Ever since the beginning of the Syrian crisis in 2011, the Western corporate media has been alight with insidious and downright absurd propaganda regarding the nature of the Syrian government, military, society, and, of course, its president. In Europe and Australia the propaganda has been heavily pushed as well. However, while the independent and alternative media have thoroughly debunked much of the propaganda coming primarily from the United States, UK, Germany, and Australia, little has been said of the propaganda coming from the United Nations.
Unfortunately, the U.N. has a reputation among many people of being a voice and a vehicle for peace. However, the United Nations is anything but, and instead has played an active role in the destabilization, breaking, and destruction of states in the aim of the same agenda that has taken full hold of governments in the West.
One such example of U.N. propaganda is the incessant droning on regarding the humanitarian catastrophe in East Ghouta while nothing but the sound of crickets comes from the U.N. in regards to the humanitarian condition of Damascus or virtually anywhere in Syria where terrorists occupy or have occupied.
This latest hypocrisy and obvious double standard in regards to situation in East Ghouta versus the situation in Damascus and other areas under siege by terrorists is both stunning and revealing. Take, for instance, the recent statement by the UNICEF Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa, Geert Cappelaere, entitled “The War On Children In Syria: Reports Of Mass Casualties Among Children In Eastern Ghouta And Damascus.” This statement stands as one of the least professional statements of “outrage” ever made on the part of a UN staff attempting to use emotion and marketing techniques to nudge public opinion to the anti-Assad narrative and support some heavier sustained “isolation” of the Assad government.
The statement contained no text, only blank lines after the preface which read “No words will do justice to the children killed, their mothers, their fathers and their loved ones.” In the footnotes, the report says “UNICEF is issuing this blank statement. We no longer have the words to describe children’s suffering and our outrage. Do those inflicting the suffering still have words to justify their barbaric acts?”
The UN office’s report thus goes hand in hand with the insane and hysterical hyperventilation coming from the Western media outlets and the governments they serve regarding East Ghouta which has suffered under oppression, atrocities, torture, murder, and yes, chemical weapons, all perpetrated by the Western-backed terrorist forces that occupy it. It should be noted that many of these chemical weapons attacks were obvious false flags in order to be pinned on the Syrian government to then justify a “response” from the West which is responsible for all the bloodshed in Syria since 2011.
As Eva Bartlett wrote for MintPress News in her article, “UN Feigns Outrage Over Ghouta While Terrorist Rockets Rain Down On Damascus:”
Where was UNICEF’s dramatic blank-lined protest when 200 civilians, including 116 children, were slaughtered by terrorist factions while in convoy from Kafraya and Foua in April 2017? These factions included Ahrar al-Sham (supported by Turkey and Saudi Arabia), al-Nusra (al-Qaeda), and factions of the Free Syrian Army. The Free Syrian Army was armed by the U.S. And, according to the words of former Qatari Prime Minister Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber al-Thani, Qatar — with the support and coordination of Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the U.S.—was from the beginning supporting armed groups, even al-Qaeda, in Syria.
This seemingly outraged UN statement has made the rounds in corporate media reports on eastern Ghouta, most of which cite the U.K.-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), run from his home by a sole person, Osama Suleiman, who uses the pseudonym Rami Abdul Rahman. In its recent Ghouta reports, SOHR itself does not provide sources.
Not once did he mention the designated terrorist factions within. These terrorist factions include: Jaysh al-Islam (Saudi-backed), Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (al-Qaeda), Ahrar al-Sham, and Faylaq al-Rahman (the main faction in Jobar, and reported to have received BGM-71 TOW anti-tank guided missiles).
The UN would garner much less public support and outrage if, instead of easily-misconstrued emotive statements, it showed training videos like this one depicting then-leader Zahran Alloush’s Army of Islam training in eastern Ghouta with their armored tanks. This is the reality of eastern Ghouta. Jaysh al-Islam is the group infamous for caging civilians, including women, to use as human shields.
The UN would garner less support still were the UN and corporate media to show videos of civilians like this woman cursing the armed groups, blaming them for hunger and for hoarding food, telling them to leave Ghouta.
With hindsight, we know now that in other formerly-occupied areas of Syria, like East Aleppo, Homs, Madaya, al-Waer, and elsewhere, when finally resecured from terrorist factions, civilians in these areas spoke of terrorists hoarding food and medicine, and preventing them from leaving — holding them hostage as human shields.
It also transpired that the numbers the UN and corporate media were citing about eastern Aleppo’s population —250,000 to 300,000 – were highly inflated, double the actual numbers of civilians in eastern areas. As I wrote previously:
110,000 civilians registered at the Jibreen Registration center; another estimated 10 percent might have gone straight to stay with family instead; and according to the Red Cross, 35,000 people (“fighters” and their family members) were evacuated out of Aleppo. The total number was thus at most 150,000, most likely significantly lower.”
Bartlett then points out that, during the course of Lowcock’s statement, only once did he even mention the shelling taking place in Damascus. Even then, he referred to the documented intentional targeting of civilians by Western-backed terrorists as implicitly unconfirmed, stating that shelling in Damascus was “reportedly” killing civilians there.
Of course, if Lowcock was simply unaware of whether or not the reports were true, he could have checked for confirmation in the writings of independent researchers like Vanessa Beeley who were there during the shelling, who had personally witnessed the results, and written about them on her own website, TheWallWillFall.org and 21st Century Wire. Or, Lowcock could have traveled to Damascus as I did in October, 2017 and taken a look for himself. Damascus is quite accessible and, provided one stays out of areas like East Ghouta where Lowcock’s terrorists reside, there is no fear of beheading or Sharia courts.
Jaysh al-Islam, al-Qaeda, Ahrar al-Sham, and Faylaq al-Rahman, all terrorists groups present in East Ghouta and the object of the United Nations obsessive desire to protect, have been shelling Damascus for weeks, hitting civilians on the street, homes, public areas, and schools. Of course, the shelling is a breach of the de-escalation zones agreed to in May, 2017 and negotiated by Russia, Turkey and Iran.
On February 23, a powerful missile was fired into Damascus, killing one civilian. All evidence points to Jaysh al-Islam as the culprit, especially since the terrorist group’s own social media page (curiously not deleted while pro-Syria researchers repeatedly have their pages removed on a regular basis) bragged about firing the missile. No blank pages have been issued by the U.N. over these crimes. In fact, little, like in Lowcock’s own statement, has been said at all.
It is thus interesting to note that Jaysh al-Islam’s political leader, Mohammad Alloush, was supposed to take part and partially represent the “armed opposition” in the May 2017 and Astana 2017 peace talks.
Syrian Ambassador to the United Nations, Bashar al-Ja’afari, spoke to the press after the statements made by Lowcock to the UN Security Council, where he pointed out Lowcock’s obvious bias. Ja’afari stated:
We have an official letter from the Resident Coordinator in Damascus, the chair of OCHA in Syria, saying that during 2017, OCHA — with the cooperation of the Syrian government, and Syrian Red Crescent, and International Committee of the Red Cross — have provided humanitarian assistance to 2.3 million people.
Mr. Lowcock denied this information, while we have it in written form coming from the head of OCHA in Damascus. So, something is wrong. Either these people here in New York don’t read what they get from … their own people in Damascus, or they mislead the Security Council members about what’s going on in Syria.”
He also addressed the claims of a “stifling siege” made by Lowcock. He said,
[This] is not consistent with the reality on the ground. Commercial trucks have been moving constantly between Damascus and east Ghouta. The Syrian government has been facilitating aid to eastern Ghouta, and medical evacuations to hospitals in Damascus. The UN is ignoring video footage posted by these terrorist groups showing women and children pushed into metal cages on the streets.
Ja’afari cited over 1,000 shells coming in to Damascus from East Ghouta a week before the February 22 Security Council meeting. By the time February 22 rolled around, he was able to cite over 1200, adding that 8 million people were at risk.
During the week of February 26, Eva Bartlett compiled a list from Syrian news agency, SANA, of terrorist attacks launched against Damascus. They are as follows:
In his latest address at the UN Security Council, Ambassador al-Ja’afari noted that the main headquarters of the Red Crescent in Syria, based in Damascus, was targeted with 10 missiles, originating from Ghouta.
This is a stunning amount of attacks conducted against civilians particularly when one takes into account the fact that these attacks have received virtually no coverage in the Western mainstream press or the United Nations. Stunning, that is, if both the press and UN were not so obviously working to promote an agenda of destabilization and “taming” of nations that do not go along with the dictates of the world financier system that has already broken the back of the West.
Despite the U.N. Security Council meeting being focused on Syria, the U.N. prevented the Syrian Ambassador to the U.N. from completing his statements. After the meeting had been concluded and the Ja’afari censored, he addressed the press, stating,
The President of the Security Council, the Ambassador of Kuwait, acted irresponsibly today by trying to prevent me from speaking, while the meeting is on Syria. This irresponsible behavior coming from the President of the Security Council in a meeting allocated to the situation in Syria reveals also that Kuwait is not — the Kuwaiti delegation — is not up to the responsibility it is assuming as President of the Security Council, because this irresponsible behavior works against the rules and procedures of the Security Council. The shortage of the moral behavior of the Kuwaiti ambassador found a crystal-cut answer by the Russian ambassador, who corrected him and said you have no right whatsoever to prevent the Syrian ambassador from addressing the council.”
Bartlett notes that this is not the first time the U.N. has censored the Syrian Ambassador. A similar situation happened in 2015, after which Bartlett was able to interview him. He told her,
The British ambassador cut me off one time while I was speaking. He said ‘you have exceeded four minutes.’ I said, ‘Who gave you the right to fix four minutes? I am a member of a concerned party, and I have the right to explain.’ To justify his wrongdoing, he also cut off the Iraqi ambassador after me. We were the only two ambassadors speaking at that session, and it was on Syria and Iraq. The issue was on terrorism in Syria and Iraq, and he cut off both of us after four minutes!”
Bartlett also wrote about Ja’afari’s repeated censorship, having his microphone and video cut as well as the censorship of the Syrian Foreign Affairs Minister, Walid Muallem who was cut off by none other than UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. She wrote,
In January, 2014, at the Geneva II conference on Syria in Montreux, Switzerland, Foreign Affairs Minister Walid Muallem was himself cut off by none other than the Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon.
Pointing out the ridiculousness of the situation, Muallem noted: ‘You live in New York, I live in Syria. I have the right to give the Syrian version in this forum. After three years of suffering, this is my right. You spoke for 25 minutes. I need at least 30.’ While Ban interrupted Muallem’s speech, asking him to ‘wrap up in just one or two minutes,’ the Syrian Minister refused to be silenced and did eventually finish his speech.”
Regarding some of the other instances of UN censorship of Ambassador al-Ja’afari, in that same article I wrote:
Correspondent Nizar Abboud…says the cuts are not due to ‘technical problems,’ but instead often done ‘by senior officials at the United Nations.’
Matthew Lee, a journalist with Inner City Press (ICP) reported on an April 5, 2012 feed cut, noting that the speeches of the then Special Envoy for Syria, Kofi Annan, as well as the (Qatari) President of the General Assembly (GA) and Ban Ki-moon were all broadcast on UN television. However, ‘just as Syria’s Permanent Representative Bashar Ja’afari took the floor to respond, UN TV went dark. When the session was over several Permanent Representatives were critical of what they called ‘the PGA’s use of the UN for Qatar’s foreign policy.’
…The Syrian Ambassador was again cut out of the feed on June 18, 2014. ICP’s Lee reported that on June 20 he was told by the same Dujarric regarding the June 7 cut that [in Lee’s words], in fact the error in 2012 was been [sic] to allow Ja’afari to speak AT ALL on UN TV. He said the arrangement was that Ban and the Qatari PGA could speak, then the UN TV was supposed to go off.’
Following the June 2014 Syrian elections, international representatives who had observed the elections in Syria convened at the UN to report back. Roughly five minutes in, after Ambassador al-Ja’afari had opened the meeting and thanked the Secretariat for facilitating it, the webcast feed was cut. Ironically, the Ambassador had stressed he wanted to leave ‘enough time to give you the right picture of the Syrian landscape that was prevailing during elections. They are eyewitnesses.’”
In just one example of the clear UN bias against the Syrian government in its “reports,” UN Emergency Relief Coordinator and head of the OCHA, Mark Lowcock, mentioned above, used as emotion as he could muster to rally the UN Security Council against the Syrian government over the situation in East Ghouta. However, Lowcock never mentioned Damascus and the people being relentlessly shelled by East Ghouta-based terrorists. Lowcock never mentioned that the entire reason for the siege in the first place was to force out terrorists who have been holding the civilians in East Ghouta hostage for nearly four years.
East Ghouta is thus being given the now infamous Aleppo treatment. When terrorists are invading, bombing, sniping, torturing, raping, and murdering civilians, the civilians are labeled “Assad loyalists,” “acceptable casualties,” and “collateral damage” if they exist at all and the crimes of the terrorists are completely ignored. When these civilians are caught in the crossfire during operations to liberate them, they are being “slaughtered,” “barrel bombed,” “indiscriminately killed,” and “intentionally targeted” by a “brutal dictator.”
In her article, Eva Bartlett writes in depth about the crimes against civilians in Aleppo committed by terrorists and ignored by Western governments and Western media. Indeed, Bartlett’s writing contain a number of personal interviews and a personal experience with the Western media’s intentional obfuscation and lying in regards to the tragedies imposed on the people of Syria by America’s terrorists. She writes,
In Aleppo in November 2016, the head of forensics, Dr. Zaher Hajjo, told me (on a day of intense terrorist bombings that killed 18 civilians and injured over 200) that in the past five years 10,750 civilians had been killed in Aleppo, 40 percent of whom were women and children. He said that in the past year alone, 328 children had been killed by terrorist shelling in Aleppo, 45 children killed by terrorist snipers.
In April 2014, I visited the French Hospital in Damascus, which was treating some of the over 60 children who had been injured by terrorists’ shelling of their school, which also killed one child. Also at the hospital was the BBC’s correspondent, Lyse Doucet. While she promised to give an honest account of the targeting of these children, her report instead read:
“They’re believed to be fired by rebels, but the government is also accused of launching them into neighborhoods under its control. So brutal is this war that nothing is considered unthinkable…”
In February 2015, I visited Damascus’ University Hospital, documenting just some of the children maimed and critically injured by such terrorist attacks — and, a year prior wrote about my own experiences in the intense shelling of Damascus, where I stayed several weeks — and, since then, have met victims of terrorist shelling of Old Damascus.
With access to numerous sources on these incessant and deadly mortar and rocket attacks and the Syrian ambassador’s repeated statements on this at the UN, the United Nations nevertheless chooses to obfuscate on the intensified shelling of civilian areas of Damascus and elsewhere in Syria, and instead endorse the war propagandists.
On February 22, UNICEF tweeted a New York Times article featuring “media activist” Firas Abdullah. Abdullah is not the neutral media source portrayed. Following the December 2015 killing of terrorist Zahran Alloush, then-leader of Jaysh al-Islam, Abdullah posted his eulogy for Alloush, calling him a “beautiful martyr.” This is the person whom the Times chose to portray a human face of Ghouta, retweeted by UNICEF.
Also on February 22, the UN body tweeted a CNN report citing the SOHR, and of course the UNICEF blank statement of outrage, in the cyclic fashion that is typical of regime-change war propaganda reinforcing itself.
On February 21, UNICEF tweeted a Newsweek photo slideshow titled after UNICEF’s own blank statement of outrage.
The February 20 tweet of the blank UNICEF statement included #EasternGhouta, but no hashtag for Damascus. Surely an oversight…
Their February 19 tweet links to an article on the Bana al-Abed of Ghouta, Muhammad Najem, whose Twitter account began in December 2017 and has nearly 5,000 followers. Expect that number to skyrocket. Expect a memoir to follow.
A UNICEF February 19 tweet on Ghouta links to war propagandist Louisa Loveluck’s article, reporting from Beirut, Lebanon.
If it isn’t already clear, UNICEF is participating in war propaganda against Syria, reporting and endorsing one very exaggerated and not substantiated side of the story, disappearing another very real side.
This is not the first time the UN has covered up terrorists’ crimes against Syrian civilians. In October 2016, I wrote of UNICEF’s unproven claims of an aerial attack on an Idlib school, in which UNICEF decried it as possibly “the deadliest attack on a school since the war began more than five years ago.” As I reported, UNICEF overlooked numerous documented deadly attacks on schools:
On October 1, 2014, terrorists’ car- and suicide-bombed the Akrama Al-Makhzoumi School in Homs, killing at least 41 children by conservative estimates, or up to 48 children by other reports, along with women and other civilians.”
I further noted:
On October 28, 2016, RT reporter Murad Gazdiev reported from Aleppo on the latest attacks by Western-backed terrorists on a school in the city. At the time of the report, at least six children were reported killed by a Hell Cannon-fired gas canister bomb which struck a school in Ḩadaiq al-Andalus. From an Aleppo hospital, Gazdiev reported:
‘The rebels launched the rocket at 10 in the morning. Seconds later it hit the National School of Aleppo… Three of the children died on the spot…. blood and pieces of them sprayed on the walls. The victims, six children, ranged in age from 2 to 12. In some cases, doctors weren’t sure if they’d put the right body parts with the correct bodies. Three of the dead children were siblings: two brothers and a sister. Their father was beyond consolation. His mental stability had been torn apart.’
This statement was given over footage of a devastated father kissing the corpses of his children.”
In January 2016, I wrote of OCHA’s selective tweeting around the terrorist-occupied village of Madaya, obfuscating the terrorist-besieged Idlib villages of Foua and Kafraya.
Honest reporters like Murad Gazdiev entered Madaya in January 2016 and confirmed that food and medical aid had indeed entered. He spoke with residents who complained of the armed groups stealing this food.
When I went to Madaya in June 2017, I spoke with civilians there who stated that vast amounts of food and medical aid entered the area, but they had no access to it, as Ahrar al-Sham, al-Nusra and co-extremists holding the village hoarded the food and sold it at extortionist prices. I also saw prisons use to hold, and sometimes torture, civilians before their trials in terrorists’ courts. I also saw these in eastern Aleppo and in al-Layramoun, in the city’s northwest. When eastern Ghouta is finally secured, it won’t be surprising to learn that schools, hospitals, and/or homes were turned into prisons to hold the civilians for whom the UN and corporate media feign concern.
In her article, Bartlett points out that UNICEF’s current Executive Director is none other than Henrietta H. Fore, former administrator of USAID, Director of the U.S. Mint in the U.S. Department of the Treasury, and Chief Operating Officer for the U.S. Department of State.
The UNICEF Executive Director prior to Fore was Anthony Lake, former National Security Advisor to Bill Clinton and former nominee to the post of Director of the CIA.
Outlet teleSUR reports that Lake was heavily involved in the starvation of Somalia in 2010-2012 by under-budgeting food aid to the tune of “10 cents a day per person to feed a million internally displaced persons.” They also reported that Lake “admitted publicly that he knew about and did nothing to prevent the genocide in Rwanda, something he ‘regretted.’”
UNICEF executive directors who formerly worked for USAID, the U.S. State Department, even Director of the United States Mint in the U.S. Department of Treasury: it seems that UNICEF’s role is less about humanitarian aid and more about being the humanitarian propaganda arm of Washington.
We should, indeed, feel sorrow for any civilian casualties in the U.S./U.K. and allies’ war on Syria. However, after years of the most egregious war propaganda on Syria, we should also exercise caution about the latest stories, be they from unsourced SOHR reports or the UN itself.
Recall that the humanitarian agency MSF once insisted that Syrian or Russian airstrikes had destroyed — reduced “to rubble” — a hospital that MSF supported. This turned out to be utterly false.
Unlike MSF, unlike the most of journalists who reported lies around Omran Daqneesh, I did go to see the intact Quds hospital, and met Omran and his father, who told me everything the media had reported on his son was false; the media had exploited his boy. Both MSF and corporate media lied about these stories, and their lies were used to call for further Western intervention in Syria.
The bias of the United Nations in favor of Western machinations – war, destabilization, corporate bullying, the privatization of resources, destruction of national sovereignty and individual rights – has long been known and reported on by independent researchers. In the case of Syria, however, that bias has been on parade for the entire world to see.
Like clockwork, the United Nations ignores the most horrific crimes against humanity while terrorists are gaining ground in Syria but, at the first sign of gains by the Syrian government, the U.N. swoops in to demand “ceasefires” and “peace.” These ceasefires are held long enough for the terrorists to rearm and regroup before launching new assaults against civilians and the Syrian government.
The U.N. has repeatedly shored up terrorist forces by insisting on shipping in food aid that is then horded by the fighting groups and not allowed to reach citizens with some instances of weaponry being shipped to terrorists under the guise of humanitarian aid.
The United Nations is thus televising its reputation as working toward the same aims as that of the world oligarchy who want to see the destruction of Syria as well as all independent sovereign nations.
This work by The Last American Vagabond is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, and may be reposted as is, with attribution to the author and TheLastAmericanVagabond.com. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at Ryan@thelastamericanvagabond.com.