The United States has predicted that another Houla-style massacre will occur in Syria and has even mentioned exact locations.
US State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said on Monday that the Syrian government “may be organizing another massacre, this time in the village of al-Haffa, in Latakia province, as well as in the towns Deir el-Zour, in Daraa, in Homs, in Hama, and in suburbs of Damascus.”
She accused Damascus of using new tactics of repression but made no mention of the armed gangs' failure to abide by the joint UN-Arab League peace plan, brokered by international envoy Kofi Annan.
Press TV talks with Dr. Webster Griffin Tarpley, author and historian from Washington, to further shed light on the issue. Below is an approximate transcript of the interview.
The US is being a little too precise about the next massacre just waiting to happen in Syria. Where is it getting the intelligence from?
Victoria Nuland is the spokeswoman of the State Department, you have just heard her. It is very interesting to note, in her private life, she is married to a guy called Donald Kagan of the Brooking Institution who happens to be the main foreign policy spokesman for the Romney campaign and of course Kagan is a leading neo-con warmonger.
It is interesting also that Romney is joined at the hip with Netanyahu, as they say. He has been in a kind of a personal alliance with Netanyahu since about 1976. So maybe with all sorts of connections, we can see where Mrs. Nuland is getting her information.
Naturally, the world community by now knows that these massacres are cynically manufactured. We have had a number of news agencies reporting that the cadavers that were displayed in the most recent one, I believe near Hama, in the last couple of days were actually in an advanced state of decay, a kind of ghoulish procedure and these had been assembled by the NATO terrorist death squads that are doing most of the fighting inside Syria.
I would also point though to the fact that the mass brainwashing and hysteria here in the Western world, it is not holding up quite as well. For example, the Frankfurter Allgemeine
which is the largest conservative serious newspaper in Germany, in the last couple of days published a story where they pointed to the fact that the Houla massacre was carried out by anti-Assad extremists and that they were interested in killing people from the Alawite religion and also Christians and others. So that is the Frankfurter Allgemeine
Even more explicit is the National Review
, surprisingly. This is the organ of the William Buckley traditional conservatives here in Washington D.C. and they come out even more bluntly and say that the Houla massacre was done by the Syrian rebels.
Now that is a kind of truth antidote to the prevailing climate here which I think is something quite new and it may indicate that some people are realizing that this leads to a blind alley.
Perhaps most importantly Zbigniew Brzezinski, the dean of the foreign policy, experts of the Democratic Party, previously very close to Obama, has issued this very vehement warning, ‘don’t get carried away with emotions, don’t have an emotional response to what happens in Syria, don’t get involved, don’t try to bully Russia, don’t try to impose some arm solution from the outside’, we have seen that before.
So I think there is some attrition in the warmonger coalition, at least here in Washington.
Speaking of propaganda tactics though, the West has presented its own narrative on Syria, but it seems it is also interpreting reports and words of Kofi Annan and his mission to fit that narrative, something that the Syrian ambassador to the UN has called a 'tsunami of lies'. Why has not that been looked into further?
Up to now, we have had a pretty uniform kind of lockstep or kind of mind control; there was a party line coming from the State Department and the CIA and NATO headquarters and the mass media of course here are largely controlled; they are shot through with agents of influence who are themselves closed to the intelligence agencies if not in them and off them.
The other thing I would like to point out is this: the thing that has changed. I believe we must now entertain the possibility that we are in a regime of nuclear deterrence concerning Syria and that is to say in the last few days, we have had Russia firing off a ‘Topol’ missile from the Caspian Sea area in the direction of the Far East and we have apparently also had a Bulava submarine-launched ballistic missile fired from the Mediterranean. Now that means two missile launches: an ICBM [Intercontinental ballistic missile] and an SLBM [Submarine-launched ballistic missile] within a few days.
That looks very much like a warning shot across the bows of the Obama administration, Hollande who has now become a leading warmonger, NATO in general. We go back a little bit; we have had, in the past months, Medvedev in Saint Petersburg saying an attack on Syria could lead to a regional war and a nuclear war and indeed the head of the Russian general staff saying that if NATO pushes ahead with anti-ballistic missile installations in Eastern Europe, that could lead to a preemptive strike by Russia against those installations in a crisis.
So this is very tough talk. When you put it together, a climate of Cuban Missile Crisis almost and I think that this may indeed now be the case that we have got actual nuclear deterrence where the NATO people realize that if they attack Syria, they may be subject to some kind of retaliation specifically from Russia which would be very unpleasant for them.
Considering all that, right now the only ray of hope seems to be Kofi Annan’s 6-point peace plan. The UN observers are in Syria and they still seem to be concerned about the situation in Homs. With the West not adhering though to what is coming out of this observer mission, what is its purpose anymore?
The purpose is what it has always been: the destruction of Syria as a modern state and the destruction of the Assad Ba’ath Party government in Syria. The goal of course, as they say here very openly, is to deprive Iran of a friendly allied country nearby, to deprive Hezbollah of a strategic depth in its logistical backup and generally to terrify and intimidate people who might be thinking of asserting national independence really anywhere in the world.
But it is clear that this is now run up against the brick wall in the form of the vetoes from China and Russia in the Security Council. At this moment, we have had the French Foreign Minister Fabius and others talking about chapter 7 measures but outside the Security Council, in other words, naked aggression by a coalition of the willing.
That seems to be the hypothesis that is gathering steam among the more extreme people. At the Bilderberg Conference, we had Itamar Rabinovich of Israel attending the Bilderberg Conference here and then going back to Israel and saying the US was very wrong not to have attacked Syria long ago. It should have been done a long time ago.
So I think you can see there is a kind of a division between the utopians, the aggressors and the ones like Brzezinski that seem to be a little bit more realistic and are counseling more caution.
So right now it hangs in the balance. It is beginning to like a lot like the Spanish civil war, the sort of dress rehearsal and immediate prelude to World War II and it could indeed become that for World War III.