DisInformation: Israel's Atttack On Syria

In an attempt to test its ability to attack its neighbours as the client state of the U.S. Israel engaged in a ground and air assault on Syria two weeks ago. When Syria complained it was dismissed as paranoia.

'Israeli air strike on Syria shrouded in secrecy'

Now all sorts of disinformation is leaking out, in particular some phony story about Syria receiving nuclear material from North Korea.

'Commandos captured nuclear materials before air raid in Syria'

Israel, US Shared Data On Suspected Nuclear Site

While this so called bastion of democracy in the middle east censors any information on the matter threatening to jail anyone who speaks of it, including journalists. And they are relying on an old colonial law to do it.

Israeli authorities have stopped local journalists reporting on the airstrike in Syria because of the country's subtle but binding code of censorship founded on a law dating from British colonial rule of Palestine.

Syria's air defences had fired at Israeli warplanes on 6 September, said an official announcement on Syrian state TV.

Subsequently, Israel imposed what correspondents described as the strictest censorship in recent times.

Israeli media have reported details of the raid, but only from foreign sources.


Some would even call this situation embarrassing. Something happened that could dramatically affect Israel, even leading to war, and the local media is silent. In and of itself, this silence only intensifies the journalists' dilemma, because it was clear that at some point the world media would begin publishing reports on this subject, and then the Israeli media could find itself facing two unflattering situations: not knowing what is happening at home, or knowing but, God forbid, collaborating with the government.

In fact some journalists not only in Israel but here in Canada pat themselves on the back over the fact that this attack was kept secret. That is that they failed to make this public, to do what they are supposed to do as journalists to be the eyes and ears of the public. Not to act in the interests of the state but of civil society.

It further follows, I think, that much of the war in the Middle East is going offstage, curiously in the interest of all parties. For what we've found in the West is that the "peace movement" only responds to what is presented in the mainstream media. It makes a certain amount of sense, today as during imperial frontier conflicts in the past, to keep as much as possible out of the news. Indeed, one of the mistakes of Vietnam, repeated in Iraq, was giving remarkably open access and full briefings to the media -- when for all practical purposes the reporting has been of assistance only to the enemy. (It is with some pain that I admit that, being a journalist myself.)

That there was a ground assault followed by an air incursion is a given. The other four W's have been gagged. So anything being said is 'leaked' and bound to be disinformation.

Israel's opposition leader, Binyamin Netanyahu, has given the first confirmation from his country of a mysterious air strike on an unknown target deep in Syria earlier this month - fuelling frenzied speculation about exactly what happened.

Meanwhile Syrian officials continue to scoff at the media speculation on the attack.

"All this rubbish is not true," said Syrian Cabinet minister Bouthaina Shaaban, speaking of North Korea's nuclear involvement with Syria.

"I don't know how the imagination has reached such creativity," she said, calling speculation of a North Korean shipment to Syria "fabricated stories that have no value and truth."

She said, "Regrettably, the international press is busy justifying an aggression on a sovereign state and the world should be busy condemning it instead of inventing reasons and aims of this aggression."

And just to further the Weapons of Mass Destruction conspiracy here are a couple of other items on the danger of Syria. You know the place that has millions of Iraqi refugees who cross the border daily to aid their relatives but are called foreign fighters by the Americans.

We spend two days on side-trips, visiting empty tourist attractions that in any other country would be crowded. Palmyra is nearly three hours' drive from Damascus. The Iraq border is just across the ridge, so we share the road with convoys of new, heavily laden Chevrolets, without number plates and filled to the brim with consumer goods and electronic gadgetry new in boxes. Smugglers, no doubt, and a booming trade.

Syria in particular has been repeatedly accused of sending suicide bombers to kill US troops in Iraq, supporting "terrorist groups" in Lebanon and Palestine and spoiling US plans for a "new Middle East". As a consequence, Syria was enlisted in President Bush's "axis of evil, alongside Iran and North Korea. The Syria Accountability Act was also passed by the US Congress and foreign investors were discouraged from working in Syria.

The claims came also after Gen. David Petraeus, the top US commander in Iraq, accused Syria in his testimony before Congress of allowing foreign fighters to cross the borders with Iraq to "instill fear and violence".

Remember all those WMD's they didn't find in Iraq obviously went with the refugees to Syria, and Jordon. Uh oh I am having a case of Deja Vu.

Syrian Chemical Blast Preceded Israeli Strike

Speculation in the Israeli and the U.S. media has focused on a suspect shipment from North Korea, possibly of nuclear-related material - that arrived in Syria just days before the Israeli Air Force struck in the early morning hours of Sept. 6.

But now Janes Defense Weekly is reporting that a military accident that occurred on July 26 near Aleppo, in northern Syria, may be related to the Israeli strike.

Missile Test or Accident?

The incident was initially reported in the official Syrian news agency, SANA, on July 26.

The official report said an explosion occurred at an ordnance depot belonging to a Syrian military unit in Musalmiya, located about 7 miles from Aleppo, that killed at least 15 soldiers and wounded 50 others.

SANA claimed that outdoor temperatures of 113 degrees were responsible for the blast, even though it occurred at 4 AM, the coolest time of the day.

Janes now claims that the explosion occurred at a chemical weapons plant during tests to mate a chemical warhead to a SCUD C missile.

The SCUD C, initially sold to Syria by North Korea in 1991, has a range of 500 kilometers (300 miles), bringing all of Israel into reach. Its 700 kilogram warhead could accommodate a nuclear warhead.

Syria's Chemical Weapons Proliferation Hydra

The deadly effect of the chemical warfare agents produced at the el-Safir military complex near Haleb (Allepo) was demonstrated on the night of July 25, 2007, apparently by an accident, which happened while Syrian engineers working on a Scud C warhead. 15 syrians were reportedly killed in the explosion that, according to official Syrian sources, was caused by sympathetic explosion due to an uncommon summer heat wave (the event happened at night, when the temperature is relaively low). According to Janes Defense Weekly, the casualties also included Iranian experts that were present at the site. According to Jane's, sarin and VX agents were dispersed over a large area after the accidents, causing severe burns.



Syria's Strategic Weapons Programs

Syria has used its rocket and missile forces for strategic signaling as well as deterrence. During the Syrian missile crisis in April 1981 and the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in June 1982, Syria deployed several Scud-Bs to sites near Damascus -- where they could be observed by Israel -- as a warning not to attack. And in recent months, Syria reportedly deployed large numbers of long-range rockets opposite the Golan during several major Israeli military exercises there, apparently to deter what it saw as preparations for an attack.

Should deterrence fail, Syria's rocket and missile forces would likely play a major role in any confrontation with Israel, as a means of deterring further escalation or disrupting Israeli mobilization and military operations. Syria might also be tempted to attack Israeli population centers in order to undermine Israeli morale -- raising the possibility of further escalation and, in turn, the use of chemical weapons should the regime or Damascus be threatened. For all these reasons, although Israel's September 6 airstrike may have averted an unwanted nuclear development, it may also signify the onset of increasing tension and volatility between Israel and Syria.

The fact is that Syria did NOT use their missiles. They merely showed them off. Any speculation on their use of conventional missiles, let alone Chemical, biological or nuclear, is not justified by the facts. And thus it is speculation.
More spin.

Reminding us of Voltaire's dictum;

"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."

While this unprovoked attack garnered no outrage in the U.S.

US President George W. Bush emphatically refused to address reports of an Israeli attack on Syria despite persistent questioning during a White House press conference Thursday.

They were quick to blame Syria this week for the car bombing in Lebanon. With no evidence merely assertions

US leads world outrage at Beirut bombing

The whole point of this not so clever subterfuge of a nuke story is to send a warning to Iran.

'Was Israeli raid a dry run for attack on Iran?'

US Bush administration ponders when to launch nuclear war against Iran

Attack points to need to halt Iran’s nuclear aims

Which of course got the knee jerk response they expected from Iran. Getting them the media headlines they wanted, of reactionary sabre rattling.

Iran Displays Weapons At Annual Army Celebrations; Warns West Against Attack

While overlooking the fact that Iran has challenged the U.S. not to a war but that most democratic of political forms; the debate.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has again proposed to US President George W. Bush to hold public debates within the framework of the 62nd session of the UN General Assembly. Ahmadinejad made this statement on Iranian television on Sunday.

“I had suggested holding a debate. I am saying again that let us discuss global concerns at the (UN) General Assembly in front of representatives of other nations,” Ahmadinejad pointed out. He said he proposed to also discuss the situation in Iraq with the aim of its settlement. The Iranian president said let Bush express his attitude and he will express his own. After that the leaders of 200 states will be able to draw conclusions, Ahmadinejad added.

According to him, “I am ready to hold talks with Bush on important global issues at the assembly.” “Let us hold talks about Iraq and other issues. Then public opinion will judge ... We will offer our global solutions,” he said.

It is five years since President Bush came to the United Nations to warn of the “grave and gathering danger” posed by Saddam Hussein. The ensuing U.S. invasion of Iraq set off a debate that continues to this day over U.S. leadership and the organization’s role in global security. Now Bush takes the UN General Assembly podium with Washington stepping up warnings about another Middle Eastern threat—Iran. His chances for strengthening an international coalition appear at least as uncertain (CSMonitor) as they were prior to the Iraq war. Scheduled speeches by Bush and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on September 25 come amid planned high-level diplomacy among the five permanent UN Security Council members over whether to expand sanctions a third time for Iran’s refusal to suspend its uranium-enrichment program.

Living in the past as all conservatives do, its their nature, the White House and their apocalyptic conservative cheerleaders have their Viet-Nam War now it wants to try its hand at its own Cuban Missile Crisis.

Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is preparing Syria to cover his flank, should war break out between Israel and Iran over Tehran's nuclear arsenal. Ahmadinejad is evidently gambling on Syria taking out Israel while Iran squares off against the United States. Were Iran and Israel to face each other head-to-head, one or the other would inevitably cease to exist. Israel would have no choice but to annihilate Iran before Iran annihilated Israel.

The reality is that Iran's leadership is divided on their approach to dealing with Europe and the International Atomic Energy Agency over their nuclear energy program. And let's not forget that so far that is all it is. And while Ahmadinejad is President he is not above being ruled out of order by the Iranian regime.

Signs of a Possible Rift in the Iranian Leadership on the Nuclear Issue

In 2005 Khamenei responded to President Ahmadinejad's alleged remark that Israel should be "wiped off the map" by saying that "the Islamic Republic has never threatened and will never threaten any country." Moreover Khamenei`s main advisor in foreign policy, Ali Akbar Velayati, refused to take part in Holocaust conference. In contrast to Ahmadinejad`s remarks, Velayati said that Holocaust was a genocide and a historical reality.

in January 2007, Hossein Ali Montazeri harshly criticized Ahmadinejad and accused him of harming the country. Montazeri, 85, is a senior theologian of the Shia Muslim faith. Also Mohammad Moussavian, a former nuclear negotiator who is currently in prison for espionage, has accused Ahmadinejad of lying to the people about the grave consequences of the penalties voted for by the Security Council. "Our advice to the president is to speak about the nuclear issue only during important national occasions, stop provoking aggressive powers like the United States and concentrate more on the daily needs of the people, those who voted for you on your promises," wrote the Islamic Republic.

That Israel with the cooperation of the United States engaged in an illegal hostile military incursion into a sovereign state's territory, is a clear violation of International law. So to justify their preemptive strike policy they leak stories of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.

Weapons Of Mass Destruction: A deadly blast occurs at a Syrian missile site as an Israeli airstrike against a suspected nuclear cache catches Tehran's eye. In 1981, Israel thwarted a WMD threat. Is history repeating itself?

Iran has learned well the lessons of Osirak, hardening and dispersing its nuclear facilities, placing many of them underground, protecting them with state-of-the-art air defenses bought from Russia. But Israel's military capabilities also have advanced over the past quarter-century, as have ours.

In September 2004, Israel contracted to buy from the U.S. 500 one-ton BLU-109 "bunker buster" bombs capable of penetrating 30 feet of earth or concrete, capable of reaching the Iranian underground facilities at Natanz.

Iran's loony president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, sent his nephew, Ali Akbar Mehrabian, to Syria to assess the strike damage. Perhaps he'll bring back the message that given the choice of an Iranian bomb or bombing Iran, Israel may already have chosen Plan B.

The silence of the Harper government over this violation of international law must mean they condone it as a Measured Response.

The world media and powers that be failed in their duty to take Syria seriously, and as information leaked out of Israel, with their need to gloat over their success, the war monger spin doctors beat them to it.

The Syrians are disappointed with the synchronised silence of the Arab world over the latest Israeli aerial invasion of Syria, which took place on 6 September. They complained to the UN Security Council on 11 September. The Syrians are equally disgusted with the stream of accusations -- all of which they insist are false -- that are coming out of the US media, claiming that the Syrian village of Tal Abyad was being used to host nuclear weapons from North Korea. Other US media reports say that the Israeli jets hit a shipment of arms bound from Iran to Hizbullah in South Lebanon. In an interview with CBS, President Bashar Al-Assad insisted that Hizbullah does not receive arms from the Syrians. The Syrians have long been saying that they are not interested in nuclear weapons, and never miss an opportunity to call for a nuclear-free Middle East that applies -- first and foremost -- to Israel.

The only countries to condemn the Israeli attack were (not surprisingly) Russia, Iran, Turkey -- and North Korea, which came out with a harsh statement at the Israeli aggression. All of America's allies in the region, however, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Lebanon responded with a chilly "no comment". There was no condemnation and no solidarity from the Arab front, unlike other similar cases of Israeli aggression in 2001 and 2003. Major Arab satellite channels and newspapers (all funded by or close to the Saudis) even adopted a stance one step short of holding the Syrians responsible for the Israeli act. The reasons are clear; increased Syrian-Saudi tension over the upcoming presidential race in Lebanon, the state of affairs in Iraq, and Syria's friendship with Iran. The Arab street, however, remains overwhelmingly supportive of Syria, especially when it comes to confrontation with Israel. This was made loud and clear by the Syrian media. The Arab League issued a strong yet powerless condemnation claiming that the Israeli intrusion was "unacceptable".

They went into Syria, with a target in mind, and either did not find it or found something completely different that made them look silly in the international community. States after all are bound by the UN Charter. They are not supposed to violate their neighbour's airspace unless they have very convincing evidence that they can display to the entire world, justifying their actions. The Israelis did not have that. When one intrudes into another country's airspace, with no valid reason, then this is considered an act of aggression.

SEE:

Postcard From Syria

Did They Or Didn't They

Israeli Rabbi Says Wipe Out Arabs

Weapons of Mass Deception

US War On Capitalism In Iran

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Israel, pay, Syria, censorship, WMD, North Korea, Iran, America,
nuclear weapons, air strike, IDF, Israel attacks Syria, disinformation, War on Iran,