Covers Up War Crimes
Misleads Over Syrian Security Operations.
Update: Indeed BBC did not see "MIGs" bombing Aleppo,
though it appears they weren't even anti-tank SU-25's but rather
L-39 Albatros are also not even "Russian-made" as the BBC
claimed. The article below has been amended to reflect this
Read here for more.
July 25, 2012 - When big lies must be told, BBC is there.
From Iraq to Afghanistan to Libya and now Syria, BBC has paved
the way for Western disinformation meant to mange public
perception around a war the public would otherwise never support
caught on record producing entire "documentaries" on behalf
of corporate-financier interests, has already been caught in
immense lies regarding the NATO-fueled destabilization of Syria.
This includes the
disingenuous use of photos from Iraq, to depict a so-called
"massacre" in the village of Houla, Syria.
Now, as NATO's Al Qaeda mercenaries operating under the banner
of the so-called "Free Syrian Army" flow over the Turkish-Syrian
border in an attempt to overrun the city of Aleppo,
BBC is there, attempting to manipulate the public's
perception as the conflict unfolds.
BBC's Ian Pannell admits he rode with a convoy of milatnt
fighters into Aleppo at night. He claims many are desperate for
the FSA to succeed, "clamoring for freedom denied by their
president," but concedes many others fear an "Islamic takeover"
and sectarian "division
and bloodshed." The latter of course, is self-evident, while
the former is the repeated, unfounded mantra of the Western
media used to cover up the latter.
Pannell poses amongst staged settings, claiming a single burning
tire equates to a barricade set up by the militants (see
more on the use of burning tires as propaganda here and
here). He concedes that militants are taking to the rooftops
with sniper rifles in the districts they claim they control -
begging one to wonder where else terrorist snipers have been,
and how many "sniper" deaths have been mistakenly blamed on the
Covering Up FSA War Crimes
Pannell then attempts to cover up serious war crimes committed
by the FSA militants he is traveling with, claiming that men the
FSA arbitrarily rounded up while "seeking revenge" were
"suspected Shabiha," harking back to Libya's NATO-backed
terrorist death squads rounding up and killing Libya's black
communities in orgies of sectarian genocide - which outlets like
the BBC defended as simply rebels targeting "suspected African
mercenaries." Pannell papers over what he just reported with the
unqualified claim that there is "little justice" on either side.
What became of the FSA's victims is not revealed.
BBC's Ian Pannell - young men "suspected" of being "Shabiha"
are rounded up as the FSA "seeks revenge." BBC fails
categorically to explain how NATO-backed terrorists can
"liberate" a city that is admittedly pro-government - but it
appears it will be done through terrorism, brutality, mass
murder, and intimidation.
BBC reporter Ian Pannell's failure to report on the war crimes
he admitted witnessing, smacks of endorsement and complicity -
an attempt to preserve the romanticism the West has desperately
tried to associate with their FSA death squads. Pannell's report
confirms earlier descriptions of widespread atrocities
committed by the so-called "Free Syrian Army."
In Libya, when the government of Muammar Qaddafi collapsed, and
as Libyan terrorists overran the last of the nation's security
entire cities of Libya's blacks were overrun, their
populations either mass-murdered, imprisoned, or forced to flee
to refugee camps. These are people who had lived in Libya for
generations. A similar fate awaits Syrians should NATO prevail.
BBC Confirms Syrian Army Use of Heavy Weapons ARE
Proportional to FSA Threats
Pannell's propaganda in Aleppo continues, where he admits FSA
militants possess tanks they allegedly "captured" from the
Syrian military, but then, showing video of what is either an
SU-25 aircraft or an
L-39 Albatros training jet, rolling in with machine guns,
claims it marks a "dramatic escalation" and a sign of
BBC's Ian Pannell -FSA tanks are positioned in or around
Aleppo, according to BBC. The myth that NATO-backed militants
are "lightly armed" is unraveling as they attempt to take on
large cities flush with cameras and media from both sides. Eager
propagandists attempting to portray victories have more than
once shown "captured tanks" in the hands of militants. Heavy
militant weapons beget heavy government weapons.
the Syrian army is using force directly proportional to the
threats NATO-backed militants have presented. Tanks and heavy
weapons mounted on trucks, also featured in the BBC report, are
legitimate targets for government heavy weapons. The precision
an SU-25 lends the battlefield verses heavy artillery
bombardments when neutralizing FSA heavy weapons is the only
conceivable way to minimize civilian casualties.
Images: (Top) From
BBC's Ian Pannell - BBC and other Western media outlets have
claimed "MIGs" are bombing Aleppo's civilian populations. This
all based on a single "tweet" made by BBC's Ian Pannell.
Pannell now reports this video depicts what he saw - which in
reality is either an anti-tank SU-25 or Aero L-39 deploying
machine guns, not bombs, verses what Pannell already admits are
FSA heavy weapons, not civilian populations. (Bottom) Several
orthographic views of the SU-25 and Aero L-39 for comparison.
And as the Western media is so found of reminding its viewers,
Aleppo is decidedly pro-government, and pro-President Bashar
al-Assad. Therefore to indiscriminately use disproportionate
force serves no purpose for the Syrian government, who has gone
through extraordinary lengths and placed its soldiers at great
risk to minimize damage to the city and its inhabitants - a city
and population that serves both an important role economically
and culturally for all Syrian people.
Remember Fallujah, Iraq
A government is put in a difficult position when armed gangs
enter a city "seeking revenge" as BBC's Ian Pannell puts it,
when these gangs have trucks mounted with heavy weapons as well
as tanks in their possession. For the West, to berate the Syrian
government and portray its security operations as unmitigated
"brutality" is disingenuous at best, especially considering the
are there solely because of years of financial, military, and
political support from the US, Israel, and the Gulf State
Image: Western hypocrisy -
Fallujah, Iraq in 2004 was bombarded by artillery and
airstrikes for weeks leading up to the final invasion. When over
10,000 troops entered the city, they were accompanied by tanks,
and supported by heavy artillery and airstrikes. When the West
is subjugating others, heavy weapons seems acceptable - but not
when another nation attempts to defend itself from admittedly
The West might want to also revisit the lessons it learned from
flattening the Iraqi city of Fallujhah, twice. The US bombarded
the city for weeks
prior to its final invasion in 2004, where over 10,000
troops entered with heavy artillery and air support. Apparently
it is acceptable for the West to subjugate others using such
tactics, but nations are prohibited from using similar tactics
to defend themselves. The Syrian uprising was a foreign-plot
stretching back as far as 2007, foreign militants
admittedly flowing over the border from across the Arab
admittedly armed and funded by the US, Israel,
Saudi Arabia, and Qatar.
The Battle of Fullujah is considered a notch in the belt of
Western military prowess, while the West condemns Syria's
attempts to defend one of its most important cities from
foreign-subversion and destruction. While NATO believes it can
still win the geopolitical battle it is waging against
the Syrian people, it has already long lost the battle for moral
This article was originally published at