" />
Published On: Sun, Oct 13th, 2013

HRW Report Covers-Up State Sponsorship of Terrorism

Human Rights Watch, funded by globalist and billionaire George Soros, has issued a report about Al-Qaeda linked terrorist war crimes in the Latakia region of Syria. The report ends with a letter, containing “tough questions” to Turkey´s Foreign Minister, but fails to address the state sponsorship of the terrorists by core NATO and GCC members.

HRW you_can_still_see_their_bloodChristof Lehmann (nsnbc) , - On 11 October 2013, Human Rights Watch issued its report titled “You Can Still See Their Blood”. The report focuses on the unlawful killings and kidnapping of civilians, predominantly carried out by Al-Qaeda linked terrorist brigades in the Latakia region of Syria. Most of these killings took place between 4 and 19 August 2013, during an major offensive.

The war crimes were carried out during the “opposition`s” campaign “Liberate the Coast” which began on 4 August. As HRW correctly writes:

On August 4, 2013 between 4:30 a.m. and 5 a.m., armed opposition groups launched a new and a large scale offensive on government controlled areas in Latakia countryside. …

HRW details which of the terrorist groups, and in some cases which of their brigades, have been involved in the war crimes committed during the campaign.

HRW names the following groups as being involved in the crimes committed on 4 August: Ahrar al-Sham, Islamic State of Iraq and Sham , Jabhat al-Nusra , Jaish al-Muhajireen wal-Ansar, Suquor al-Izz.

HRW names the other groups which were involved in the campaign and related war crimes as being: Free Syrian Army under Salim Idriss’s Command, Ahrar al-Sahel and its battalions, Farouq Brigade, The Hassan al-Azhari Battalion, The Heroes of Khirbet al-Jawz and the Oussama Bin Zeid Battalion, Saif Allah al-Masloul, al-Ansar, Sham al-Islam, Sheikh Qahtan Battalion (formerly Al-Tawhid), Ansar al-Sham, Sons of al-Qadisiyya, Suquor al-Sham, Thuwar al-Haffeh, Ibrahim Khalil, Al-Shaheed Sino Rebels Battalion.

All in all 20 groups were involved, as HRW also states in a letter to Turkey´s Foreign Minister, Ahmed Davotoglu. The letter is part of the report and published as Annex III.

ObamaDempseyBandarNo Reference to a Joint Command Structure. Strong, Intentional Bias.

As it was the case in the night between 20 and 21 August, in the Jobar district of Damascus, where the Syrian Army was confronted by 20.000 fighters from different groups who had formed one united front, it is unlikely that the 20 jihadi groups and their battalions which took part in the Liberate the Coast offensive did not have a joint command structure.

The offensive, in which 20 groups were fighting to achieve a  common strategic objective defeats statements by top-officials from core NATO member states, to the effect that the jihadi groups do not have a joint command structure. HRW fails to mention this with as much as one word in the report.

Another factor that is being omitted is that the chemical weapons attack in Damascus happened only one and a half day after the coastal offensive was defeated, and an equal amount of days after an entire brigade which was en route from the Jordanian Ramtha air base to Damascus was literally wiped out by the Syrian army.

A recent analysis of the chemical weapons attacks in Eastern Ghouta on 21 August clearly demonstrated, that a joint command structure exists, and that the political as well as military responsibility for the war crime can and must be placed at the highest levels of the White House, the Pentagon, and the Saudi Interior Ministry. An unbiased investigation of the war crimes, committed by the insurgents in Latakia, between 4 – 19 August would have led to the same conclusion.

Given the fact that the HRW investigators have conducted a profound investigation with appropriate resources being available to the investigators; and given the fact that they have delivered an otherwise well documented report, it is inconceivable that it would have escaped the HRW experts to look for signs of this joint command structure and to investigate and document it. HRW´s failure to investigate is a clear and unmistakable sign of strong, intentional bias.

HRW´s Documentation of Financing focuses on Small Fish, neglects State Sponsorship of Terrorism.

The HRW investigators have also done professional work with regards to investigating the funding of the Liberate the Coast Campaign. Also the section of the HRW report that deals with the funding of the campaign defeats the notion that the jihadi groups and their brigades lack an organized command structure or that each of the groups struggles with its own funding.

In April 2013 the EU lifted its ban on the import of Syrian oil from "rebel held territory to finance the opposition".

In April 2013 the EU lifted its ban on the import of Syrian oil from “rebel held territory to finance the opposition”.

The HRW report states, among others, that a joint operations room was used for organizing the funding of the campaign, and the report names particular individuals, especially one Kuwaiti Saed al-Suwan al-Ajami.

HRW uses sources such as individual´s Twitter accounts and other social media sites for documenting the funding of the operation, and mentions an amount of some 4.8 million dollars which has been donated.

Considering the fact that some 20.000 fighters have been involved in the campaign, 4.8 million USD would amount to some 16 USD per fighter, for each day of the 4 – 19 August campaign.

A high-ranking officer of the Danish Home Defense (Hjemmeværnet), which is a paramilitary Danish defense organization, specialized in defending local areas in the case of a military invasion of the country, said on conditions of anonymity, that:

“16 USD per day, per fighter are laughable. Even if the amount was quadrupled, it would still hardly even begin to cover the logistical expenses for launching such a campaign. No so-called terrorist organization or coalition of organizations could launch any campaign of that nature, with more than 20 organizations and some 20.000 fighters, without massive state sponsorship, which turns the so-called terrorists into mercenaries. Mercenaries is what they really are. If HRW calls them anything but mercenaries it is because HRW is a joke”….. 

“The only question here is whether the political will to investigate which states exactly are sponsoring with how much and through which channels is there. Even top-Russian officials would be reluctant to disclose what they really know about this state sponsorship, because it could give away their sources of information and method of gathering intelligence. It’s as simple as that. The funding via social media is a joke: Everybody here is laughing about it”. 

As the Danish Home Defense officer points out, the question is whether Human Rights Watch has the “political will to ask the right questions”. Obviously it does not have that political will, and that fact alone discredits the validity of large parts of the report. Whether the bias has anything to do with who is funding HRW is not an inappropriate question either.

The fact that the core NATO members USA, UK, France, the core GCC members Saudi Arabia and Qatar, that Israel, Libya and the EU are funding the jihadists has both been admitted and documented. HRW is not mentioning it with a single word in the report.

In April 2013 the European Union lifted its ban on importing Syrian oil from “rebel held” territories so that the revenue from the oil could be used for financing “the opposition”. The lifting of the EU ban and the EU import of oil from the predominantly Kurdish region around Deir Ez Zor was fueling the September Al-Qaeda onslaught that forced tens of thousands of Syrians to flee. The EU import is also one of the factors which is fueling and driving the ongoing attempt of Turkey´s AKP government to create a “Greater Kurdistan” on both Turkish and Syrian Kurdish Territories.

​Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mashaal Al Zaben met with US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey.

​Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mashaal Al Zaben met with US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey.

In August, only days before the Saudi controlled Liwa-al-Islam used chemical weapons in the East Ghouta district of Damascus, the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army General Martin Dempsey, was in the Jordanian town of al-Mafraq, from where the CIA and US Special Forces operate in liaison with the insurgent groups in Syria. Dempsey arrived at a time when new supplies of both U.S. and Saudi weapons began being shipped across the border into Syria.

According to analysts,Dempsey visited Jordan in preparation of the expected military campaign in August – September, following the insurgents use of chemical weapons in false flag operations.

In September 2013 the Libyan Foreign Minister, Mohammed Abdul Aziz stated that sending troops and arms to Syria is a source of pride.

Also in September, Prince Bandar, the chief of Saudi Intelligence, admitted to Russia´s President Vladimir Putin, that Saudi Arabia controls the Chechen terrorist groups. A report by the author documents moreover, that Bandar and Saudi Intelligence are directly responsible for funding Liwa-al-Islam, the group who launched chemical weapons in Damascus on 21 August.

BandarWhy Focus on Twitter Accounts and Social Media ?

The fact that HRW is focusing on the sponsors of relatively small amounts rather than on the systematic funding of mercenaries by state sponsors of terrorism may be willfully designed to distract those citizens who have an honest interest in the human rights situation in Syria from looking at the proverbial elephant in the room.

It is a carefully and skillfully crafted work of misinformation by a human rights organization that is funded by billionaire globalist George Soros. The only useful function the report can have for those who are genuinely interested in pursuing the war crimes which have been committed is that the report provides a wealth of useful information about organizations, brigades, witnesses, and in some cases the names of brigade commanders who could be arrested and interrogated, so that information about their knowledge about state sponsorship of terrorism could be extracted from them.

Erdogan DavotogluWhy Slam Turkey for Porous Borders – Now ?

The HRW report ends with a letter to Turkey´s Foreign Minister, Ahmed Davotogly. The letter is published in the report´s Annex III. Pertaining Turkey´s porous borders, HRW writes to Davotoglu:

Human Rights Watch would like to understand better the extent of the measures the Turkish government is taking to secure its border against elements who are committing war crimes in Syria, and steps the Turkish authorities are taking to investigate and prosecute individuals implicated in such crimes who are known to be operating in and out of Turkey or using Turkey as a supply route. 

Arms shipments at the size of 400 tons are known to arrive at Turkish ports, from where they are distributed to the mercenaries in Syria. Some of the shipments included SAM-7  or Stinger missiles. The Turkish government does little if anything to stop the transit and its military and intelligence services are known to participate.

It is known that Turkey has been the primary hub for CIA weapons shipments to the mercenaries in March 2013. The list could be continued and fill volumes. The operand question here is, why HRW would begin asking the Turkish government questions about the porosity of its 900 km long Turkish – Syrian border and why now ?

The most likely answer ? Preparations for launching a campaign for the establishment of humanitarian corridors.

Subsequent to the unanimous adoption of UNSC resolution 2118 (2013) on Syria´s chemical weapons, the international, anti-Syrian alliance has begun launching a campaign that aims at the establishment of humanitarian corridors in Syria. In early October, the Security Council adopted a Presidential Statement, which for the first time in the course of the more than two year-long conflict introduces the “Responsibility to Protect” in the equation.

The Syrian government is being positioned as a human rights violator because it does not allow cross border humanitarian operations without having sovereign control over who and what is entering the sovereign Syrian territory. Turkey on the other hand, is being criticized for “having a porous border”.

The border is porous, right, but not because Turkey has a lack of military presence. In fact, Turkey massively reinforced its southern border to Syria in September. The Turkish part of the Turkish- Syrian border is porous because Turkey, as a core NATO member, participates in creating the humanitarian crisis, which apparently shall be used for calls for humanitarian corridors under the Responsibility to Protect principle. The Director of the International Committee of the Red Cross and leaders of other humanitarian and aid organizations have begun media and political campaigns in which the humanitarian crisis in Syria is promoted along with calls for the need of unimpeded cross border operations. It is noteworthy that analyst Anthony Cartalucci documented the Doctors Without Borders is functioning as what he describes as NATO´s medical battalion.

The HRW letter to Turkey´s Foreign Minister, Ahmed Davotoglu is covering up Turkey`s and NATO`s mercenary war in Syria. HRW, asking Turkey which measures it takes to prevent war crimes in Syria, is propaganda at its best and it would have had Göbbels and Eddy Bernaise blush. One of the many possible and pertinent, correct questions HRW could have asked instead would be

“Which measures is Turkey taking to prevent that its illegal mercenaries, for which Turkey, along with other core NATO members bears the full political and command responsibility, are committing war crimes in Syria”.  

HRW is not only missing the proverbial elephant in the room. Human Rights Watch has become the elephant in the room”.

About the Author

- Dr. Christof Lehmann is the founder and editor of nsnbc. He is a psychologist and former independent political consultant on conflict, conflict resolution and a wide range of other political issues. In March 2013 he established nsnbc as a daily, independent, international on-line newspaper. He can be contacted at nsnbc international at

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these html tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>