New 'massacre' reported in Syria's Hama province

New 'massacre' reported in Syria's Hama province

www.bbc.co.uk

At least 86 people, including many women and children, have been killed by Syrian pro-government forces in Hama province, opposition activists say.

A spokesman for the Syrian National Council, the main opposition coalition, said there had been a "massacre" in the villages of al-Qubair and Maarzaf.

The Local Co-ordination Committees, an activist network, said 78 were executed with guns and knives in al-Qubair, including 35 members of one family.

The allegations could not be confirmed.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.heraldsun.com.au
www.rte.ie

Urgh, things really are getting rancid in Syria.

Whoever committed this alleged killing is almost irrelevant and lets not go into whether it was a "false flag" or government orchestrated killing.

All sides are up to their ears in violence now as weapons and equipment flow to the rebels via Saudi Arabia & Qatar. This conflict is even spilling across broders into Lebanon & Turkey.

The UN needs to get tough, and quickly or the civilians in the area are going to find themselves in the middle of a catastrophe.

www.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Originally posted by Peruvianmonk

The UN needs to get tough,

www.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

On whom,

The Syrian Gov, or Qatar /Saudi for supplying the weapons?

In any event, it's going to get worse. It's an extreme hot spot with an extremely short fuse.

reply to post by Vardoger


On everyone. The Annan plan included point 2,

To commit to stop the fighting and achieve urgently an effective United Nations supervised cessation of armed violence in all its forms by all parties to protect civilians and stabilise the country.

To this end, the Syrian government should immediately cease troop movements towards, and end the use of heavy weapons in, population centres, and begin pullback of military concentrations in and around population centres.

As these actions are being taken on the ground, the Syrian government should work with the Envoy to bring about a sustained cessation of armed violence in all its forms by all parties with an effective United Nations supervision mechanism.

Similar commitments would be sought by the Envoy from the opposition and all relevant elements to stop the fighting and work with him to bring about a sustained cessation of armed violence in all its forms by all parties with an effective United Nations supervision mechanism;

en.wikipedia.org...-point_peace_plan

Annan should come out and point fingers at "all relevant elements to stop the fighting". Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Assad and his cronies, the rebels, Russia, whatever the role of the West is.

Truth out on the table is the only way to get a ceasefire working and a political transition started.

More information coming out from the Syria Observatory for Human Rights, which is closely alligned to the rebel forces.

Syrian forces had been shelling Mazraat al-Qabeer and the nearby village of Maazarif, which are about 12 miles from the central city of Hama. "Shabbiha headed into the area after the shelling and killed dozens of citizens, among them women and children," the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said, describing a similar pattern of events as recounted from the Houla massacre on 25 May.

"The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights calls on the international monitors to go immediately to the area. They should not wait to tomorrow to investigate this new massacre," the British-based observatory said in a statement. "They should not give the excuse that their mission is only to observe the ceasefire, because many massacres have been committed during their presence in Syria."

www.guardian.co.uk...

These monitors need to get to the site of the alleged massacre on the double. If this is Assad's forces or aligned militias ordered/gone wild, then it would signal to me that he is losing control outside of Damascus or is setting himself up for an intervention from abroad.

It saddens me that those poor people being slaughtered could be you, me, your best friend etc and noone give a too hoots about them. I do wish humanity would grow up and stop this mindless violence. Just what is this supposed to acheive in the long run? When all the violence has been done and people become war weary, they sign a peace treaty or whatever. People have been killed. You cant bring them back. Why cant we all get along and live in peace. We only live on this Planet for a max of 100 years tops. 103 if you are really lucky and if you are exceptionally lucky one might lived to 115, but that is a very rare thing. So why waste those years in killing each other. Enjoy life on Earth with whatever time you have. I would.

reply to post by Wirral Bagpuss

It saddens me that those poor people being slaughtered could be you, me, your best friend etc and noone give a too hoots about them. I do wish humanity would grow up and stop this mindless violence. Just what is this supposed to acheive in the long run? When all the violence has been done and people become war weary, they sign a peace treaty or whatever. People have been killed. You cant bring them back. Why cant we all get along and live in peace. We only live on this Planet for a max of 100 years tops. 103 if you are really lucky and if you are exceptionally lucky one might lived to 115, but that is a very rare thing. So why waste those years in killing each other. Enjoy life on Earth with whatever time you have. I would.

Well said Bagpuss. The geopolitical tangle takes away from what is a complete human tragedy. You will see people on this page saying # em, they are all extremists etc.

There are real, normal people, like you and me and our families, being killed at the behest of these patriarchal leaders obsessed with power.

I get the feeling that the sh.t just got even more real with this latest incident. Psyops full steam ahead.

Don't be tempted to take sides, this is a very complex situation that transcends normal politics.

At the route of all this bloodshed is the NWO agenda - to break down the last few sovereigns who are still off the financial grid.

Egypt - check
Libya - check
Bahrain - check
Yemen - check
Syria - next
Iran - to follow

Ned

The Syrian state account of the event.

Syrian state television later quoted an official source as saying that security forces, responding to appeals from citizens, had launched an attack on an "armed terrorist stronghold" in Qubair. The security forces came across the bodies of two women and a number of children, bound hand and foot, in the village, who the coroner said had been killed at 10:00, when the "armed terrorist groups" were still in the village, the official added.

www.bbc.co.uk...

Two opposing accounts, whichever, if either is accurate, the ceasefire continues to crumble.

The UN SC is at deadlock on a route forward, maybe they could increase the observer force? (clutching)

I noticed how the western powers on the media release say

'' militia aligned with Assads military ''

So, this wasnt actual military doing this, it was remote militia.

There's a big difference and its quite telling that the media has moved away from blaming assad, to now blaming factions symathetic to him.

In the end, this was nothing more than a bunch of armed gangs walking into a village and murdering people.

Who it takes orders from isnt really important, they are both doing the same crimes.

reply to post by Peruvianmonk


The situation in Syria is, indeed, escalating and getting out of control. I'm convinced that there will be an invasion of Syria by the US and/or NATO in the coming weeks. The humanitarian angle is being pushed by the MSM to rally public sentiment against the Syrian government. This typically happens just prior to an invasion, a la Gulf War 1. I suspect that the CIA is funding some, if not all, of the anti-government "insurgents". And since most of them are al Qaeda, we don't even need to change the name on the checks. Keep in mind also that Syria already has nuclear weapons, and the risk of them escaping state control makes the Syrian conflict a much more pressing issue than an invasion of Iran.

I'll beat the dead and their loved ones don't see the quotation marks around the word massacre

shame whoever did that

Maps are being created with target reference points from orbit and people on the ground.

Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
Whoever committed this alleged killing is almost irrelevant and lets not go into whether it was a "false flag" or government orchestrated killing.

All sides are up to their ears in violence now as weapons and equipment flow to the rebels via Saudi Arabia & Qatar. This conflict is even spilling across broders into Lebanon & Turkey.

The UN needs to get tough, and quickly or the civilians in the area are going to find themselves in the middle of a catastrophe.

But finding out who it is is one of the main points here in being able to stop it, and you're quoting a state-owned UK BBC, a news service that I'm continually baffled at the support for. Notice how they always say it's the Syrian government forces? Or that the other side "said" it was them, just to cover their backs if things turn out badly for the western countries?

This could be a lot closer to the truth. I'm not saying it is, but it's worth being open minded, and don't expect much else than one-sided news from the BBC! Seriously, go through every Syria related story they have and you'll find a very strong and continous pattern : the Syrian government always get the blame, because the other side said so, a side that could be backed by corrupt western governments so that that can move in and take over the country. (install their own people, etc.)

reply to post by robhines

But finding out who it is is one of the main points here in being able to stop it, and you're quoting a state-owned UK BBC, a news service that I'm continually baffled at the support for. Notice how they always say it's the Syrian government forces? Or that the other side "said" it was them, just to cover their backs if things turn out badly for the western countries?

Yes I did quote the BBC, a state owned organisation, however I included massive caveats on who was responsible and noted that the groups reporting the massacre are closely aligned to the rebels.

You then go on to include a video from your own state owned news organisation, Iranian owned PressTV! . The BBC may be guilty of propaganda and biased reporting at times but PressTV is something else.

his could be a lot closer to the truth. I'm not saying it is, but it's worth being open minded, and don't expect much else than one-sided news from the BBC! Seriously, go through every Syria related story they have and you'll find a very strong and continous pattern : the Syrian government always get the blame, because the other side said so, a side that could be backed by corrupt western governments so that that can move in and take over the country. (install their own people, etc.)

I am open minded about on what is going on inside and around Syria. It is clear to me that both sides are committing atrocities and receiving arms and backing from outside actors, as civilians suffer the consequences.

reply to post by draco49

The situation in Syria is, indeed, escalating and getting out of control. I'm convinced that there will be an invasion of Syria by the US and/or NATO in the coming weeks. The humanitarian angle is being pushed by the MSM to rally public sentiment against the Syrian government. This typically happens just prior to an invasion, a la Gulf War 1. I suspect that the CIA is funding some, if not all, of the anti-government "insurgents". And since most of them are al Qaeda, we don't even need to change the name on the checks. Keep in mind also that Syria already has nuclear weapons, and the risk of them escaping state control makes the Syrian conflict a much more pressing issue than an invasion of Iran.

Syria does not have nuclear weapons. Any attempt was ended by the IAF strike on an apparent nuclear reactor in 2007. It is however, thought to have stockpiles of chemical weapons.

reply to post by Peruvianmonk


Another interesting thing in this article is the subtle language shift. Previously, the news reported that it was Syrian Government forces behind these atrocities. Now, they are referring to the perpetrators as "Syrian pro-government forces". By making that tiny adjustment, they are able to maintain the public perception that the Syrian Government is behind it, while never actually putting blame on the Syrian Government.

reply to post by draco49


I agree there has been a change in language. It does not however affect what is actually happening on the ground in Syria, which is unclear.

This activist, Manhal Abu-Bakar, on Al Jazerra claims that these militias were backed directly by Syrian troops in this killing

Opposition activists in Syria say that pro-government armed groups backed by security forces have killed scores of people in a village in Hama province. Manhal Abu-Bakar, an activist in Hama, told Al Jazeera that Syrian tanks and pro-government armed gangs began shelling and attacking al-Qubayr on Wednesday afternoon.

Armed gangs supported by Syrian soldiers drove into the village an hour later, executing some people in a manner similar to killings carried out in Houla last month, he said.

More from the Syrian state response.

But Syria's government denied any role in the killings. "What a few media have reported on what happened in al-Qubayr, in the Hama region, is completely false," the government said in a statement on official television. "A terrorist group committed a heinous crime in the Hama region which claimed nine victims. The reports by the media are contributing to spilling the blood of Syrians," the statement said.

www.aljazeera.com...

Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
You then go on to include a video from your own state owned news organisation, Iranian owned PressTV! . The BBC may be guilty of propaganda and biased reporting at times but PressTV is something else.

Ouch! First time I've heard of PressTV to be honest, but it wasn't about them, it was about what Tarpley said and he did have several sources that he quoted. He's also talking about it in several places, not just PressTV. Thanks though, from now on will make sure to research each station I find things on.

Cannot stand ANY state-owned news service! They make me sick. I do think it's important to remember what Tarpley is saying here though.

Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
Syria does not have nuclear weapons. Any attempt was ended by the IAF strike on an apparent nuclear reactor in 2007. It is however, thought to have stockpiles of chemical weapons.

I believe they actually do have nuclear weapons. A friend of mine (A US Marine GySgt with Top Secret clearance) who just got home after being active in the Middle-East for the past 6 years, told me very emphatically that Syria definitely has nukes, and that the US has been trying to keep a lid on it with diminishing success over the years. I've known the man for 20+ years and he's not a liar or story-teller.

Syria has been a thorn in the side of Western forces and agendas for years, but they are strategically insignificant because of the nation's geography, and their lack of desirable resources. In the current climate, with US focus on combating terrorism, increasingly evident intent to invade Iran, and our commitment to Israel, Syria becomes an important player. Their alliance with Iran makes them a potential enemy in any actions we take against Iran. If they didn't have nuclear weapons, that wouldn't be such a big deal. After all, Syria is a tiny country, surrounded on all sides by US installations and allies. But the US has to tread very lightly in order to invade Iran without starting WWIII; a world devastated by nuclear bombs and the ensuing global radiation dispersement isn't any more attractive to the shot-callers than to you or I. Looking at Iran's other alliances with Russia and China, two nations who stand to lose the most in the event of a nuclear war, a Syrian nuclear threat is the only wildcard left.

The only time the US/NATO invades other nations, is when that nation either has something we want or poses a potential threat to our agenda. Without a nuclear weapon, Syria doesn't fit the criteria. They have no resources we want, and are in the middle of a "civil" uprising. Additionally, their territory doesn't offer Western forces anything they don't already have in terms of logistics. So ask yourself, what is it about Syria that has put them in the spotlight and made them a priority for US/NATO military action?