43 1 min 11 yrs

First, the bad news.

The Syrian army unleashed a massive attack on the city of Homs early on Saturday morning, bombing the protest hub and killing at least 260 people in a bloody “massacre”, activists and witnesses said.

Now the good news.

The UN is going to have a debate about it, real soon.

And all the time, Iran looks on and smiles, serenely.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

43 thoughts on “THE HOMS MASSACRE

  1. So supporting the Egyptiam people’s toppling of Mubarak was wrong, but intervening to help topple Assad is right ?

  2. I say do nada. Let nature take its course.

    Maybe the European Union can offer the Syrian government membership for its fine example of positive proactive management.

    After all,

    When the Greek populace sees this it might discourage them from all their silly anti-social, infrastructure damaging behaviour and encourage them to get their economic house in order.

  3. Unfortunately the Assad regime enjoys the full protection of Russia.

    No matter how many Syrians are killed by this unelected and illegitimate regime.

    The Russian media, incl the US TV mouthpiece RT, is barely reporting the massacres in Syria. Last night, and most nights, the coverage was all about complaints about US ” banksters ” and nothing about the gunning down of 200 persons in the streets.

  4. Why does the single country veto on the security council exist. It is an anachronism. If an individual country on the security council does not agree with a resolution it can refuse to participate in enforcing it, but the resolution should still pass if it carries a majority of the vote.

  5. Petr

    I hope they do. It would be better than having Assad allowed to slaughter the Syrian people at will.

  6. The massacre was reported by ‘activists’. In today’s hi-tech world, there appears to be no evidence to back these ‘reports’ – no video evidence from a mobile phone etc? Aftyer all, 200 dead people is rather difficult to miss and very easy to show.

    As for Iran sitting back serenely, I’m sure that the Iranians will be fully aware of the US/Israeli capacity for false-flag provocation, especially as it is being discussed within the US regime’s think-tanks:


    see pages 84-85

    – The truth is that these all would be challenging cases
    to make. For that reason, it would be far more
    preferable if the United States could cite an Iranian
    provocation as justification for the airstrikes before
    launching them. Clearly, the more outrageous, the
    more deadly, and the more unprovoked the Iranian
    action, the better off the United States would be.
    Of course, it would be very difficult for the United
    States to goad Iran into such a provocation without
    the rest of the world recognizing this game,
    which would then undermine it. (One method that
    would have some possibility of success would be
    to ratchet up covert regime change efforts in the
    hope that Tehran would retaliate overtly, or even semi-overtly, which could then be portrayed as an unprovoked act of Iranian aggression.) –

  7. Allan@Aberdeen –

    There have been warnings this week of Iranian terror attacks in the US. There might be terror attacks, but they won’t be Iranian.

  8. Colm- It’s a question of ‘He who pays the piper’

    Voting for action through the security council means providing the means to do it. If the U.S. doesn’t stump up the money and resources it can’t happen. So majority voting doesn’t matter really.

  9. The Ron Paul set thinks that everything is a Fawles fwag operation.

    Tell me Allan, does the world press have proper access to Syria? How else is word supposed to get out when the regime is actively stopping the flow of news?

    It is noted that Al Jazeera is providing some damned honest reporting on the Syrian uprisings. I recommend it esp to Americans, who simply do not have much other access to proper reporting on this.

  10. Never thought I’d hear you say that about AlJazeera, Phanotm. Was always trying to make the point that it’s a bloody good channel. Not without its biases, of course, just like any channel (or person).

    Allan: “The massacre was reported by ‘activists’. In today’s hi-tech world, there appears to be no evidence to back these ‘reports’ – no video evidence from a mobile phone etc?”

    Apart from this lot:

  11. Petr

    Never thought I’d say it either!

    But I go by the evidence, and the English language service that I now see in the US ( via Channel RISE here ) and in London does some sustained quality reporting

    They don’t play favorites as far as I can see, and have given honest reporting on all the Arab uprisings, as well as on sensitive things in other regions

    They are miles ahead of Fox, CNN or the laughable RT.

  12. A true treat is watching Allan and Pete downplay actual police states (Syria, Iran) while they chicken little the US and UK as “police states”.

  13. Let’s read again what is being discussed within the military-media of the US:

    – For that reason, it would be far more
    preferable if the United States could cite an Iranian
    provocation as justification for the airstrikes before
    launching them. Clearly, the more outrageous, the
    more deadly, and the more unprovoked the Iranian
    action, the better off the United States would be.
    Of course, it would be very difficult for the United
    States to goad Iran into such a provocation without
    the rest of the world recognizing this game,
    which would then undermine it. –

    Clearly a major provocation is needed, a huge black-op, because only 17% of Americans are reported as favouring direct action against Iran:


    – Those surveyed were asked “how far do you think the United States should go to prevent” Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Some 47 percent favored economic sanctions against Iran, but only 13 percent said the U.S. should “go farther and take covert action against Iran such as sabotage and assassination of scientists working on their weapons program,” and just 17 percent would go still farther and “take military action against Iran, including bombing weapons facilities inside the country.” –

    However, according to somebody who had some experience of getting these things done, the public can be made to do whatever the government wants:

    Why of course the people don’t want war … But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship … Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

    Hermann Goering

  14. Mahons the lawyer thinks that the US is “the land of the free”. Let’s have a look at what the authorities in “the land of the free” are doing:



    This is the Stasi, gestapo, KGB all happening live in the US aided and abetted by the likes of mahons, the lawyer. This is what a police state is about.

  15. By your friends I shall know you. Assad’s most important friends are Iran, Russia and China. All great defenders of democracy and human rights.

    “An Arab and Western-backed resolution condemning the violent crackdown in Syria has been vetoed at the UN Security Council by Russia and China. The two permanent members of the council rejected the draft resolution despite strong condemnation by US President Barack Obama of the violence. The vote came hours after activists accused Syrian security forces of killing at least 55 people at Homs.”

    Tyrants and butchers of the world unite to defend one of their own

  16. The very idea that the US and the joined-at-the-hip UK are protectors of some kind of ‘freedom’ can be shown to be nonsense, but it isn’t seen on the corporate media. Here are the words of General Smedley Butler:

    – WAR is a racket. It always has been.

    It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

    A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small “inside” group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

    In the World War [i.e. WWI] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.

    How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle? –

    The corporate chicken-hawks who make such vast amounts of money from wars which they contrived never risk their own lives, but why should they when there are so many ‘patriots’ willing to risk their own? Libya last year (gold and oil), Syria now (territory), Iran imminently (oil and gold), Venezuela to follow (oil, and now gold) – this was all foretold:

  17. “A true treat is watching Allan and Pete downplay actual police states (Syria, Iran) while they chicken little the US and UK as “police states”.”

    Well, yes.

    In the meantime, the FBI says that paying by cash and a concern for privacy is “suspicious” and an indicator of terrorist activity.

    Citizens, take every opportunity to inform on your neighbours.

  18. I think Mahons has a point at 4:14. While there is certainly a legitimate debate to be had re the erosion/attempted erosion of our civil liberties here in the west, to equate this, or to imply an equivalence with what’s going on in Syria, is…. out of perspective, I’d say.

  19. And the bad news:


    – Early accounts of the casualties in Homs talked of as many as 200 deaths, but one of the main activist groups later revised its confirmed toll down to 55. –

    The estimates of dead are plumetting, but the figure of over 200 is what will be retained in the minds of the gullible public. Of the dead, how many are ‘militants’ or ‘activists’? I’d wager rather a lot. The number of dead will be used to justify ‘humanitarian intervention’ of the murderous kind seen (but not shown by corporate media) which killed thousands in Libya. There really is a military-media complex for, without the controlled media, the lucrative ‘humanitarian interventions’ so beloved of the weapons corporations just wouldn’t happen.

  20. Tom Tyler –

    Except that Mahons dreamed up an equivalence. No-one is covering up for the Damascus and Tehran regimes. We know what they’re like. However, there’s a wilful and ongoing disregard for the bullshit and lies which our governments and government media send our way. Lies enabled the Iraq fiasco and they perpetuate a futile occupation of Afghanistan. This is just the last decade. The last century has many more such examples. You’d think that some would eventually become fed up of being deceived.

    If you doubt that those who govern us are capable of great evil then google Operation Northwood, a Pentagon/CIA scheme to commit mass murder in America and blame it on Cuba. If that’s a bit far off then consider the MOD/CIA biological warfare tests on millions of Britons.

    Anyone suggesting in those decades that government cannot ever be trusted and is capable of unimaginable wickedness would have been mocked or derided. They also would have been correct. As George Carlin wisely suggested: do not believe anything the government says.

  21. I think Mahons has a point at 4:14

    I disagree. We all know what the governments of Syria, Iran, Russia and China are, but they don’t claim to be lands ‘of the free’. Whenever I watch RT or vist any .cn websites, I make a point of only reading their foreign i.e. non-Russia/China news because they will lie about or at least dampen anything relating to perceived suppression of human rights in their countries. But none of these countries intervene on the other side of the world nor have hundreds of military bases everywhere. That the US/UK are acting in Syria for some kind of freedom can be shown for the lie that it is from the events of Libya and Egypt – but maybe that’s so long ago that the X-Factored population has forgotten, if they ever knew in the first place.

  22. Allan

    Plummeting, like your list of Holocaust victims?

    I guess no one is ever killed, except by the US?

  23. Phantom – the number of dead claimed a few hours ago is over 200: it is now 55. That, even by the dodgy arithmetic of an innumerate in the financial sector, can be termed ‘plummeting’.

    Do you dispute that your media-military complex is winding up the American public for war against Iran? Bear in mind that it was predicted (watch all especially after 5.35 – attack on Iran forecast):

  24. one of the main activist groups later revised its confirmed toll down to 55.

    Whew! So that’s all right then. Russia and China were quite right to veto that resolution today. After all, between them they have killed tens of thousands of their own citizens since 1990 and tens of millions if we go back as far as 1930. Assad is a paragon of restraint in his butchering and fully deserves to stay in power.

  25. No peter – it’s not all right and I’m quite sure that my post above made it clear. But what is clearer is how the corporate media are manipulating data to instigate an attack similar to that against Libya – now that should be clear.

  26. Allan

    This is not some western conspiracy to obtain oil – as you will know Syria has very little of that. Most of the Arab world wants to see Assad overthrown. His only supporters are Iran, Russia and China. Oh and Hezbollah and Hamas of course. Fine bedfellows for sure.

  27. Allan’s fine with that.

    If the US is against it, he supports it.

    The enemy of his enemy is his friend.

    As immoral as thought gets, but some folks are like that.

  28. Phantom –

    Do you mean that to oppose the US federal government is as immoral as thought gets?

  29. No. At times it is absolutelty correct.

    But the likes of Allan oppose US policy at all times. Repeat At all times.

    If he’d been an adult during WW2 , we all know where his sympathies would lie. With his friends who ran the camps where no one died at German hands but where some died when the evil allies blocked medicine shipments

  30. Well said Phantom.

    Of course Allan reckons that nowhere near 6 million jews died in WW2. It may have been as few as 3 million, but the vast Zionist conspiracy has done its work well.

  31. I oppose US policy at all times: repeat – at all times, because US policy is driven entirely by the banking forces which control it, and they are driven only by money. their entire political system is owned by these same interests. There is no instance which I can think of where US policy was driven by moral purpose. This doesn’t mean that there wasn’t such a case: it’s just that, at this moment, I can’t think of one. Not WW1 nor even WW2. Even the Cold War was established by the banking and corporate interests to generate military expenditure. They gave the Soviet Union the H-bomb ffs, and that is known but, because Faux/CNN/NBC/ABC/CBS Inc. doesn’t broadcast it, then the dupes don’t believe it, and there are plenty on this thread.

  32. their entire political system is owned by these same interests.

    Agreed. And it will only get worse after the Supreme Court decided that money = free speech.

    Obama may need to raise $1 billion to get re-elected. But Troll thinks that’s free speech in action and anyone who tries to change it like McCain is a traitor to the constitution.

  33. Let’s look at examples of America’s ‘moral purpose’ in WW2.

    Following the defeat of France, the UK was in a position of near-bankruptcy. Roosevelt offered 50 destroyers in return for full payment and the handover of British bases in the western hemisphere. Churchill caved in and the 50 destroyers were handed over to the UK: they were found to be scrap and unusable – unusable! Nonetheless, a US cruiser went down to Simonstown to collect 42 tons of gold as payment for the junk. Additionally, thousands of rifles were supplied by the US – same story, WW1 vintage junk. WW2 saw a huge transfer of wealth from the British empire to the US – real moral purpose indeed.

    Prior to assuming power, the nazi party was the most heavily funded of all in Germany but the money didn’t come from Germany – it came from the US, particularly Wall Street. The technology for production of synthetic fuel came from Standard Oil, without which the Luftwaffe couldn’t fly.


    – Top American industrialists and financiers named in this book are covered by the categories listed above. Henry Ford and Edsel Ford respectively contributed money to Hitler and profited from German wartime production. Standard Oil of New Jersey, General Electric, General Motors, and I.T.T. certainly made financial or technical contributions which comprise prima facie evidence of “participating in planning or carrying out Nazi enterprises.” –

  34. As if wars should have a moral purpose. People starting wars because they knew best, that’s always worked out well.

  35. War to save civilization against two major powers who quite explicitly wanted to enslave or destroy ” inferior races ” was about the most moral endeavor mankind has participated in during recent centuries.

    Ask those remaining with us who liberated the camps, or who were freed from them, if this war was moral.

    We’ll leave Allan to his deep, disturbing, madness on this subject.

  36. America claims to be of a higher moral status than the likes of China and Russia, yet it can be shown that the morality of the US government, certainly each one since 1913, is a money-driven cesspit. If America were so anti-nazi, why were the nazis and the German war machine funded from and by America? Why did the US give the H-bomb to the Soviet Union?

Comments are closed.