British Ambassador To Syria – Importing White Helmets Terror To The UK
The Guardian article entitled – “Supporting the west? No, Syria’s White Helmets are about saving lives” – was truly sickening journalism at its very worst. It’s first paragraph said, “For years, Syria’s civil defence workers have been subjected to a vicious online propaganda campaign by the “electronic armies” of the Assad regime and Russia.” For the Guardian, anyone criticising the ‘White Helmets’ were mere conspiracy theorists – the usual response by governments and the false mouthpiece of the establishment when there isn’t a good defence left to their arguments.
The writer of this article, and others, across the mainstream media talks of numerous deadly Sarin chemical weapons attacks by Assad upon his own people – and indeed, asserts that this is how Assad has won the war. For challenging that narrative anyone is branded an ‘unabashed regime apologist.’
The article goes on to state that the UN and OPCW had evidence that Sarin was used by the Syrian regime and quoted Boris Johnson, who said – “absolutely no doubt the finger points at the Assad regime.” The proof turned out not to be that at all – mere assumptions laden with ambiguous language and anything coming from Johnson, a known liar, proven time and time again – is hardly a potent waypoint to the truth. In fact, just three weeks ago the updated interim OPCW report found no nerve agents had been used in Douma, Syria. The Guardian was quiet about that fact.
The article, supported by The Guardian and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation even concludes that the US was indeed Assad’s ally and somehow helped Syria win its war against ISIS and Co. There appear to be many facts but it is littered with unadulterated fiction. This is the sad state of some journalism today.
SafeSubcribe/Instant Unsubscribe - One Email, Every Sunday Morning - So You Miss Nothing - That's It
UK Government confirms ‘White Helmets’ being evacuated and offers asylum.
With the news that the White Helmets required evacuation from war-torn Syria, where the eventually rebels lost, a UK Government statement was issued by Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt and International Development Secretary Penny Mordaunt on the Israeli life-saving operation of the White Helmets:
“Following a joint diplomatic effort by the UK and international partners, a group of White Helmets volunteers from southern Syria and their families have been able to leave Syria for safety.
They are now being assisted by the UNHCR in Jordan pending international resettlement.
The White Helmets have saved over 115,000 lives during the Syrian conflict, at great risk to their own. Many White Helmets volunteers have also been killed while doing their work – trying to rescue civilians trapped in bombarded buildings or providing first aid to injured civilians. White Helmets have been the target of attacks and, due to their high profile, we judged that, in these particular circumstances, the volunteers required immediate protection. We therefore took steps with the aim of affording that protection to as many of the volunteers and their families as possible.
We pay tribute to the brave and selfless work that White Helmets volunteers have done to save Syrians on all sides of the conflict.”
Countering false narratives
Former Ambassador to Syria 2003 – 2006, Peter Ford responds directly to the UK government as follows:
“The government statement contains two bare-faced lies.
The White Helmets most definitely have not assisted all sides in the conflict. From the beginning, they have only ever operated in rebel-held areas. Government controlled areas have the real Syrian Civil Defence and Syrian Red Crescent. This is quite a big whopper on the government’s part. It goes without saying that the media will not pick up on it.
Secondly, the White Helmets are not volunteers. They are doing jobs for which they are paid, by Western governments. They have a press department 150 strong, bigger than that for the whole of the UK ambulance service. Their claims of saving over 115,000 lives have never been verified. The co-location of their offices with jihadi operation centres has been well documented.
Apparently the government are lying because they are nervous of being accused of importing into this country scores of dangerous migrants who have many times been reported to be associating with extremists (social media is rife with self-propagated videos of their misdeeds such as participation in beheadings and waving ISIS and Al Qaida flags), and wish to whitewash them.”
Journalist Peter Hitchins wrote:
I think the nicest thing to say here is that Mr Hunt is a bit inexperienced. The statement said that Britain would be ‘protecting’ a group of ‘White Helmets’, supposedly civil defence workers from Syria. That’s what they call themselves, anyway.
The 400 people involved had been caught by the sudden collapse of Islamist jihadi rebel forces in a southern corner of Syria next to the Israeli-controlled Golan Heights. And, despite the defeated rebels being Islamist jihadi fanatics, they were mysteriously allowed to cross into Israel so that they could escape to Jordan.
Is it possible (I only ask) that, while undoubtedly brilliant at public relations, and at making slick videos showing themselves rescuing wounded children, the ‘White Helmets’ are not quite as nice as they say they are?
Even the USA, which has for years (like us) helped the Syrian rebels, refused entry to the leader of the ‘White Helmets’, Raed Saleh, when he arrived at Washington’s Dulles Airport in 2016. They won’t say why. In any case, it is time the British Government came clean about who it has been helping in Syria.”
Ex British Ambassador Craig Murray wrote:
The Hell of rule under the jihadists that we in the West are arming, funding, training, “military advising” and giving air support, alongside Israel, is the indisputable and much more important element of Fisk’s report (below), as is the clear evidence he provides that the White Helmets are part of the jihadist factions.”
Some journalists like Robert Fisk went to Syria, got eye-witness reports which The Independent published. Robert Fisk, the long-time and highly awarded Middle-East correspondent wrote a damning article about his own witness reports just after the Douma chemical gas attacks – “There are the many people I talked to amid the ruins of the town who said they had “never believed in” gas stories – which were usually put about, they claimed, by the armed Islamist groups.” Fisk’s eye-witness report quoted doctor’s who confirmed that: “Then someone at the door, a “White Helmet”, shouted “Gas!”, and a panic began. People started throwing water over each other. Yes, the video was filmed here, it is genuine, but what you see are people suffering from hypoxia (by sand in underground tunnels) – not gas poisoning.”
A fact-checking piece in wiki-tribune in the US confirms that the US both funded and armed groups linked with Al-Qaeda. It confirms that the volunteers of the White Helmets are indeed paid workers and that $33 million dollars had been given to the White Helmets organisation. It also could not confirm or deny that the White Helmets have a division that only treats militants, not non-combatants.
It did confirm that there is video evidence of the White Helmets mutilating the corpses of pro-Government Syrian fighters and that there is also evidence of the White Helmets removing the body of a man immediately after he was executed by Jihadist militants. It also found that Rebel forces closed schools in Aleppo and used them as shelters for its combatant forces and much more.
It also confirms a number of stories banded around social media as false and confirmed just as much with mainstream media stories.
Importing dangerous migrants with terrorism expertise
The issue at hand now is that Britain is to offer asylum to many members of a distinctly dangerous group of people (and their families) amongst the unsuspecting population of Britain. These people are used to living and cooperating with terrorists like Al-Nusra Front, until recently an affiliate of Al Qaeda, one of the most evil groups of thugs and murderers known to mankind – not becoming valued members of sleepy market communities up and down the Shires.
As Peter Hitchins says: “The Foreign Office tells me that the Home Office, not them, will be vetting those chosen to come here. I hope they are careful when they do so. I am sure that future Home Secretaries will not be grateful if any of the new arrivals turns out to have the same opinions as Abu Qatada.”
Why are we even offering these people a safe haven? Britain has no commercial or national security interests in Syria. Why allow 400 migrants of dubious intent into our country and deny 400 desperately needed doctors on the grounds of immigration? There are 50 Muslim majority countries in the world, housing 1.5 billion people – Britain is not one of them.
Do not mistake this as some sort of anti-Muslim rant, the question should quite rightly be asked – why are these people more important than qualified doctors? Britain has already taken in more than 10,000 Syrian refugees and now that the war is over it should not accept any more.
Let us not forget, it was the British government who offered safe passage from Libya to the family who spawned the man that blew up the Manchester arena and killed 22 of our own citizens, ten were under 20 years old, one was just eight. The final number injured after the dust had settled was not 115 as reported by the mainstream media – it was 800. The bomber, Salman Ramadan Abedi, was a 22-year-old British Sunni Muslim of Libyan ancestry who, along with his father had been funded by the British government as rebel forces to fight against Gaddafi.
When Libya fell – a mass migration took place into Europe. Something that helped drive the Brexit vote. You see the ironic point here. Britain funds terrorism, imports terrorism then spends billions protecting us from the terrorism it generated in the first place.