Wednesday, June 4, 2014

Elections in Syria: Washington Pressured Several Countries to Prevent Syrian Expats from Voting

assad supporterJune 3 was historic. It was Syria’s first ever free, fair, open democratic presidential election.
Hassan al-Nouri and Maher Hajjar competed with Assad. He’s overwhelmingly popular.He’ll win easily. Only his victory margin remains to be determined. Syrians want no one else leading them. Especially while conflict continues. He’s fighting for Syrian freedom. He’s defeating Obama’s dirty game.
On Tuesday, 9,601 polling stations opened at 7:00AM. Heavy turnout kept them open until midnight. To accommodate everyone wanting to vote. Syrians in hot zones voted in safe areas. The Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) reported “massive” turnout.
A Syrian Presidential Facebook posting said:
“Syrians, who are always up to the expectations, prove day after day their commitment to the culture of life, hope and challenge in the face of the culture of death, terrorism and closeness.”
They’re committed to preserving Syrian sovereignty, it added. Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign and Expatriates Minister Walid al-Moallem issued a statement, saying:
“No one grants legitimacy except the Syrian people. The Syrians register today their free will in democratic, transparent elections to elect who will lead them” for the next seven years.They alone are enfranchised. “No one can impose (their) will on the Syrian people.”
Assad and his wife Asma voted at a school near his Damascus presidential residence. Hajjar cast his ballot in Salhiya Quarter’s parliament palace.
Al-Nuri voted at a Sheraton Hotel polling station. He commented, saying:
“Syria is becoming a different country where pluralism is taking root and a different opinion gets acceptable.”
Results won’t be announced until all ballots are counted. According to Supreme Judicial Committee for Elections head Hisham al-Shaar:  No exit polls were taken. “Preliminary and final results will be announced simultaneously. No tentative results will be made public.”
Thirty Syrian friendly countries sent monitors. Russian upper house Federation Council Committee on Constitutional Legislation First Deputy Chairman Alexei Alexandrov said:
“We have no doubts about the legitimacy of these polls.”“Syria does everything to get aligned with the world’s democratic law-governed states.”“There are no doubts that (Assad) was confronted by serious politicians who had every ground to expect a realistic win.” “It is obvious that (he) enjoys special prestige, and the people’s love for him is felt.” “From legal and objective points of view, the elections (were) held impeccably.”“The existing minor reproaches will not influence the final results.”
Electoral commission member Ridvan Asan said:
“Turnout of voters has been high. Polling has been held in an open and honest manner.” Itar Tass correspondents visited 15 Damascus polling stations.
They witnessed unimpeded voting. The process was open, free and fair, they said.Armed militants’ attempts to disrupt things failed. Millions of Syrians wanting to live free foiled them.One voter perhaps spoke for others, saying:
“Three years of struggle against Saudis and Qatar have not subdued us. They did not even dream of democracy of ours.”
Another said “(t)hree years of war have not broken us. We’re voting for the future.”A Damascus resident called voting “our duty. We can’t allow people from outside to decide for us,” he said.
“Our duty is to vote to protect our country.” According to another Damascus resident:
“Even if there are mortar bombs like the terrorists promise us, we’ll go and vote for Bashar Assad. This is our right.”
Al-Watan Waddah editor-in-chief Abed Rabbo said no one but Assad can restore peace and stability.
“People…will vote for the person who will bring them” what they most value. And best “prospects for the future.”
Syrians know Assad. They respect him. They’ll elect him overwhelmingly. By a 70% majority or higher.Syrian expats voted on May 28. Tens of thousands of Lebanese refugees turned out.Up to an estimated 100,000. Beirut’s Syrian embassy extended voting hours to accommodate them.
Washington pressure got France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Austria, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE and other countries to prevent Syrian expats from voting.
They endorsed sham Ukrainian and Egyptian elections. They denounced Syria’s model democratic process.It didn’t deter millions of Syrians from exercising their democratic franchise. Or millions more abroad.Western reporters in Lebanon and elsewhere were amazed. Long lines queued for hours. In countries far off as Brazil. Overwhelmingly supporting Assad. Expressing it publicly. They want him alone representing them.AP said he has “significant support among large sections of the population, particularly among Christians, Alawites and other religious minorities.”
In Lebanon, “(t)ens of thousands of Assad supporters flocked to cast ballots at the hilltop embassy in Yarze, a town Southeast of” Beirut.
“The ensuing chaos snarled traffic, trapping schoolchildren in buses for hours and forcing some schools to cancel scheduled exams.”
Voters began arriving pre-dawn. Some on backs of pickup trucks. Others in cars and buses.Traffic was heavy. Some people abandoned cars. They walked several kilometers to polling stations.They queued for hours in Iraq, Iran and some European countries. Qatar supports Obama’s war on Syria. It owns and operates Al Jazeera. It reported what couldn’t be denied.
May 28 “was not an ordinary voting day,” it said. “It was a parade of Syrians celebrating their embattled president, Bashar al-Assad, and expressing support for him.”
“Since early morning, tens of thousands of Syrians flocked to the heavily fortified area surrounding the Syrian embassy in Lebanon as expatriate voting began ahead of the June 3 presidential election.”“(T)his was the most visible mass gathering the country has witnessed in the past few years and possibly, the largest-ever gathering of Syrians outside their country.”
People came from everywhere. “Photos of Assad were plastered on cars and minibuses, national flags and t-shirts.”
“Chanting for Assad broke out periodically on the highway, in front of the embassy and even in the polling room.”
Voters said “God, Syria, Bashar only.”
Reuters said  ”refugees waved flags and held pictures of Bashar al-Assad as they crushed into Damascus’s embassy in Lebanon…to join Syrians worldwide voting early in an election that looks certain to give him a third seven-year term as president.”
“Several countries that oppose Assad, including France, have blocked the voting but Syrian government media said people were still able to participate in many countries.”“In Lebanon, which holds a million Syrians – most of them refugees – citizens were driven to the Syrian embassy in Beirut.”“Their buses blocked one of Beirut’s three main highways and men and women waved Syria’s flag and held up pictures of Assad.”
On June 3, Reuters said Syrians are “expected to deliver an overwhelming victory for President Bashar al-Assad.”
“State television showed long queues of people waiting to vote at polling stations…as well as crowds waving flags and portraits of the president.”“(N)either of Assad’s rivals…enjoys much support.”
Washington reacted as expected. Assistant State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf repeated one Big Lie after another. She called Syria’s model democratic process “a disgrace.” She ludicrously said Assad “has no more credibility today than he did yesterday.” “Elections should be an opportunity for the people of a free society to be consulted and to play an important role in choosing their leaders,” she said.
“Instead, such a process was inconceivable today in Syria, where the regime continued to reject the courageous calls for freedom and dignity that started more than three years ago.” “It intentionally denied millions of Syrians the right to vote and continued to massacre the very electorate it purports to represent and protect.”
It bears repeating. Syria’s election was open, free and fair. It mocked America’s sham process.
As quoted above, Russian monitor Alexei Alexandrov said:
“We have no doubts about the legitimacy of these polls.”“Syria does everything to get aligned with the world’s democratic law-governed states.”“It is obvious that Assad enjoys special prestige, and the people’s love for him is felt.”“From legal and objective points of view, the elections (were) held impeccably.”Final results will be announced once all ballots are counted.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at
His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.” his blog site at Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.
  0  0 

Syrien mit Russland für immer!(?Blogger's Comment)

Syrien mit Russland für immer!

STIMME RUSSLANDS Thierry Meyssan, unabhängiger französischer Journalist, Sonderberater von Baschar al-Assad und ehemaliges Mitglied der libyschen Regierung, berichtet über einen möglichen Beitritt Syriens zur Zollunion und zur Organisation des Vertrages über kollektive Sicherheit (OVKS):

„Russland hat immer geglaubt, nicht persönlich mit Assad, sondern mit dem Staat, d.h. mit Syrien zu tun zu haben. Im Laufe des Krieges behauptete Präsident Wladimir Putin mehrmals, dass Russland vor allem das Land Syrien und dessen Volk sowie einen Schutz der syrischen Bevölkerung für wichtig halte, wie gut seine Beziehungen zum offiziellen Vertreter des Landes auch sein mögen. Während des Krieges hat Russland Syrien auf eine diplomatische Weise geholfen, indem es ein Veto gegen die Resolution des UN-Sicherheitsrates eingelegt hat, um eine Vernichtung Syriens durch die Nato zu verhindern! Doch Russland setzte zu diesem Zweck auch seine eigene Armee ein!
Im August 2012 verübten die USA Luftangriffe auf Syrien, genauso wie einst auf Libyen. Zu diesem Zeitpunkt befiehlt Russland seiner Flotte, sich längs der syrischen Küstenlinie zu zerstreuen, was einen US-Angriff verhindert hat. Wenn die USA eine Bombardierung Syriens beschlossen hätten, hätten sie auch die russische Flotte bombardieren müssen, was sie offenbar nicht tun wollten. Wir wissen ja, dass die US-Armee nicht mehr die stärkste Armee der Welt ist! Russland ist sich auch darüber im Klaren, dass Baschar al-Assad von seinem Volk stark unterstützt wird, genauso wie Charles de Gaulle bei der Landung im Jahr 1945 vom französischen Volk unterstützt wurde. Diese Erscheinungen sind durchaus vergleichbar! Baschar al-Assad hat sein Land vor dem Aggressor gerettet. Daher wurde er von seinem Volk befolgt und Russland hielt es für nötig, eine Regierungsdelegation nach Damaskus zu entsenden.
Mit Russland wurde darüber verhandelt, wie Russland zur Stabilisierung der Lage im Land, zur Verstärkung der Verteidigungsfähigkeit und zur Wiederherstellung des Zerstörten beitragen kann. In wirtschaftlicher Hinsicht muss Syrien am 1. Januar 2015 eine assoziierte Mitgliedschaft in der Zollunion bekommen. In finanzieller Hinsicht hat Russland beschlossen, in Syrien massiv zu investieren, um das Land wiederherzustellen, und das ist keine Philanthropie! Russland wird sein Geld zurück bekommen, doch durch das Investieren wird Russland sicher sein, dass Syrien seinen Boden nicht für die Errichtung von Transitgasrohrleitungen wird verkaufen müssen. Das wird wiederum ermöglichen, einen Gaspreissturz in Europa zu verhindern und das geostrategische Gleichgewicht des Kontinents aufrechtzuerhalten. Die Wiederherstellungsarbeiten sollen hauptsächlich von russischen Unternehmen ausgeführt werden.

Was den Militärbereich betrifft, wird der syrische Verteidigungsminister in diesem Sommer in Moskau Verhandlungen über einen möglichen Beitritt seines Landes zur OVKS sowie über eine Bereitstellung von Mitteln zur Vernichtung der Dschihad-Kämpfer in Syrien führen. Bei diesen Mitteln handelt es sich um Verteidigungsausrüstung sowie um Satellitenüberwachung von Terroristen. Russland hat also Syrien während des Krieges unterstützt und an den Sieg von Baschar al-Assad fest geglaubt!“


A Should Be Discussed Article on

European Parliament’s New «Neo-Nazi / Far Right» – Not so «Nazi» and not so «Far Right»

Wayne MADSEN | 04.06.2014 | 00:00

Amid all the hair pulling and teeth gnashing by the Eurocrats and their overly paid pundits in the media about how the European Parliament electoral victories of the Eurosceptic French National Front, UK Independence Party, Danish People’s Party, and other «far right» parties could spell the imminent doom for the European Union, some level-headed observations are in order. Just as Europe’s once avowedly Marxist-Leninist Communist parties now sing the praises of the European Union, along with their once anti-capitalist friends in the European Green Party movement, the «neo-fascists» have moderated and can no longer be called «neo-Nazi» or totally opposed to European integration. Most of the Eurosceptic parties, for example, are supporters of NATO, which many believe is merely an American-led military enforcement arm of the EU.
It is also important to note that the largest winner of the recent elections for the European Parliament resulted in a major win for apathy. Turnout was low across Europe, even in countries like Lithuania and Belgium where national elections were held and in the UK and Ireland where local elections were run concurrently with the EU Parliament polling. 
The major news that has gone largely unreported by the European media and the U.S. press, which is spoon-fed its content by the European big media houses, is that what was «far right» once with the French National Front and other right-wing parties is no longer the case, especially when it comes to these parties’ new support and advocacy for Israel.
Although the National Democrats of Germany, Golden Dawn of Greece, and Jobbik of Hungary have definite anti-Semitic elements, other far-right parties, such as the National Front of France, the Party for Freedom of the Netherlands, Austrian Freedom Party, and the Sweden Democrats (and Greater Romania, which was locked out of the new European Parliament due to a poor electoral finish), have scrapped anti-Semitic rhetoric.
Many far-right parties sought and received accommodations with the Israeli right-wing, particularly the Likud Party, and Jewish groups within their respective nations. Some of the leaders of these formerly «neo-Nazi» parties have even accepted invitations by Likud and the Israeli settler’s movement to visit Israel. In December 2010, Austrian FPO leader Heinz-Christian Strache led a delegation of far-right European parties to Israel where they issued the "Jerusalem Declaration." The declaration affirmed Israel’s right to exist, its establishment of settlements in the occupied West Bank, and its need to take whatever actions necessary to defend itself from «Islamic terrorism.» It was a major shift for the FPO, which once supported Iraq’s Saddam Hussein against Israeli «Zionism» and U.S. «imperialism.» The FPO’s move to the center is even more astounding in light of the fact that Strache’s predecessor as FPO leader, Jorg Haider, was once called «Hitler’s spiritual grandson.» 
Joining Strache in Israel in December 2010 were Filip Dewinter, the leader of the Flemish Interest (Vlaams Belang) party, a former neo-Nazi party; Geert Wilders, the Islamophobe leader of the Netherlands Party for Freedom; German Freedom Party leader Rene Stadtkewitz; and Kent Ekeroth, Sweden Democrat member of the Swedish Parliament.
The strategy by Israel with regard to the far-right parties worked. The common foe of the Israeli right-wing parties and many of the European nationalist parties is now Islam. This manifestation was seen in the writings of Norwegian mass killer Anders Breivik, the former member of the far-right Norwegian Progress Party who expressed his support for Israel while ostensibly finding common ground with neo-fascist parties in Germany.
With regard to NATO, the far-right provides support for the continued maintenance of the U.S.-led military alliance and a continued U.S. military presence in Europe. There is nothing very «Nazi» about extending a welcome to the military forces of a nation that largely helped defeat the armies of Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini some 70 years ago. However, the Austrian FPO, Sweden Democrats, and Finns Party are not so opposed to their nations’ scrapping their traditional neutrality and joining NATO. The French National Front and the UKIP, while not expressly for or against NATO, have voiced their support for Russian President Vladimir Putin in the Ukraine matter, stances that surely do not put them in the good graces of the EU/NATO powers in Brussels.
There has also been a tendency to confuse the large scale entry of right-wing parties into the European Parliament with the popularity of secessionist parties. Secessionist does not imply «fascist» or anti-EU, especially since the Scottish National Party (SNP), which will vie with London on an independence referendum in September, has favored keeping an independent Scotland within the EU even if England and Wales choose to leave it. The same holds true for Catalonia, which sees membership in the EU as a way to wean itself from control by Madrid.
There was a glitch with regard to the SNP’s support for the EU in the recent election. The Scottish nationalists failed to pick up Scotland’s third allotted EU parliamentary seat. The seat, which had been held by the all-but-totally vanquished Liberal Democrats, went to the anglophile UKIP. The UKIP is strongly opposed to Scottish independence and it even opposed devolved powers for Scotland. In essence, the SNP failed to grasp the anti-EU feelings among the Scottish electorate even though many Scots may also favor independence. Some SNP officials are already trying to steer their party’s past support for the EU to a less pro-Brussels viewpoint. 
The SNP and their Welsh Plaid Cymru colleagues have always considered left-of-center and certainly not in the right-wing camp. The same applies to the Catalonian nationalists, a movement that is divided between a center-right party and extreme leftists.
The entrance of a large bloc of Eurosceptic parties into the Strasbourg parliament has resulted in confusion among the right, the center, and the left. Perhaps, this is because the old labels applied to the political spectrum are no longer applicable. Even the spectrum no longer applies... This can be seen in the shifting alliances among the European Parliamentary groups.
For example, the first place win for the National Front of France has made it a major alliance kingmaker in the new parliament. National Front leader Marine Le Pen immediately set about to create a new nationalistic and anti-EU alliance, called the European Freedom Alliance (EFA) with the Dutch Freedom Party of Geert Wilders, the Austrian Freedom Party, the Belgian Vlaams Belang, the Italian Lega Nord, the Slovak National Party, and the Sweden Democrats. The Lega Nord indicated it was leaving the European Alliance of Freedom and Democracy (EFD) of the UKIP to join the new EFA. The EFD was also to lose the Danish People’s Party and the Finns Party to the British Conservative-dominated European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR), a marked move to the center for both right-wing parties. However, the EFD appeared likely to pick up the rather quirky and off-beat Polish Congress of the New Right (KNP) as a member. 
The EFD and ECR are vying for the support of other new parties in parliament, including the anti-Euro Alternative fuer Deutschland (AfD), the Independent Greeks (ANEL), and the Ordinary People and Independent Personalities (OLANO) of Slovenia. 
Without the support of the other far-right parties, the neo-Nazis from Greece, Hungary, and Germany lack the minimum requirement for having a recognized bloc in parliament. The rule is that a bloc must have members of parliament elected from at least one-quarter of the EU member states. The shift from «far right» to the center by the parties from Austria, Denmark, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Finland, has resulted in no parliamentary clubs for the Nazis to engage in any beer hall putsches in Strasbourg.
So, right from the start, there is a major split among the right-wing parties entering the European Parliament. The wailing and angst from the Eurocrats and their media sycophants appears to have been wasted exercises.
Tags: European Union NATO France Germany Le Pen