In January, Michel Chossudovsky reported British media confirming UK/CIA/MI6 operatives in Syria training anti-Assad Western-backed insurgents. They're also supplying them with arms, ammunition, and equipment. The Libyan model's being replicated in Syria, so far short of bombing.
Flashback to 2005: Two undercover British Special Air Service (SAS) soldiers had been caught red-handed by the British government’s alleged allies, the Iraqi police, dressed as Arabs, replete with wigs and armed to the teeth and in a car which was packed with explosives, Basra, 19 September 2005
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
NATO's "secret war" on Syria: Replicating the Libya model
British Special Forces supporting rebels
by Stephen Lendman, Global Research, 11 February 2012
In January, Michel Chossudovsky reported British media confirming UK/CIA/MI6 operatives in Syria training anti-Assad Western-backed insurgents. They're also supplying them with arms, ammunition, and equipment.
"These reports confirm unequivocally [they're illegally] interfer[ing] in the affairs of a sovereign state. This is not a popular uprising. The insurrection as well as the killings of civilians were sponsored by the Western powers from the outset."
More on this below. Events replicate the Libya model a year earlier.
In February 2011, US/UK/French special forces and intelligence operatives actively began helping anti-Gaddafi NATO-backed militants. An armed insurgency followed, including bombing weeks later.
A year later, BBC confirmed it, saying:
"....British special forces were deployed on the ground in order to help the UK'S allies - the Libyan 'revolutionaries' often called the National Transitional Council or NTC."
Knowledgeable sources said "they did a tremendous job" conquering Libya. "The existence of E Squadron is well known within the special forces community but has not hitherto been discussed publicly. It was formed five years ago to work closely with the intelligence service MI6, and is mainly involved in missions where maximum discretion is required, say Whitehall insiders."
Composed of SAS, SBS, and Special Reconnaissance Regiment forces, it "often operates in plain clothes and with the full range of national support, such as false identities, at its disposal."
Last March, other British media provided similar accounts. The London Daily Mail, said "hundreds of British special forces troops have been deployed deep inside Libya targeting Colonel Gaddafi's forces - and more are on standby."
"It is understood that just under 250 UK special forces soldiers have been in Libya since before the launch of air strikes to enforce the no-fly zone against Gaddafi's forces."
Another hundred or more were on standby. They were comprised of Special Forces Support Group (SFSG) paratroupers drawn from the SAS (Special Air Service) and SBS (Special Boat Service). They were resupplied from Cyprus. Moreover, 800 Royal Marines were "on five days notice" to deploy to the Mediterranean.
Last March, six squadron members were caught red-handed. Dropped in by helicopter, they were dressed in black, well-armed with weapons, explosives, maps and false passports. Britain claimed they arrived to protect diplomats and monitor events in Benghazi, not military operations.
An official Ministry of Defense statement said, "We neither confirm nor deny the story and we do not comment on the special forces."
The Libyan model's being replicated in Syria, so far short of bombing. Expect it if current tactics don't achieve regime change.
On February 9, Russia Today (RT.com) reported:
"British and Qatari troops are directing rebel ammunition deliveries and tactics in the bloody battle for Homs," according to the Mossad-connected DEBKAfile.
On February 8, it reported:
UK and Qatari "special operations units are operating with rebel forces under cover in (Homs), according to DEBKAfile's exclusive military and intelligence sources."
Allegedly not engaged in fighting, they're tactically aiding and abetting foreign insurgents illegally against a sovereign government.
DEBKAfile reported an Ankara plan to send Turkish/Arab forces to Homs and other "flashpoint cities." Earlier, Assad said full-scale war would confront Turkish or other forces if they invade.
On February 8, Turkey's Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu visited Washington for help. Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan's enlisting support from Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states. Anti-Assad pressure's building.
Qatar's ruling Emir, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, openly admitted supporting insurgents with cash, weapons and munitions. In mid-January, he said he's ready to send troops.
On February 8, London Daily Mail writer Tim Shipman headlined, "Britain will help Syrian rebels says (PM) Cameron as Assad army bombs continue to rain down on Homs," saying:
Details of "a three point plan to force" out Assad "were signed off yesterday" at a National Security Council meeting.
According to a Whitehall security source:
"The training is taking place on a one to one basis with opposition leaders outside Syria." No further information about direct intervention was supplied.
On February 10, Daily Mail writer Lee Moran quoted a US State Department source saying the Pentagon's considering arming insurgents. Earlier, Obama said no "option(s are) off the table."
On February 8, London Telegraph writer Alex Spillius headlined, "International 'militarisation' in Syria growing closer, warns US official," saying:
Washington debate shifted from diplomacy "towards more robust action since Russia and China blocked" Security Council action. "Any plan to supply aid or set up a buffer zone would involve a military dimension to protect aid convoys or vulnerable civilians."
"The Pentagon Central Command has begun a preliminary internal review of US military capabilities in the region" to provide options if ordered. An unnamed senior US official said "increasingly it looks like (military intervention) may not be avoidable."
If initiated, regional allies will be involved, including Turkey, Gulf states, and perhaps Israel. Last August, Ria Novosti headlined, "NATO plans campaign in Syria, tightens noose around Iran - Rogozin," saying:
Russia's NATO envoy Dmitry Rogozin said NATO's planning to oust Assad and establish a beachhead for attacking Iran. Izvestia quoted him saying:
Planning for a military campaign "is well underway. It could be a logical conclusion of those military and propaganda operations, which have been carried out by certain Western countries against North Africa."
Rogozin added that NATO plans intervening only against those regimes "whose views do not coincide with those of the West." As a result, he envisioned a possible "large-scale war in this huge region."
Military intervention now seems likely. Expect regional proxies to be used. Air power support may follow. UK, Qatari, and perhaps other Western elements inside Syria represent initial steps toward what appears planned.
A Final Comment
The business of America is permanent wars for unchallengeable wealth, power, and dominance, while homeland needs go begging.
Obama's a war profiteer front man. He plans them while talking peace. Ravaging Afghanistan continues. Thousands of US troops remain in Iraq. Others were repositioned nearby. Increased numbers were added to establish a larger regional footprint, combining air, ground, and naval units for future combat operations.
Syria's target one, then Iran. Whether full-scale war's planned isn't clear.
However, proxy operations may develop that way whether or not intended.
Washington wants total regional dominance. Nothing's off the table to achieve it.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
NATO's "secret war" on Syria: Replicating the Libya model
British Special Forces supporting rebels
by Stephen Lendman, Global Research, 11 February 2012
In January, Michel Chossudovsky reported British media confirming UK/CIA/MI6 operatives in Syria training anti-Assad Western-backed insurgents. They're also supplying them with arms, ammunition, and equipment.
"These reports confirm unequivocally [they're illegally] interfer[ing] in the affairs of a sovereign state. This is not a popular uprising. The insurrection as well as the killings of civilians were sponsored by the Western powers from the outset."
More on this below. Events replicate the Libya model a year earlier.
In February 2011, US/UK/French special forces and intelligence operatives actively began helping anti-Gaddafi NATO-backed militants. An armed insurgency followed, including bombing weeks later.
A year later, BBC confirmed it, saying:
"....British special forces were deployed on the ground in order to help the UK'S allies - the Libyan 'revolutionaries' often called the National Transitional Council or NTC."
Knowledgeable sources said "they did a tremendous job" conquering Libya. "The existence of E Squadron is well known within the special forces community but has not hitherto been discussed publicly. It was formed five years ago to work closely with the intelligence service MI6, and is mainly involved in missions where maximum discretion is required, say Whitehall insiders."
Composed of SAS, SBS, and Special Reconnaissance Regiment forces, it "often operates in plain clothes and with the full range of national support, such as false identities, at its disposal."
Last March, other British media provided similar accounts. The London Daily Mail, said "hundreds of British special forces troops have been deployed deep inside Libya targeting Colonel Gaddafi's forces - and more are on standby."
"It is understood that just under 250 UK special forces soldiers have been in Libya since before the launch of air strikes to enforce the no-fly zone against Gaddafi's forces."
Another hundred or more were on standby. They were comprised of Special Forces Support Group (SFSG) paratroupers drawn from the SAS (Special Air Service) and SBS (Special Boat Service). They were resupplied from Cyprus. Moreover, 800 Royal Marines were "on five days notice" to deploy to the Mediterranean.
Last March, six squadron members were caught red-handed. Dropped in by helicopter, they were dressed in black, well-armed with weapons, explosives, maps and false passports. Britain claimed they arrived to protect diplomats and monitor events in Benghazi, not military operations.
An official Ministry of Defense statement said, "We neither confirm nor deny the story and we do not comment on the special forces."
The Libyan model's being replicated in Syria, so far short of bombing. Expect it if current tactics don't achieve regime change.
On February 9, Russia Today (RT.com) reported:
"British and Qatari troops are directing rebel ammunition deliveries and tactics in the bloody battle for Homs," according to the Mossad-connected DEBKAfile.
On February 8, it reported:
UK and Qatari "special operations units are operating with rebel forces under cover in (Homs), according to DEBKAfile's exclusive military and intelligence sources."
Allegedly not engaged in fighting, they're tactically aiding and abetting foreign insurgents illegally against a sovereign government.
DEBKAfile reported an Ankara plan to send Turkish/Arab forces to Homs and other "flashpoint cities." Earlier, Assad said full-scale war would confront Turkish or other forces if they invade.
On February 8, Turkey's Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu visited Washington for help. Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan's enlisting support from Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states. Anti-Assad pressure's building.
Qatar's ruling Emir, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, openly admitted supporting insurgents with cash, weapons and munitions. In mid-January, he said he's ready to send troops.
On February 8, London Daily Mail writer Tim Shipman headlined, "Britain will help Syrian rebels says (PM) Cameron as Assad army bombs continue to rain down on Homs," saying:
Details of "a three point plan to force" out Assad "were signed off yesterday" at a National Security Council meeting.
According to a Whitehall security source:
"The training is taking place on a one to one basis with opposition leaders outside Syria." No further information about direct intervention was supplied.
On February 10, Daily Mail writer Lee Moran quoted a US State Department source saying the Pentagon's considering arming insurgents. Earlier, Obama said no "option(s are) off the table."
On February 8, London Telegraph writer Alex Spillius headlined, "International 'militarisation' in Syria growing closer, warns US official," saying:
Washington debate shifted from diplomacy "towards more robust action since Russia and China blocked" Security Council action. "Any plan to supply aid or set up a buffer zone would involve a military dimension to protect aid convoys or vulnerable civilians."
"The Pentagon Central Command has begun a preliminary internal review of US military capabilities in the region" to provide options if ordered. An unnamed senior US official said "increasingly it looks like (military intervention) may not be avoidable."
If initiated, regional allies will be involved, including Turkey, Gulf states, and perhaps Israel. Last August, Ria Novosti headlined, "NATO plans campaign in Syria, tightens noose around Iran - Rogozin," saying:
Russia's NATO envoy Dmitry Rogozin said NATO's planning to oust Assad and establish a beachhead for attacking Iran. Izvestia quoted him saying:
Planning for a military campaign "is well underway. It could be a logical conclusion of those military and propaganda operations, which have been carried out by certain Western countries against North Africa."
Rogozin added that NATO plans intervening only against those regimes "whose views do not coincide with those of the West." As a result, he envisioned a possible "large-scale war in this huge region."
Military intervention now seems likely. Expect regional proxies to be used. Air power support may follow. UK, Qatari, and perhaps other Western elements inside Syria represent initial steps toward what appears planned.
A Final Comment
The business of America is permanent wars for unchallengeable wealth, power, and dominance, while homeland needs go begging.
Obama's a war profiteer front man. He plans them while talking peace. Ravaging Afghanistan continues. Thousands of US troops remain in Iraq. Others were repositioned nearby. Increased numbers were added to establish a larger regional footprint, combining air, ground, and naval units for future combat operations.
Syria's target one, then Iran. Whether full-scale war's planned isn't clear.
However, proxy operations may develop that way whether or not intended.
Washington wants total regional dominance. Nothing's off the table to achieve it.
e-mail:
Homepage:
Comments
Hide the following 9 comments
US Invading Syria by Proxy
15.02.2012 15:03
US Invading Syria by Proxy
US "prepares military options" to back terrorists in Syria.
by Tony Cartalucci, Land Destroyer, 8 February 2012
Tony Cartalucci
Another interesting case of Russian-Chinese propaganda.
15.02.2012 20:50
against Global Warming :
1. simply deny or ignore scientific data
2. cast doubt on scientific figures by hiring scientists who will produce "scientific" studies supporting their own view
3. Scare people (what will you do without nuclar energy ?, the individual freedom is under threat when smoking is forbidden, etc...)
4. repeat this as long as necessary or possible.
In this political debate this becomes :
1. Simply deny or ignore historic evidence (like the crualties committed by the Lybian or Syrian regimes)
2. Hire scientists/journalists who will produce studies/articles Casting doubt on the opposition forces by
A. trying to blackmail the opposition as all from the very onset being a masterplan from the fascist West
B. by trying to involve them in warcrimes (loosing completely out of sight the proportions and the systematic character of the government crimes)
C. by depicting the presence of foreign military advisers as the ultimate proof that their theories are true, whiles it only proves
that finally some action has been taken. Any speculation about the extent of which, and the influence of which on the field are just that : speculation with a lot of fantacy.
3. Scare people by depicting a bigger war.
4. repeat this as long as necessary or possible.
Let's apply this on the article NATO's "secret war" on Syria: British Special Forces supporting rebels".
The ultimate aim is to find support among the left and organise resistance against any foreign intervention (be it humanitarian, diplomatic or military) aimed at helping
the Syrian people to get rid of a crual dictatorial junta.
At 1. The Libyan case is systematically brought forward as a test-case from the west. This is simply a historic falsification.
As proven by others and me in other contributions. Most of the time they completley ignore the Egyptian and Tunsian revolution, since they don't help
them in their propaganda.
At 2. Interesting are their sources : Russia Today ...this is a pure propaganda channel under direct control from the Kreml thus Mr Putin, a dictator himself. The same apllies to Mr Rogozin.
The systematic shameless lies from Russia Today in the Libyan
conflict have been well documented. Interesting also is that they use only information from the DEbka files which help them make their point, whiles they completely
ignore information brought by Debka that casts a disturbing light on the brutality of the Syrian regime. Out of the actual presence of foreign military advisers
to conclude that the Syrian insurrection was masterminded by the west from in the beginnnig, is a deliberate falsification of historic facts, which was also tried in the
Libyan case, but proven lies. Fact is that from the moment that diplomatic affords were exhausted, a military presence was established in Libya, and seemingly now
in Syriah. This presence had almost no impact on the Libyan war. Only the Nato air support made the military chances change into the advantage of the Libyan freedom fighters, and it is ontly
in that context that the military presence on the ground was of significant importance, also to avoid as much as possible civilian casualties.
AT 3. Suddenly Syriah should become a beachhead to attac Iran. Well, at least what one can say, they really try all means, doubt, lies, scare...
At 4. Keep on trying...
By the way, the ravaging of Afghanistan has many causes. To blame it only on the Nato, is another lie lavashly repeated by some...
Beno KLee
troll alert!
15.02.2012 22:50
It's about time that Indymedia contributors started to recognise that a lot of 'trolling' here is not undertaken by alcoholics, mentally retarded males who live in squalor or those who hold EDL type views.
It is undertaken by professional public relations companies who are paid to do this on behalf of the very people who are committiing serious human rights abuses and trying to excuse war crimes.
When you see deranged arguments supporting that which no sane person would ever support, you have a profiteering PR consultant tapping away on a keyboard in their office.
Thats the way this works, thats the way it has been working for the past ten years.
Cat
failed thinking
16.02.2012 10:08
Do you see the flaw in your argument ?
Independent thinker
Really ?
16.02.2012 10:20
It is undertaken by professional public relations companies who are paid to do this on behalf of the very people who are committiing serious human rights abuses and trying to excuse war crimes. """""
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry but that is just crackers. The average Indymedia reader has, I'm sorry to say, little influence in society and the number of us reading the site is currently at an all time low so the idea that anybody would pay a PR company to comment on IMC is laughable.
Carl
lazy thinking!
16.02.2012 14:37
Western interference does not contradict the idea of a popular uprising.
When there is a popular uprising, the West either helps crush it, or they try to co-opt it and use it for their own purposes, arming the groups who are more friendly to their aims and suppressing those who aren't.
That doesn't mean there isn't a genuine popular uprising underneath all the murderous power-mongering!
Those who think there is no popular support for the uprising are just as simplistic in their thinking as those who think the West are there to support democracy!
Unless we learn a bit more about the situation on the ground in these countries and resist falling into black and white thinking we will never be able to offer meaningful solidarity to the people there.
anon
Yep u can always spot the trolls
17.02.2012 23:11
Like the fucking BBC or the Guardian, where you obviously get your 'information', *isn't* propaganda!
What a fucking jerk!
All ruling class are fuckers - Syrian Bosses,=Bullingdon Boyz Bosses - they're all a bunch of gangster fuckers sucking the blood of the people. Fuck em all!
Any poor Syrian that expects to get any real 'freedom and democracy' through their actions is being conned. The west have already got their new Syrian bosses waiting in the wings.
Egypt?
Well another 'facebook' twitter google revolution - all private corps funded by CIA's In-Q-Tel venture capital arm - as Condie Rice's former tech adviser Jared Cohen (now at do no evil Google) said 'we don't need agents on the ground any more we can bring about the social change we want using social media' who's in charge in Egypt? Oh the US trained and funded Egyptian Army
FFS troll off!
2%Human
@2%Human
18.02.2012 08:25
Syria is about the people rising up, the West has fuck all to do with it otherwise it would be over by now.
Happier person
Now with the smug complacent dumb liberal act
18.02.2012 11:51
Patronising tosser
HP>>- The State is just not that powerful
Ignorant arse biscuit ;)
HP>>-and you are going to have a seizure with that level of stress in your system.
Not stress mate it's justifiable anger at a) the Machiavellian machinations, spin and lies put about by the 'liberal' MSM for and on behalf of our carbon obsessed ruling elite. and b) That liberals like you swallow western propaganda whole. and then come on here regurgitating it as 'truth'
HP>>-Syria is about the people rising up,
Syria is about the west exploiting 'people rising up' to destabilise a strong ally of Iran, It's geo-politics mate.
HP>>- the West has fuck all to do with it
Naive, and wilfully ignorant of the west's desire to continuously meddle and fuck with the lives of people who unfortunately for them, happen to live in a part of the world where 70% of the remaining carbon energy sources are
HP>>- otherwise it would be over by now.
Self contradictory nonsense
On the one hand " The State is just not that powerful" and on the other the State is soooo powerful that it'd be over by now apparently.
I'd suggest that instead of trying to present your smug self satisfied liberal bollocks here you go and read up say Zbigniew Brzezinski's The Grand Chessboard. a quote..
"It is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges capable of dominating Eurasia and thus of also challenging America. The formulation of a comprehensive and integrated Eurasian geostrategy is therefore the purpose of this book." (p. xiv)
read on......
Increase the peace decrease the ignorance
2%Human