At
least three other members of the team were a part of the Syrian
“revolution” including Farouq al Habib, one of the 3 most
prominent White Helmet leaders who was also a leader of the Homs
uprising against the Syrian government and according to his
testimony, was tortured by the Syrian “regime” security forces in
2012 for smuggling a journalist into Syria to “cover” the
“peaceful protests”. Habib was a founder member of the ‘Homs
Revolutionary Council’ (the CIA have been linked to nearly all
‘Revolutionary Councils in Syria) before fleeing to Turkey in 2013
=========
Hier een artikel dat op 4 november jl. werd geplaatst op Counterpunch, het is geschreven door JAN
OBERG:
While
thousands of humanitarian organisations around the world are
struggling fiercely with diminishing support from governments and the
public, one has achieved a surprising amount of support from Western
governments in a surprisingly short period of time and gained a
surprising attention from mainstream media and ditto political
elites: The Syrian Civil Defence or White Helmets.
Their
name of course makes you think of the UN’s Blue Helmet and white is
the colour of those who should be protected in harm’s way – and
the colour of innocence. However, for many years there has been an
Argentinian relief organisation with the same name.
The
SCD or White Helmets counts nearly 3.000 rescue workers who operate
in very dangerous areas in rebel-held territories in Syria and claims
that it has, in three years, rescued about 70.000 lives according to
its Twitter account (or 65 per day).
Contrary
to what you might think, it isn’t a Syrian organisation because
Syria has its own organisation, incidentally also called Syria Civil
Defence, which was established in 1953 and is registered with ICDO,
the International
Civil Defence Organisation,
since 1972.
The
White Helmets seems to have an annual budget of US$ 30 million and
has raised a total support of well over US$ 100 million. And it seems
that they operate exclusively in war zones in which the fighting
against the Syrian government and the Syrian Arab Army takes place,
i.e. in ‘liberated’ areas where hundreds of groups and some 80
countries, mainly NATO members, Gulf states and Saudi-Arabia,
operate.
On
the White Helmets’ briefing
page it
is stated that “funding for their humanitarian relief work is
received from the aid budgets of Japan, Denmark, the Netherlands, the
United Kingdom and the United States.”
Other
civil society and humanitarian organisations inside Syria have not
been so fortunate. You’ve probably not heard that much about
the Syrian
Arab Red Crescent and its work?
How much/little support have they received from Western
humanitarian-concerned governments? And in general, civil society
organisations in Syria – women, peace, human rights, culture, etc.
– have received nothing like US$ 100 million in a few years and no
one has such a flashy media appearance as the White Helmets.
The
White Helmets was started in 2013 by James
Le Mesurier who
seems to have tried a little of everything everywhere, including the
grey zones of special forces and intelligence in virtually all NATO
wars, Yugoslavia in particular. He later set up a foundation in
Holland to gather the funds. Here is a
recent account by Scott Ritter,
former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and weapons inspector in
Iraq with tremendous knowledge of things Middle East:
“The
organizational underpinnings of the White Helmets can be sourced to a
March 2013 meeting in Istanbul between a retired British military
officer, James Le Mesurier—who had experience in the murky world of
private security companies and the shadowy confluence between
national security and intelligence operations and international
organizations—and representatives of the Syrian National Council
(SNC) and the Qatari Red Crescent Society. Earlier that month, the
SNC was given Syria’s seat in the Arab League at a meeting of the
league held in Qatar.
At
that meeting, the SNC assumed Syria’s seat, and the Arab League
authorized member states to actively provide support, including arms
and ammunition, to the Syrian rebels. The Qataris, working through
the SNC, helped assemble for Le Mesurier $300,000 in seed money from
Japan, the United States and the United Kingdom for a seven-day
course designed to train and equip a 25-person rescue team, recruited
by the SNC, for duty in so-called “liberated areas” of Syria. The
SNC made available a pair of Syrian activists—Raed Saleh and Farouq
Habib—to assist Le Mesurier in this work.
The
group is – as will be seen below – treated as uncontroversial in
virtually all Western mainstream media. However, there is enough
material with documentation to merit caution.
If
you read media reports about the White Helmets and do not see the
author mention that this group’s real identity is disputed and
functions controversial you can be sure that you are wasting your
time with somebody who is politically incredibly naive, or gullible;
someone who has not done his or her research or is knowingly part of
a deceptive effort serving a one-sided political agenda.
The
White Helmets definitely is an controversial NGO – at the same time
as it is (made) difficult to understand clearly what it really is.
And
until the whole picture has been developed, anyone ought to be
cautious with taking information about them at face value. So much
must be clear given the links below.
Dual
purpose?
That
said, this author has not been on the ground but has studied both the
pro- et contra links provided below.
Some
observers draw the conclusion that the White Helmets – Syrian Civil
Defence – is purely good guys rescuing lots of people, children in
particular. The opposite advocacy claims that, all told, they are
part of the terrorist groups, serve Western governments with
intelligence and that their backers run political propaganda in their
name and that they are simply executioners – murderers with a human
face.
But
does it have to be either/or?
An
alternative hypothesis could be that the White Helmets is a
dual-purpose organisation. They claim to be ordinary Syrian
volunteers who came together around the idea of saving lives and are
truly altruistic “bakers, tailors, engineers, pharmacists,
painters, carpenters, students and many more, the White Helmets are
volunteers from all walks of life.” It could well be that some of
them actually are, even a majority.
That
doesn’t preclude that other elements – not the least those
operating outside Syria such as foundations, PR and marketing firms,
change organisations, NATO government and NGOs are in it with less
noble, war-promoting purposes.
Link
collection pro et contra
Find
below a link collection – long but fascinating in its wealth of
information. We bring it as a help to those seriously interested in
Syria’s fate and in studying how opinions are being built by means
of connected actors in a rather opaque networking structure, in how
NGOs have increasingly become Near-governmental organisations and for
those who do not want to sound foolish when they discuss these
matters.
First
some links to how the the White Helmets presents themselves. Second,
some mainstream media articles in their favour of and praising it –
including some that argue that the White Helmets ought to receive the
Nobel Peace Prize (which happens to be nonsense, since they don’t
even remotely qualify according to the criteria in Alfred Nobel’s
very clear will and the prize is not a general do-good-prize. In
addition, it must be doubted that the Nobel Committee will get more
persuaded by the White Helmets’ – quite immodest – campaign in
favour of their own candidacy).
Third
some links to the comprehensive network of organisations, including
governments, that the White Helmets seem to be part of – and it is
quite a confusing lot with absolutely no transparency – but quite a
few investigations have been carried out.
And
fourth and final – the main links to investigative reports and
other stuff that are sceptical in various degrees to the first three.
The
White Helmets present themselves:
On
the front page you are asked to sign an appeal for establishing a
No-Fly Zone (which would be a violation of international law).
Syria
Civil Defence on Facebook
Netflix
The
makers of the Netflix movie give their background
Mayday
Rescue
According
to its website it channels government funds to the White Helmets:
“Syria Civil Defence receives funding (through Mayday Rescue and
Chemonics) from the governments of the UK, Holland, Denmark, Germany,
Japan, and the USA.”
A
US global development corporation through which government funds for
the White Helmets are channelled (according to Mayday Rescue).
Sources
that promote the White Helmets without questioning
Time
Time
The
Economist
A
film by Danish journalist Nagieb Khaja shown on Al-Jazeera (30 secs
into the film one learns that they have saved more than 56.000 lives
“since the war began in 2011″ although the White Helmets were
formed in 2013).
Organisations
in the network around the White Helmets
A
social movement creation and PR company that allegedly wants to
change the world, co-founded by Jeremy Heimans – whose mainstream,
politically correct background you see here.
Jeremy – of course – began his career with the strategy
consultants McKinsey & Company. He also happens to be a
co-founder of
Avaaz
means voice or song in several languages and the organisation is
known by millions as a petition platform for many good/progressive
causes. Avaaz has some 43 million members around the world and is
thus easily the largest NGO in the world.
Avaaz
has also created Purpose.com. Here Jeremy Heimans, co-founder of
Avaaz too, speaks to Forbes about
his background and what the two companies do.
Avaaz
is very active in promoting a No-Fly Zone in Syria which
it explains in a petition text with these words: “Let’s build a
resounding global call to Obama and other leaders to stand up to
Putin and Assad’s terror. This might be our last, best chance to
help end this mass murder of defenceless children. Add your name.”
The
sad thing is that it has learnt nothing from its own campaign for a
No-Fly Zone in Libya. John Hanrahan is a former executive director of
The Fund for Investigative Journalism and reporter for The Washington
Post, The Washington Star, UPI and other news organisations has
made this
extremely interesting analysis about
how odd it is that Avaaz maintains an interventionist war-agenda in
spite of earlier experiences and resistance even by high-ranking
militaries.
Hanrahan
quotes Avaaz’s campaign director, former State Department official
John Tye, “that Avaaz shows 54,000 members in Syria in a population
of 23 million – which means that even if every Avaaz member
supported a no-fly zone, this would still mean that only one of every
426 Syrians had “voted” for one.
Avaaz
spearheads – at least in this matter – an extreme militarist
policy while “Avaaz is a global web movement to bring
people-powered politics to decision-making everywhere”. Which
people want a No-Fly Zone in Syria? Do they know it’s a violation
of a sovereign state’s airspace, of international law? That it
would embolden every terrorist on Syrian soil because they would get
rid of the Syrian Airforce as their enemy? That it continued into
regime change in both Iraq and Libya?
Many
questions unanswered by this peculiar “people power”
organisation, more militarist than governments!
They
maintain on their
website that
“The Syria Campaign is fiercely independent and has accepted no
money from governments, corporations or anyone directly involved in
the Syrian conflict. This allows us full autonomy to advocate for
whatever is needed to save lives.” But they also say that they have
accepted funds from the Asfari Foundation and the Rockefeller
Brothers Foundation and other anonymous donors.
The
Syria Campaign also states that it is only pro-human rights and
pro-freedom and takes no side. But they explain the conflict in these
words:
“The
regime of Bashar al-Assad is responsible for crushing a peaceful
uprising that has led to the deaths of over 450,000 people, the
displacement of over 12 million – half the country – and the
emergence of violent, extremist groups like Isis.
Today
the fighting in Syria has given way to a world war with more than
eighty countries involved on all sides.
The
majority of Syrians want neither Assad nor Isis. They want an end to
the violence and a democratic Syria.
What
is happening in Syria could be happening to any of us. No one is free
until we’re all free.”
I
would characterise such a presentation as side-taking wrapped in
substance-free marketing jargon; a very politicised statement wearing
only black-and-white.
A
private company, headquartered in Dubai, that describes itself as “a
research, conflict transformation and stabilisation consultancy”.
White
Helmets, according to their website, received seed funding came from
the Asfari Foundation – trustees
of which are
heavily related to the oil industry and corporate finance. The Asfari
Foundation’s bonds with the Syria Campaign is dealt with here.
Sources
raising investigation-based questions about the White Helmets
Vanessa
Beeley
Scott
Ritter at TruthDig
Hands
off Syria
Rick
Sterling
Vanessa
Beeley
Vanessa
Beeley
Christina
Lin, Asia Times
Jonathan
Gornell
Syria
Solidarity Movement
Open
Letter from The Hamilton Coalition To Stop War
Max
Blumenthal
Max
Blumenthal
Rick
Sterling
21st
Century Wire
Russia
Today
General
reasons for concern about the real identity of the White Helmets
Here
are some of the reasons – numbers not indicative of priority:
+
Huge funding by NATO/EU countries which are militarily involved.
+ A
degree of political lobbying – a very specific explanation of the
conflict and how it started which points to a no-fly zone,
weaponization of human rights issues and speaks strongly against the
Syrian government and Russia and very critically of the UN – that
is extremely unusual for a purely humanitarian organisation.
+
Incredibly advanced public relation in terms of very professional
websites, videos and PR strategy dropping the right stories and
images at the right time – quite unique for a group of “bakers,
tailors and students” etc..
+
Too professional wordings and images, too much playing to
(exploitation of) emotions, too catchy smart formulations again and
again; in short, lacking every sense of genuine local quality. Too
many children – and cats –
in the images speaking to an audience with little politically
consciousness but surely a good heart. In short, populist marketing
also in the sense of conveying the message: Look how good we are and
how evil everybody else are.
+
Guilt by association: If the White Helmets is a 100% humanitarian
first responder organisation it must be extremely naive in ignoring
that its integrity, credibility and noble purposes is put at risk
with the specific network of organisations and governments that it
has chosen to seek support from.
+
Substance versus public relation: how does a humanitarian
organisation justify that millions of dollars are spent on
self-promoting public relation rather than on saving more lives in
such a horrific war? And taking so many photos and shoot films of its
own work in the midst of massacres and bombing raids?
+
It’s very difficult to discern who actually manages the White
Helmets in general and in terms of day-to-day operations. One looks
in vain for something like an organisational chart secretary-general,
board, executive director (although one is mentioned, Raed Saleh,
whom the US has on one occasion actually denied entry into the US).
+
How come that such an innovative organisation seems to have been
started in circles that have to do with oil interests, British
intelligence, mercenary/military operations and
interventionist/bombing countries?
+
How come it works only in rebel/terrorist/liberated areas? Could it
do that without co-operation or co-ordination with some of these
groups? It has been stated – naively – by the Right Livelihood
Award Foundation that their vision is to operate also on
government-controlled territory and later be a leader in re-building
a new democratic post-war Syria. However, why should the sovereign
state of Syria’s legitimate government accept a foreign-based and
-financed civil defence territory there when it has had its own since
1953?
Perhaps
we should not be that surprised?
Should
we be surprised that humanitarian workers are involved in “something
else” and are not exclusively devoted to doing no harm and doing
good for humanity?
Not
really. I’ve met that sort of people and organisations during the
dissolution of Yugoslavia in the 1990s, among other places at the US
Embassy in Zagreb where the humanitarian section people, most likely
CIA operatives, after some talk with me about helping the people
switched to talk about how good it would be if president Milosevic
was killed.
Are
humanitarian organisations – like most other NGOs today – highly
or completely dependent on governments? Yes, most are. And they
should therefore always be checked for possible moral corruption and
co-optation. Many are no longer Non- but Near-governmental and
behave, at minimum, politically correct or serve/promote the
interests of their governments one way or the other.
Wasn’t Doctors
Without Borders started
by Bernard Kouchner who advocated military humanitarian intervention
as an idea, did the dirty job for NATO in Kosovo and
morally advocated the
bombing of Libya as a “peace guarantee”? Here an
interesting video
debate with
him at Oxford by Mehdi Hasan.
Should
it be so surprising that – even liberal, democratic – governments
propagandise, construct concrete stories to appeal to the human heart
in us all (for a good cause) and that they regularly lie, do
fear-mongering, use stereotyping and demonisation, present
black-and-white narratives – all of which serve their elites’
interests and may not always be that noble in reality?
Of
course not. No wars would be possible without one of more of these
ingredients.
Says
Harf “We were able to equate Serbs to Nazis in public opinion…”
Some kind of balance or truth didn’t interest him: “We are
professionals. We have got a job to do and we do it.”
If
there is anything new in this field since the early 1990s it is the
spectrum, the depth, the money and the intensity with which public
opinion is being deceived about war and peace – that war today is
peace and peace is preserved by violence. And the de facto
replacement of knowledge and texts by purpose-driven, mediatized and
emotionalised “narratives” and images and films – right down on
you phone and into your mind.
In
summary: Illusions about our goodness that feed social narcissism and
the MIMAC
I
do not believe that I know exactly what the whole story and the truth
is about the White Helmets. But I know that quite a few things don’t
feel right.
As
a sociologist and peace researcher with four decades of academic and
practical experience of global affairs and work in conflict zones,
the word spoken by the guard Marcellus in Shakespeare’s Hamlet at
Kronborg Castle in my native Denmark come to mind: “There is
something rotten in the state…” not only in the bombing state of
Denmark (that supports the White Helmets) but also in the state of
the – free – media coverage of conflicts and wars.
If,
thus, you are generally sceptical of Western media coverage of wars
fought by the West and specifically of the story of the White Helmets
as a purely brave humanitarian organisation – are you then
automatically pro-Assad, pro-Russia or pro-bombing? If you are
critical to A, must you automatically endorse everything B or C does?
Given
the “Zeitgeist” of these times, my hunch is that the
anti-intellectual’s, the propagandist’s and the blamegamer’s
answer is a roaring “Yes!” Personally, I couldn’t care less but
there is reason to worry about the fact that our media are not free
to take up the issues dealt with here.
Pulitzer
prize winner, Chris Hedges, talks about “the
incessant manufacturing of illusions that feed social
narcissism.” The
– unwinnable – wars the West fights with the illusory ideology of
spreading goodness, democracy, freedom and peace as well as the
alleged good role of the White Helmets in it is little else but an
expression of such an incessant manufacturing of illusions that feed
social narcissism of the many while filling the pockets of the few in
the Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex (MIMAC).
It’s
time to give reality show politics and media a reality check. But who
can and who will? And who dares now everything will get worse after
November 8?
Eén van de manieren waarop u wordt besodemieterd over de situatie in Aleppo, kwam ik vandaag tegen op Information Clearing House: 5 Arrested After Egyptian Police Bust Staged Photo Shoot Of "Wounded Aleppo Children": Police arrested five people for making staged "wounded children" photos, which they were planning to use to misrepresent on social media as photos of destruction and injured people in Syria's Aleppo >>
Voor (nog meer) berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden.
