Why the UK and France are allowed sovereignty but Syria isn’t

From ASG:

Aside from the shameless hypocrisy of the British and French decision to arm the foreign and local terrorists and executioners in Syria, aka, “Syrian rebels” or “resistance fighters” as they are now officially called, another stomach-churning aspect of this joint announcement is the language French and British leaders used to justify their intent to violate the EU arms ban. When asked yesterday if the UK would be willing to break the ban, David Cameron responded “We are still an independent country. We can have an independent foreign policy…” French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius responded to the same question today by asserting that “France is a sovereign nation,” adding that both France and were prepared to “lift the embargo” even if there was no international support for the decision. 

So while the White Man’s sovereignty is not dependent on any international consent for its existence, anti-imperialist nations like Syria do not enjoy a similar right to issue such self-proclaimed professions of sovereignty like France can or chart an “independent foreign policy” like Britain’s.  The sovereignty of insubordinate nations like Syria is not merely dependent on the “international community’s” [shorthand for US and Europe] recognition but can be trampled on with impunity and justified in the most counter-intuitive and morally bankrupt terms. More than this, imperialist powers not only get to dictate and violate other nations’ sovereignty, but also to invoke the term as a legal and political defense when rationalizing their own disputed intent to destroy another nation’s right to remain sovereign.   

One need only look up the concept of sovereignty in the White Man’s very own introductory text-books to see how brazenly hypocritical the western approach to Syria’s sovereignty is. Quoting from Michael Roskin et al’s “Political Science: An Introduction”: “Sovereignty means “national control over the country’s territory, boss of one’s own turf. Nations are very jealous of their sovereignty and governments take great care to safeguard it. They maintain armies to deter foreign invasion, they control borders with passports and visas and they hunt down terrorists.”

Yet bizarrely,  when a state like Syria which still enjoys [international] legal sovereignty and has a seat at the UN,  tries to reassert “control of its territory” and “be the boss of its own turf” by “hunting down terrorists” and foreign fighters, it is not merely denied this right but threatened with invasion and punished with externally funded, armed and trained proxies. But what else can the Empire do when its ultimate aim is not  regime change  but to strip the Syrian state itself of sovereignty by plunging it further into an endless and bloody civil war that can only result in the destruction of Syria the state?


Al-Qaeda refashioned by the UK

by Voltairenet.org

Abu Qatada, the man who had been dubbed by the Anglo-American media as “Osama ben Laden’s ambassador in Europe“, and who is on the list of individuals associated with Al-Qaeda established by the UN Security Council Committee (resolutions 1267/1898), has just been released on parole by the British authorities.

Owing to the intervention of the European Court of Human Rights, which opposed his extradition to Jordan where he was to be prosecuted, he will be totally free in three months “if no agreement is found.”

In addition, the Daily Telegraph revealed that BBCjournalists were instructed not to call Abu Qatada “extremist” and “not to make use of images suggesting that the preacher is overweight.”

The affair has caused a stir in Great Britain, where people fail to understand how someone who had been qualified as “extremely dangerous” by former Interior Minister David Blunkett, and was detained in the high security Long Lartin prison in Worcestershire, can be set free.

As we had anticipated in May 2011, the media production of Osama bin Laden’s death was the prelude to the recycling of his men in the interests of the new US strategy. After helping to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan, serving as patsies of the September 11 attacks, and finally being used against the Iraqi resistance, their new assignment is to hijack the “Arab Spring” and subvert the Resistance Alliance (Iran, Syria, Hezbollah).

Thus, in Syria, men emanating from the ranks of Al-Qaeda, funded by Qatar and overseen by Turkish, British and French military instructors, constitute the bulk of the contingent that the Western press calls the “Free Syrian Army”.

The BBC is now looking after the image of those who are likely to serve such a cause.

No propaganda can save your daily failures and imminent demise

Israel Tests on Worm Called Crucial in Iran Nuclear Delay‘ –

Behind Dimona’s barbed wire, the experts say, Israel has spun nuclear centrifuges virtually identical to Iran’s at Natanz, where Iranian scientists are struggling to enrich uranium. They say Dimona tested the effectiveness of the Stuxnet computer worm, a destructive program that appears to have wiped out roughly a fifth of Iran’s nuclear centrifuges and helped delay, though not destroy, Tehran’s ability to make its first nuclear arms.

“To check out the worm, you have to know the machines,” said an American expert on nuclear intelligence. “The reason the worm has been effective is that the Israelis tried it out.”