Strategically timed Syrian massacre

By Stephen Lendman

Insurgents are enlisted, armed, funded, trained, and directed by Western and regional special forces.

They decide strategy, targets, and timing. Armies need leadership to operate effectively. So do killer gangs.

Special forces have tactical expertise. They're directing Washington's war on Syria. They plan and lead attacks and bombings.

Treimseh's massacre was strategically timed. Questions about it remained unanswered. More on that below.

Coming when the Security Council considered harsher anti-Assad measures raises obvious red flags.

Armed Syrian rebels pose with their weapons in a location on the outskirts of Idlib in northwestern Syria.

Why then is clear. At issue is pressuring Russia and China to bend. So far both countries hold firm. They oppose further sanctions and outside intervention.

Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov was clear, saying:

"In case (Western countries) decided to submit the draft resolution for voting on Thursday although they already know that it is rejected, Russia will veto the draft resolution."

Washington won't quit trying. Hillary Clinton is an unabashed war criminal. She's arguably America's most shameless ever secretary of state.

She's clearly the most brazen. Her language and attitude exceed the worst of Cold War rhetoric.

Her take-no-prisoners thinking, character, and demagoguery reveal a woman addicted to self-aggrandizement and diktat authority.

She relishes death, destruction, and the spoils of war.

She's indifferent to human suffering. She's a monument to wrong over right.

She's a disgrace and embarrassment to her country, position and humanity.

She's pushing for Security Council authorization for war without saying so. On July 13, a State Department Press Statement headlined "Assad Regime Massacre in Traymseh," saying:

She's "outraged (about) another massacre committed by the Syrian regime" that she claims killed "over 200 men, women, and children...."

Official death toll numbers aren't known. Reports suggest insurgents comprised most of them.

Despite no corroborating evidence, she claims "the regime deliberately murdered innocent civilians. Syria cannot be peaceful, stable, or democratic until Assad goes and a political transition begins."

"Those who committed these atrocities will be identified and held accountable."

(T)he international community must keep increasing the pressure on the regime...."

"The Security Council should put its full weight behind" regime change.

There must "be consequences for non-compliance."

"History will judge this Council. Its members must ask themselves whether continuing to allow the Assad regime to commit unspeakable violence against its own people is the legacy they want to leave."

Washington's bloodstained hands are all over the Treimseh massacre. Obama officials also bear direct responsibility for earlier Houla and Qubair ones.

Expect much more ahead. Likely larger-scale false flags are planned. Assad will be wrongfully blamed.

Washington will either get Security Council authorization for intervention or circumvent it. None approved war on Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, or Libya.

International law is clear. The UN Charter prohibits attacking another nation except in self-defense - until the Security Council acts. It has final say.

The right of self-defense is limited solely to deterring armed attacks, preventing future ones after initial assaults, or reversing the consequences of enemy aggression, such as heavily armed Western-backed Syrian insurgents.

International law supports Assad. He's obligated to defend his people under armed attack.

At the same time, he must conform to the principles of necessity, distinction, and proportionality.

Necessity permits only attacking military targets.

Distinction pertains to distinguishing between civilian and military ones.

Proportionality prohibits disproportionate force likely to damage nonmilitary sites and/or harm civilian lives.

A fourth consideration requires preventing unnecessary suffering, especially affecting noncombatant civilians.

If these objectives aren't possible, attacks are prohibited, but not when civilian lives are threatened by hostile elements doing most of the killing.

Clearly that's the case in Syria.

Just war, humanitarian intervention, and/or responsibility to protect (R2P) notions don't wash. International law is clear and unequivocal. So is constitutional law. Only Congress can declare war, not presidents.

It hasn't deterred America's permanent war policy. Multiple direct and proxy ones rage illegally. Obama itches for more. So does Clinton. Media scoundrels support them.

On July 13, the Washington Post published an AP report headlined " 'Outraged' Clinton demands UN Security Council action after new Syria massacre," saying:

She demands Security Council action. Without naming either country, she effectively blamed Russia and China for blocking Washington's rage for war.

She wants Security Council language authorizing stiffer sanctions and clear steps for regime change. Noncompliance assures consequences, she warned.

Ban Ki-moon played his usual complicit role. On July 13, he said:

He's "outraged by reports of horrific (Treimseh) mass killings."

Despite no evidence whatever, he "condemn(ed), in the strongest possible terms, the indiscriminate use of heavy artillery and shelling....including by firing from helicopters."

Again he pointed fingers the wrong way. Assad was wrongfully blamed for Western-backed killings.

"The Syrian Government must halt this bloodshed," he said.

"I call upon all Member States to take collective and decisive action to immediately and fully stop the tragedy unfolding in Syria. Inaction becomes a license for further massacres."

"Members of the Security Council must build on the Action Group communiqué and follow through on their promises to act accordingly."

He wants regime change. He suggested outside intervention. Initiating it means war. NATO or third party belligerence violates international law. He's sworn to uphold it.

Like Kofi Annan, his predecessor, his record reflects failure and betrayal. They're both imperial tools. They spurned their mandate to promote peace. They're complicit with Washington-led NATO's crimes of war and against humanity.

They're both at it again. They're advancing the ball for war. On Friday, the Security Council met in closed session. Talks got nowhere. Russia and China won't play Washington's game.

An unnamed Western diplomat blamed Moscow, saying:

"The problem is Russia. I'm not saying they are not working behind the scenes, but clearly it hasn't worked and they have to admit that either they haven't been pushing Assad hard enough or they have and they have failed to persuade him."

"At the moment, the effect of what they are doing, maybe not the intention, but the effect, is just to give space for the massacres to continue."

French President Francois Hollande added:

"A regime has decided to use force to crush its own people." By blocking tougher action, Russia and China let "chaos and war take hold in Syria."

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said:

"Without anticipating the results of the investigation of the crime, on which we insist, we would like to stress that we have no doubt that this atrocity benefits the forces that do not seek peace but obstinately keep trying to sow the seeds of sectarian strife and civil conflict in Syria, and those for whom the grief and suffering of the Syrian people mean nothing."

He added that reports suggest civilians were shot at point blank range "by unidentified monsters."

He emphasized that killings occurred while Security Council members met behind closed doors. Without saying so, he likely inferred its suspicious timing.

Russia's UN envoy Alexander Pankin said:

"We are prepared for various compromises, but there is the ‘red line’ that we cannot step over."

Conflict resolution can't succeed "with the stick of sanctions directed against only one party to the Syrian process - the government."

Russia drafted a resolution extending UNSMIS observers another three months.

Washington, Britain, and France want it limited to 45 days. They also insist on a 10 day deadline imposed solely on Syria to end violence and withdraw all troops from cities and towns.

Otherwise they demand Security Council action under the UN Charter's Chapter VII. It authorizes "Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggression."

Article 41 calls for measures short of armed intervention. They "may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations."

Article 42 calls for other measures if Article 41 proves inadequate or ineffective. They "may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations."

Subsequent articles authorize the use of force. UN members are invited to participate.

Article 46 calls for "(p)lans for the application of armed force (to) be made by the Security Council with the assistance of the Military Staff Committee."

Pankin knows the risks. He warned about "harsher steps (including) the use of military force" Moscow opposes.

Events in Treimseh are still being sorted out. Insurgents attacked the village and nearby Syrian troops. They counterattacked. Killer gangs were routed. They suffered heavy casualties.

SANA state media reported it. Many insurgents were captured.

SANA said terrorists "spread across the town before the army entered it, and that this was based on orders they received to attack law-enforcement forces and prevent civilians from going to work."

Four captured insurgents appeared on Syrian television. They participated with "around 250 gunmen."

They acted on direct orders. They were surprised when security forces confronted them. Many insurgents were killed. Scores were arrested. Clashes lasted around 90 minutes.

Gunmen had been gathering in and around the town for nearly three weeks. On Thursday, they heard that army forces encircled it. They got orders to attack.

Insurgent Mohammad Sattouf said "he was in charge of fabricating videos of protests and uploading them to YouTube."

On July 14, SANA said security forces acted "in response to" Treimseh residents’ calls for help. Death squads were attacking civilians and "exploding a number of houses."

Large weapons supplies were seized. They include:

"45 machine guns, 13 Nato sniper rifles, 9 RPG launchers, 7 BKC machineguns, 3 mortars, 3 hand-made rockets, 14 pump-action rifles, 10 military pistols, 24 mortar shells, 32 RPG shells, 53 machinegun chargers, 30 sniper rifle chargers, 8 explosive devices, 10 grenades, 150 detonators, 1500 sniper rifle bullets, 5000 BKC machinegun bullets, 4200 machinegun bullets, 500 pistol bullets, 7 gas masks, 5 prism binoculars, 25 satellite wireless devices, 30 shields, in addition to materials for making explosive devices, explosives and large amounts of gunpowder, TNT templates, highly explosive C4 material, a field hospital and an amount of military equipment, stolen cars and registration licenses."

Eyewitnesses said over 50 civilians were killed and many more injured before security forces arrived. Most deaths likely were insurgents.

Western accounts are entirely fabricated. They're bald-faced lies. Media scoundrels regurgitate them. They're complicit in Washington's rage for war. Attacking Syria could happen any time.