotten to the point where Twitter issues scary warnings about “unsafe” or “spammy” content from websites the social media platform deems dangerous, potentially scaring readers away. 

Commenting on the matter, Kinzer said that “the power of private companies to decide what people see and don’t see is greater now than ever.

As for censorship by the outlets he has written for, Kinzer said he was lucky to be writing from places that editors really didn’t have the knowledge to tell him how to report. “Nobody called me and said ‘I know everything about Uzbekistan and this is wrong.’”

That said, he does maintain that in writing his columns, some subjects are either taboo or you would have to frame them in the usual anti-Russia manner common in Western media.

It’s very hard to get a story in the American press about Russia that’s anything other than fitting into the cliches. I’ve had trouble writing about Russia, because the narrative that Putin is something other than a killer is not welcome in the United States. And I’ve had trouble writing about Syria. And of course, it’s very difficult to write about Israel.

Lather, rinse, repeat

On the 10-year anniversary of the war on Syria, I wrote about how, mind-bogglingly, Western media and pundits continue to repeat the cliched and debunked rhetoric and lies that have been recycled year after year.

Kinzer addressed this technique, the repetition of narratives.

I had an editor at the New York Times years ago who told me: A lot of journalism is about repetition. And boy does the American press do that. We have been told certain things about certain countries so many times over. And it just seems like the truth.

“‘The evils that have taken hold of Russia. The daily genocide that’s happening under the killers in Syria…’ You don’t need to go, you don’t need to check, it’s just like the air, it’s like an obvious fact.

I even see it in what’s happened to the Pulitzer Prize for International Journalism,” he said, adding that in 2020 it “predictably” went to a series of reports on “how evil Russia is” and this year – to a series of reports on “how evil China is.” 

The Pulitzer, he argued, is supposed to encourage original reporting, “not people that just scribble down what officials say, and then put it in nicer prose, and use phrases that are calculated to make people believe that government opinion is actual fact.

The job of journalists is to rebel against the narrative. We are out there as the eyes and ears of the world. If you don’t want to do it, fine, but don’t pretend that you’re doing it, and sit in your little cubicle and think of the stereotypes you’ve been fed and just regurgitate them. That is not journalism, it’s just public relations.”

In conclusion, Kinzer recalled a quote by Mark Twain: “The majority is always wrong. When you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform.”

Indeed, time and again when the majority has written about “weapons of mass destruction,” “chemical attacks,” Iraqi troops “killing babies in incubators,” and other Washington-contrived narratives, those courageous few who have stood up against those lies-based-narratives have proven to be honest journalists. 

If only more journalists would follow.  

%d bloggers like this: