The problem with the Geneva Communique from the first Geneva round on Syria is that the government of Syria never subscribed to it. It was jointly chaired by the League of Arab States for Syria, whatever that may mean. Another problem is that it is, as so many diplomatic documents are, highly ambiguous. It plainly advocates a power sharing executive formed by some of the current government plus the opposition to oversee a transition to democracy. But it does not state which elements of the current government, and it does not mention which elements of the opposition, nor does it make plain if President Assad himself is eligible to be part of, or to head, the power-sharing executive, and whether he is eligible to be a candidate in future democratic elections.
Doubtless the British, for example, would argue that the term transition implies that he will go. The Russians will argue there is no such implication and the text does not exclude anybody from the process. Doubtless also diplomats on all sides were fully aware of these differing interpretations and the ambiguity is quite deliberate to enable an agreed text. I would say that the text tends much more to the “western” side, and that this reflects the apparently weak military position of the Assad regime at that time and the then extant threat of western military intervention. There has been a radical shift in those factors against the western side in the interim. Expect Russian interpretations now to get more hardline.
Given the extreme ambiguity of the text, Iran has, as it frequently does, shot itself in the foot diplomatically by refusing to accept the communique as the basis of talks and thus getting excluded from Geneva. Iran should have accepted the communique, and then at Geneva issued its own interpretation of it.
But that is a minor point. The farcical thing about the Geneva conference is that it is attempting to promote into power-sharing in Syria “opposition” members who have no democratic credentials and represent a scarcely significant portion of those actually fighting the Assad regime in Syria. What the West are trying to achieve is what the CIA and Mossad have now achieved in Egypt; replacing the head of the Mubarak regime while keeping all its power structures in place. The West don’t really want democracy in Syria, they just want a less pro-Russian leader of the power structures.
The inability of the British left to understand the Middle East is pathetic. I recall arguing with commenters on this blog who supported the overthrow of the elected President of Egypt Morsi on the grounds that his overthrow was supporting secularism, judicial independence (missing the entirely obvious fact the Egyptian judiciary are almost all puppets of the military) and would lead to a left wing revolutionary outcome. Similarly the demonstrations against Erdogan in Istanbul, orchestrated by very similar pro-military forces to those now in charge in Egypt, were also hailed by commenters here. The word “secularist” seems to obviate all sins when it comes to the Middle East.
Qatar will be present at Geneva, and Qatar has just launched a pre-emptive media offensive by launching a dossier on torture and murder of detainees by the Assad regime, which is being given first headline treatment by the BBC all morning
There would be a good dossier to be issued on torture in detention in Qatar, and the lives of slave workers there, but that is another question.
I do not doubt at all that atrocities have been committed and are being committed by the Assad regime. It is a very unpleasant regime indeed. The fact that atrocities are also being committed by various rebel groups does not make Syrian government atrocities any better.
But whether 11,000 people really were murdered in a single detainee camp I am unsure. What I do know is that the BBC presentation of today’s report has been a disgrace. The report was commissioned by the government of Qatar who commissioned Carter Ruck to do it. Both those organisations are infamous suppressors of free speech. What is reprehensible is that the BBC are presenting the report as though it were produced by neutral experts, whereas the opposite is the case. It is produced not by anti torture campaigners or by human rights activists, but by lawyers who are doing it purely and simply because they are being paid to do it.
The BBC are showing enormous deference to Sir Desmond De Silva, who is introduced as a former UN war crimes prosecutor. He is indeed that, but it is not the capacity in which he is now acting. He is acting as a barrister in private practice. Before he was a UN prosecutor, he was for decades a criminal defence lawyer and has defended many murderers. He has since acted to suppress the truth being published about many celebrities, including John Terry.
If the Assad regime and not the government of Qatar had instructed him and paid him, he would now be on our screens arguing the opposite case to that he is putting. That is his job. He probably regards that as not reprehensible. What is reprehensible is that the BBC do not make it plain, but introduce him as a UN war crimes prosecutor as though he were acting in that capacity or out of concern for human rights. I can find no evidence of his having an especial love for human rights in the abstract, when he is not being paid for it. He produced an official UK government report into the murder of Pat Finucane, a murder organised by British authorities, which Pat Finucane’s widow described as a “sham”. He was also put in charge of quietly sweeping the Israeli murders on the Gaza flotilla under the carpet at the UN.
The question any decent journalist should be asking him is “Sir Desmond De Silva, how much did the government of Qatar pay you for your part in preparing this report? How much did it pay the other experts? Does your fee from the Government of Qatar include this TV interview, or are you charging separately for your time in giving this interview? In short how much are you being paid to say this?”
That is what any decent journalist would ask. Which is why you will never hear those questions on the BBC.
BREAKING NEWS
Nutenyahoo To Save Internet.
“The biggest challenge we face with the cyber world is protecting the privacy and security of the public. There could be a serious breach….” he said.
http://rt.com/news/israel-netanyahu-un-internet-260/
There’s something in the comment section for every taste. Dad, take a look at what anti-semitic comments really look like. I look forward to seeing you putting them right.
I can’t make up my mind whether the antisemites or the antimuslimites are getting the upper hand there. It makes me realize what a haven of sanity Craig Murray’s comments section is, even with Dad aboard! Thanks to All.
…
Re Mary’s 8 59am post regarding the suppression of the Russian False Flag documentary,
”In both the RT and MOXNEWS cases,” Woodworth observes, “the viewer statistics on YouTube suddenly flat-lined on the morning of September 11 — like a heart monitor when a patient dies….”
Am I the only one who suspects US intelligence made offers that Jaques Clouseau, the Wily Coyote, Mr Bean and other geniuses of the big screen just couldn’t resist? Is this the result?
Stick your usured gangster vulture loans to the most vulnerable so far up where the sun don’t shine Abel Reuben.
Scum.
You’re flaming a bot, Jives
A Node.
That’s right and i don’t regret it for a second.
Habbabkuk, 28 Jan 3:41 pm
Actually, Craig Murray’s blog couldn’t operate freely in the UK, and is thus now hosted in the Netherlands:
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2007/sep/21/digitalmedia.politicsandthemedia
Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!
29 Jan, 2014 – 5:10 pm
“If you would care to look back more carefully, I think you’ll find that Mary has slagged off Scarlett Johansson and Susan Sarandon. That makes two actresses, I believe.”
I must have missed that one.
But:
Susan Sarandon is a progressive left-liberal anti-war activist (as well as an actress). Strange that you support her.
The British Red Cross, whose work in general I support, has just asked me for an extra donation in order to help with the deteriorating refugee situation in Syria.
How to react? Seeing that our own governmenr is one of the leading players in the current destabilisation of Syria, I thought that I would look up the leading Lights in the BRC to see what connections they may have with our present administration.
Has anyone already done this?
Herbie
I think you misunderstand the meaning of e.g. – Res Dis only provided an example.
Just in case you need another perhaps you should consider the following:
@Guano
“Aangirfan has recently exposed the fact that the majority of the bankers and directors of the East India company were Jewish, same as the majority of the bankers and owners of the Slave Trade from Africa were Jewish, same as most of the bankers and directors of world banking today, the same group of people who shelter inside the safety of the leafy suburbs of the UK and get the blame for the genocides and barbarities they orchestrate passed onto the English nation, as is happening at this present time in Syria.”
And while considering you might wish to note what Craig said in response, which suggests that he has a similar view of Guano
“That is completely untrue, Guano. A tiny percentage of East India company directors were Jewish, and a tiny percentage of African slave owners. There are more scots than Jewish international bank directors.
Fuck off with the racist nonsense.”
If only some of the Eminences were as robust with racist nonsense as Craig!
John Goss
This loan spam bot is happy. Normally if they’re angry they say: very interesting blog I must give URL my friends etc
The blogging team have swallowed Assad’s ploy that he is the legitimate authority in Syria.
The strategy of Al Qaida and USUKIS is to make the dictators angry, to make them commit crimes against their people, to get the West to take them out and leave stooges and Qaida warlords to wreck and disable the country.
In this case Russia has been summoned by USUKIS to annoy Qaida as well, to make them angry too and take it out on the Syrian people. The end plan is for Israel to receive UK Aid to totally control and “stabilise” Syria (as in Gaza).
Anybody who still believes in the bogey of Russia as an enemy needs to read the advertising campaign: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_085121
Russia = Assad = Al Qaida = USUKIS =Saudi = global new order v. the people
Link not available sorry: Catch it, bin it, kill it.
The trolls and the media want you to choose between villains while in reality all the villains are working together against truth and Islam.
Obergruppenführer Theresa May is putting through her legislation to strip passports off those she calls ‘dangerous’. What will she do with the people she has created stateless?
Agent Cameron is giving in to the Tory partei right wingers.
PM ‘agrees with immigration rebels’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25953053
Extremely stupid old man. I don’t read beyond the title for the same reason I don’t have a TV. There is enough confusion in the world without TV or Trolls
Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!
29 Jan, 2014 – 8:30 pm
Habbabkuk says (pissed again by the look of his spelling):
“…what is porbably [sic] mosy [sic] objectionable is the sheer cowardice of those posters who daren’t come out with their prejudices openly…”
However:
Habbabkuk said to me a long time back (he will no doubt have it recorded) that he was not a Zionist.
Resident Dissident said on 20 Jan, 2014 – 10:46 pm when I suggested he was a Jewish Zionist:
“I am not Jewish”
Even though he previously wrote at 10:36am 19 Jan:
“Perhaps if there had been a few more of us around in Germany in the 1930s and 40s then the holocaust may not have happened.”
However he has not denied being a Zionist.
Question: are there any Zionist posters on this blog willing to say so and justify their support for Israeli expansionism and the establishment of Israel as a Jewish state?
To remind you what HB said:
“…the sheer cowardice of those posters who daren’t come out with their prejudices openly…”
‘There are more scots (sic) than Jewish international bank directors.’
Possibly. But major international finance houses in general?
http://www.goldmansachs.com/who-we-are/leadership/management-committee/index.html
Not exactly hooching with Scots.
(2% or so of Americans are Jewish)
“The blogging team have swallowed Assad’s ploy that he is the legitimate authority in Syria.”
That’s what it say on Wikipedia: “President Bashar al-Assad”.
That’s what it says in the CIA factbook: “chief of state: President Bashar al-ASAD”
Looks like it’s you that got it wrong.
Mary
The statement of the century: “What will she do with the people she has created stateless?”
Earlier they tried to get food to the people Assad was bombing while living amongst the Qaida beheaders.
Nobody should be murdered hungry by either ‘side’.
Fred
Please don’t miaow all day outside. Assad is the illegitimate head of state of Syria. Use the cat flap please next time.
Guano at 1.58 pm
Yes I know. But what is particularly distasteful is people like Able Reuben and Abourezk James are selling people problems. All these so-called short-term loan-sharks are usurers preying on the weak and vulnerable as though they do not have enough problems. That is why I find them so contemptible. I trust the vast majority who contribute to Craig Murray’s blog are bright enough to avoid these slime-balls.
Cameron is giving evidence to the National Security Committee live now. Chair Margaret Becket.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/21006886
Membership includes several Friends of Israel.
The members of the Committee were appointed on 16 May 2013
Margaret Beckett MP (Chair) Labour
Mr James Arbuthnot MP Conservative
Mr Adrian Bailey MP Labour/Co-operative
Sir Alan Beith MP Liberal Democrat
Sir Malcolm Bruce MP Liberal Democrat
Lord Clark of Windermere Labour
Lord Fellowes Crossbench
Fabian Hamilton MP Labour
Lord Harris of Haringey Labour
Lord Lee of Trafford Liberal Democrat
Lord Levene of Portsoken Crossbench
Paul Murphy MP Labour
Baroness Neville-Jones Conservative
Sir Richard Ottaway MP Conservative
Mark Pritchard MP Conservative
Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale Labour
Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP Conservative
Lord Sterling of Plaistow Conservative
Baroness Taylor of Bolton Labour
Keith Vaz MP Labour
Lord Waldegrave of North Hill Conservative
Mr Tim Yeo MP
http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/joint-select/national-security-strategy/membership/
The No camp getting their argument across eloquently
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmGjiokfQ2A
@Guano
The art of debate is not to ignore all facts and declare what you want to believe true calling all who do not agree with you names.
I posted authoritative references to back what I said, either offer evidence to back your case or be man enough to admit you got it wrong.
Local government is in a mess.
The poor people who live on the Somerset levels, apart from having to sustain life for themselves, their families and their animals in water several feet deep, have this nonsense going on in their county council. Who is in charge and who is carrying the can?
£20,000 wage for ‘out of office’ Somerset County Council chief executive
http://www.centralsomersetgazette.co.uk/20-000-wage-office-Somerset-County-Council-chief/story-20435529-detail/story.html
Similar events to that above have taken place in two Surrey borough councils that I have heard about and Nevermind tells us about some of the nonsense that happens in Norfolk CC.
What a shambles. What about it Pickles?
“Actually, Craig Murray’s blog couldn’t operate freely in the UK, and is thus now hosted in the Netherlands: ”
Which actually wouldn’t save him from perverse British libel laws, the threat of which led to one comment having to be removed. This is a world away from the sort of state censorship practiced in some of the other countries mentioned.
Miaow, Miaow Miaow, Miaow
Why don’t you go and catch a mouse. I fed you yesterday
Well said Sandy about the Red Cross.
I have looked at them previously but see that Bernstein of FA fame is now the chair.
http://www.redcross.org.uk/About-us/Who-we-are/Governance-and-annual-reports/Our-governance/Our-chairman-and-chief-executive
http://www.redcross.org.uk/About-us/Who-we-are/Governance-and-annual-reports/Our-governance/Our-trustees
They all come through the same revolving doors as in all large NGOs like WWF and in quangos.
The situation in the American version is little different. Bush appointed the chairwoman http://www.redcross.org/bonnie-mcelveen-hunter which indicates that the American Red Cross is seen as an arm of the federal state. The president is another corporate person from the big business world, http://www.redcross.org/gail-j-mcgovern .
Some years back on the occasion of Israel’s 60th ‘birthday’, I watched a ceremony when Peres presented an award to the Chair of the American Red Cross. I cannot find any link on the internet now. From memory it was being given for something to do with Israel’s emergency ambulance service in which the American Red Cross had been involved.
We now have been sent appeals to circulate “Challenges to International Humanitarian Law:Israel’s Occupation Policy” by Peter Maurer, president of the International Committee of the Red Cross. Rot. The people of Gaza have little time for the Red Cross knowing of its associations. Maurer’s words are vacuous, clichéd and complacent. Wait for the Zionist solution and do not mention the involvement of the Yanks or the other NATO countries. There is a quote about ‘the right to life’. Of course we all have ‘a right to life’ and that includes the Palestinians. Do not bloody well debate it.
@Kempe 30 Jan, 2014 – 5:30 pm
Two of the countries mentioned were China and Iran. You must have missed this comment from earlier in the thread which completes refutes your claim. Here it is again:
.
.
From the latest highly recommended Medialens email alert:
“The Russian-born filmmaker Andre Vltchek, who has travelled the world extensively in making his documentaries, relates his experience of appearing in the media in different countries. He observes that when he speaks in China, he does so uncensored:
‘I was on CCTV – their National TV – and for half an hour I was talking about very sensitive issues. And I felt much freer in Beijing than when the BBC interviews me, because the BBC doesn’t even let me speak, without demanding a full account of what exactly I am intending to say.’ (Noam Chomsky and Andre Vltchek, On Western Terrorism: From Hiroshima to Drone Warfare, Pluto Press, London, 2013, p. 31)
Vltchek continued:
‘people in the West are so used to thinking that we are so democratic in terms of the way our media is run and covers the stories. Even if we know it’s not the case, we still, subconsciously, expect that it’s still somehow better than in other places and it is actually shocking when we realize that a place like China or Turkey or Iran would run more unedited or uncensored pieces than our own mainstream media outlets. Let me put it this way: Chinese television and newspapers are much more critical of their economic and political system than our television stations or newspapers are of ours. Imagine ABC, CBS, or NBC [major US television stations] coming on air and beginning to question the basics of capitalism or the Western parliamentary system.’ (Ibid., p. 32)”
Read it all here:
http://medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=753:propaganda-the-dominant-grand-narrative-of-our-time&catid=52:alerts-2014&Itemid=245
Just saw this Sandy when I was looking to see what Goldring of Oxfam is paid.
However, The Daily Telegraph can disclose that Sir Nick Young, the chief executive of the British Red Cross, saw his pay jump by 12 per cent to £184,000 since 2010, despite a one per cent fall in the charity’s donations and a three per cent fall in revenues.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10224104/30-charity-chiefs-paid-more-than-100000.html
PS Goldring’s predecessor who left last Spring got £119,560.
From Mary
“Please don’t feed the trolls. As much as I really appreciate people coming to my defence, it only provides the troupe with a platform to hurl more of their stuff at me…….” They will not succeed however.
________________
The aim is not to hurl anything at you or to drive you off this board : it is merely to introduce a little measure, proportion and sanity into your discourse and, whenever necessary, to correct your frequent misrepresentations, half-truths and snide little sneers.
I think Jon once had you summed up, actually, when he advised me to simply pass by your screeds without comment because if I criticised them, you would feel obliged, in reaction, to post even more of the same stuff. That’s probably bang on – unable to admit that you have erred/transgressed, you try to show the readership that you won’t be intimidated (as you see it) by redoubling your “efforts”. More grist to our mill, I fear….
Thanks, Mary, for the Red Cross info. I too have done some rummaging around and, in addition to the information given by Mary, I find that they have a “Chef de cabinet” one Caroline Leighton, whose CV includes a spell (unspecified) with Common Purpose.
I think that I will ignore their specific request for donations re Syria. At this stage I don’t feel that I have enough to challenge them on it but I think that I need to think carefully about my future financial support for them.