The Houla Massacre: A War Provocation by the NATO Death Squads in the Tradition of Himmler’s Gleiwitz Operation of August 1939, Designed to Flip Eager Lion 2012 into Aggressive War Against Syria
A prominent political analyst says that NATO-backed armed gangs have been behind the recent killing of civilians in the Syrian town of Houla.
Press TV has conducted an interview with Dr. Webster Tarpley to further discuss the issue.
What follows is a rough transcript of the interview.
Press TV: Dr. Tarpley, the statements coming from the Western sources of the Houla massacre seem to be a mix of realities and speculations. I mean, we have the UN human rights office saying that during the massacre the government was shelling the neighborhood.
I mean, how could the military have been shelling the place if it had its own forces on the ground there?
Tarpley: I think you will find that the Western accounts are coherent with a major NATO war provocation. All honest observers know that the fundamental problem in Syria is the presence of NATO death squads that have been brought in, in large numbers, armed, fomented by the NATO states and this is now taking on a certain momentum of its own.
This is not the first time that the NATO people have tried to get a large scale massacre that they could try to inflame public opinion with.
However, I would say three on the ground eyewitness reports that I verified myself. First one comes from Fides; Fides is an Italian-Roman Catholic missionary News Service and they point to the fact that what the reality of the Houla massacre is that these fighters, right extremists, al-Qaeda or Salafi, whatever they were; came in and started targeting the Armenian Christians and the roman Catholics, the Franciscans and some others. This is one package.
Then we have a Belgian website with an author called Vox Clamantis which describes, in detail, how it was done that the hospital in Houla was burned down and the people that had been taking refuge in it were systematically massacred from up-close by the death squads not by the government.
Then, we have the Russian journalist operating in Syria, Anhar Kochneva. You can look at some of the work that she has put on the Internet where you have actual eyewitnesses speaking in Arabic and it is translated into Russian but there is also a text which you can translate into English if you want to or some other languages, which simulates the same thing.
They say that they are being oppressed by these death squads in effect and that they are angry with Kofi Annan and with Qatar for enabling this.
So if you put it all together.., there is yet a further element which is that there has been an attempt, it is gruesome and it is macabre, but to procure cadavers.
The NATO side, the death squads they sponsor have been attempting to build up a stock of cadavers that they could then use in this way.
The model for this of course is what Himmler, Heydrich and Gerbils did at the Gleiwitz video station in Germany on the Polish border to provoke war with Poland in August-September 1939.
This is exactly the same method that is now being used by NATO in Syria.
Press TV: With that said, who would benefit from killing women and innocent children in Syria?
Tarpley: Well, the goal of this is to build up war hysteria in world public opinion and this has succeeded to some extent because of the controlled, brainwashing Western media, the kinds of stories that have been put out are all one-sided, all quite fantastic.
Then, it goes together with the idea of course that now at least 12 NATO countries and others have kicked out the Syrian diplomatic representatives. So there is an attempt to build up a certain momentum.
The Russian delegation going into the UN meeting on Sunday afternoon was already skeptical that you could not, somehow the NATO’s story does not add up. In other words, it cannot be artillery and tanks, on the one hand and everybody killed from up close, on the other.
That contradiction was obvious from the very beginning and obviously we need Russia to hang tough to remain strong on this and not to cave in under this immense pressure.
But the idea is either regime change immediately or war and then regime change. And as that Gleiwitz-Polish example suggests, this is the kind of thing that gets you on your way to a war.
The way the war could come is quite obvious. We now have operation Eager Lion 2012. We have got 12,000 troops from 17 countries in Jordan, mainly US, Jordanian and some other NATO.
This drill could immediately go live. It could immediately cross the Syrian borders, so to speak, and start a war since the elements, the spearhead of such a war has already been assembled on the territory of Jordan.
So we are literally on the brink of a very large regional war.
Press TV: Turkey has hosted a group of opposition groups ahead of an expected resignation of Burhan Ghalioun, the head of the so-called Syrian National Council.
I mean, what do you think was the aim and achievement of this meeting?
Tarpley: Well, Turkey, up to now, has not taken the plunge. The pressure coming from NATO on Turkey of course is that they have got to launch an attack.
That would be national suicide for Turkey because it would guarantee an uprising of the Kurds and this would tear apart the post-Ataturk Turkish state.
So that would be a very, very bad choice but we are constantly getting reports that Erdogan is looking at invoking NATO article four. There is no basis for this and of course the so-called Syrian National Council is a gaggle of adventurers; it is a gaggle of profiteers and rent seekers and adventurers who are trying to get money from various Western countries so that they can continue to live the high life in these hotels.
And the fact that just after 51 percent of the Syrian people voted for an actual election, which was open, it was not a one-party election at all, a couple of weeks after that election being successful, the Syrian National Council fell apart just about completely with this guy, Ghalioun, resigning. I think that says a lot.
NATO is politically defeated but their only answer to that is that they tried to escalate it militarily and for that they have got to use these provocations which again are just a kind of thing that we saw coming from the Nazis on the verge of World War II.
The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has said that most of the civilian victims of last week’s massacre in the Syrian town of Houla were executed.
Over 100 civilians were killed in a massacre in the western town of Houla on May 25.
Meanwhile, a number of Western governments have recalled their ambassadors and high-ranking diplomats from Syria in protest to the killing of at least 108 people.
The Syrian government says that the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country and that security forces have been given clear instructions not to harm civilians.
Press TV has conducted an interview with Syed Ali Wasif, from the Society for International Reforms and Research, to hear his opinion on this issue. The following is a rough transcription of the interview.
Press TV: First of all I like to get your opinion on the double standard being adopted by the international community, by and large when it comes to Syria specifically with regards to this Houla massacre where most of the civilians were killed at point-blank range and not by the artillery and tanks as many claimed?
Wasif: Well unfortunately yes there is a double standard when it comes to the interest of NATO and pro-Western allies. So this is exactly the case in Syria going on today. What happened is alarming.
Actually this was a premeditated, pre-orchestrated component of the NATO foreign policy actually or what you can call it an alliance of the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia with regard to this premeditated action and this murder, killing a hundred people there.
How could the Syrian government kill its own people when they represent basically the Alawites and those people there were mainly Alawites and all other pro-Syrian people?
So how could a government kill its own people?
So this is totally ridiculous. But the thing is actually now we are seeing a zooming in of the NATO pressure on Syria by taking one by one different steps in different directions in order to bring down the Syrian government, in order to put a lot of pressure on it and the other step was actually the taking down all those or calling all those ambassadors of the West allies and NATO countries to the respective countries.
This basically is a sign of putting more pressure on Damascus to give them certain concessions or to try to negotiate in favor of those.
This unfortunately is also a brazen act of terrorism by their pro-Saudi, Wahhabi, pro-Israel and pro-American terrorist there and they are totally terrorists under international legal norms and human rights and humanitarian norms.
So there is no question about it even at times we have seen that the United Nations has also taken up the same stance as thereof the Damascus government that those in the opposition are the terrorists resorting to violence and killing civilians and unarmed people.
So this basically is sort of an astonishing alliance between the US, Israel, Saudi Arabia which is totally a US puppet there in that region, is how could they who are in the opposition in Syria could toe the line of Israel, Saudi Arabia and United States and then call for Islam or take the name of Islam? How could it happen?
I mean Syria and on the other hand the Syrian government is a secular government based on the Ba’ath Party of formed and established in 1910 in Damascus by a Christian and a Jewish, Michel Alfaq.
So how could the Western government try to pose this Syrian government as a threat to the Western interest when this government is a secular government?
So when we see a combination of the two opposing factions there, there is two opposing sides, that is the Western allies and there is NATO and Western powers with Israel and the United States on the one hand and on the other hand Saudi Arabia and the Wahhabis and others, the opposition Syrian forces on the other, how could they join hands with the Western powers who do not like the Islamists?
So if the Islamists are on the same side and sharing shoulder to shoulder the same burden and sharing the same interest with the Zionist and with the Americans, it means that there is something fishy out there and this is the moment when I think the Syrian people and those naïve Syrians who are not that aware of the international situation and the ideological standing behind these forces, they should know and should analyze the situation that they are being basically backed by pro-Zionist , pro Wahhabi, pro-American forces and they have been cheated and deceived in the name of Islam by those forces in Syria and they have nothing to do with their liberation, with their freedom or with their Islamic movements because these forces cannot have, you know on the one hand they can have a kind of an ally in the name of Satan, in the name of evil and they act in the name of Allah on the other hand. This cannot happen.
They cannot go hand in hand with Satan, with evil and with Allah. So they have to find and choose the right option that is to find the solution to this problem created by those Western allies, Israel and the Saudis there.
So I think this is totally an act orchestrated by the Saudi intelligence, funded by the Israelis and of course the NATO forces there, the NATO countries there trying to manipulate the political situation. They are calling off the respective ambassadors back.
And one thing more I want to point out here and I will be the first person to do that regarding Syria.
Listen, as soon as you see that the Syrian government topples, if it topples in the future for instance then you will see the Eastern Saudi province, the Northern Yemeni province, the other countries will see a flare-up of those and Bahrain as well and you will see the armed guerrillas in those counties.