Hot Topics

War in Syria: Staged Uprising NOT a Revolution

“A revolution is usually done by the people, not by importing foreigners to rebel against the people” President Dr. Bashar Al Assad

Here’s a list of some of the terrorist groups in Syria and their origins. Yet some still refer to this carefully calculated and executed invasion as a revolution or civil . Over 300,000 FOREIGN mercenaries invaded Syria to wage war.

16266097_10158110147835557_7917428773921468979_nFatah Al Sham belongs to Qatar. Ahrar Al-Sham belongs to Saudi Arabia. Faylaq Al-Sham belongs to Turkey. Suqur Al-Sham belongs to Jordan. Ajnad Al-Sham belongs to Qatar. Ansar Al-Sham belongs to Turkey. Thuwar Al-Sham belongs to Saudi Arabia.

Steven Sahioune gives us a detailed account of what took place in the early stages of this imposed war and invasion in his article: The Day Before Daraa: How the war broke out in Syria. “Deraa was teaming with activity and foreign visitors to Syria well before the staged uprising began its opening act. The Omari Mosque was the scene of backstage preparations, costume changes and rehearsals.  The Libyan terrorists, fresh from the battlefield of the US-NATO  regime change  attack on Libya, were in Deraa well ahead of the March 2011 uprising violence.  The participation of local Muslim Brotherhood followers, who would assist the foreign Libyan mercenaries/terrorists, was an essential part of the CIA plan, which was well scripted and directed from Jordan. Enlisting the aid and cooperation of local followers of Salafism allowed the Libyans to move in Deraa without attracting any suspicion.   The local men were the ‘front’ for the operation.

The CIA agents running the Deraa operation from their office in Jordan had already provided the weapons and cash needed to fuel the flames of revolution in Syria.   With enough money and weapons, you can start a revolution anywhere in the world.

In reality, the uprising in Deraa in March 2011 was not fueled by graffiti written by teenagers, and there were no disgruntled parents demanding their children to be freed. This was part of the Hollywood style script written by skilled CIA agents, who had been given a mission: to destroy Syria for the purpose of regime change.  Deraa was only Act 1: Scene 1. The fact that those so-called teenage graffiti artists and their parents have never been found, never named, and never pictured is the first clue that their identity is cloaked in darkness.  In any uprising there needs to be grassroots support. Usually, there is a situation which arises, and protesters take to the streets.  The staged uprising in Deraa had some locals in the street who were unaware of their participation in a CIA-Hollywood production.  They were the unpaid extras in the scene about to be shot.  These unaware extras had grievances, perhaps  lasting a generation or more, and perhaps rooted in Wahabism, which is a political ideology exported globally by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Royal family and their paid officials”. Read Steven’s article to learn more about the details of this staged uprising.

There have been many accounts of Syrians in Syria telling the West that what took place in Syria was not a revolution. One of these accounts is from Majd, he states ” I am Syrian… living in Syria in the middle of everything. We have seen horrors. It was never a revolution nor a civil war. The terrorists are sent by your government. They are al Qaeda Jabhat al Nusra Wahhabi Salafists Talibans etc and the extremist jihadists sent by the West, the Saudis, Qatar and Turkey. Your Obama and whoever is behind him or above him are supporting al Qaeda and leading a proxy war on my country”. 

Syriana Analysis explains on the sixth anniversary of the war in Syria why it was not a Revolution. “The narrative of the corporate mainstream media is that the vast majority of Syrians resorted to peaceful protests against the “dictator Assad regime”.

In this video, I will prove with evidences that, what you were being told is a lie.”–Syriana Analysis

Eva Bartlett: My October 2015 article, “Deconstructing the NATO Narrative on SyriaDeconstructing the NATO Narrative on Syria“. Excerpts: “…it is known that from the beginning, in Dara’a  and throughout Syria, armed protesters were firing upon, and butchering, security forces and civilians.

Tim Anderson’s “Syria: how the violence began, in Daraa” pointed out that police were killed by snipers in the March 17/18 protests; the Syrian army was only brought to Dara’a following the murder of the policemen. Additionally, a storage of protesters’ weapons was found in Dara’a’s al-Omari mosque.

Prem Shankar Jha’s, “Who Fired The First Shot?” described the slaughter of 20 Syrian soldiers outside Dara’a a month later, “by cutting their throats, and cutting off the head of one of the soldiers.” A very “moderate”-rebel practice.

In “Syria: The Hidden Massacre” Sharmine Narwani investigated the early massacres of Syrian soldiers, noting that many of the murders occurred even after the Syrian government had abolished the state security courts, lifted the state of emergency, granted general amnesties, and recognized the right to peaceful protest.

The April 10, 2011 murder of Banyas farmer Nidal Janoud was one of the first horrific murders of Syrian civilians by so-called “unarmed protesters.” Face gashed open, mutilated and bleeding, Janoud was paraded by an armed mob, who then hacked him to death.

Father Frans Van der Ludt—the Dutch priest living in Syria for nearly 5 decades prior to his April 7, 2014 assassination by militants occupying the old city of Homs—wrote (repeatedly) of the “armed demonstrators” he saw in early protests, “who began to shoot at the police first.”

May 2011 video footage of later-resigned Al Jazeera journalist Ali Hashem shows fighters entering Syria from Lebanon, carrying guns and RPGs (Hashem stated he’d likewise seen fighters entering in April). Al Jazeera refused to air the May footage, telling Hashem to ‘forget there are armed men.’ [See: Sharmine Narwani’s “Surprise Video Changes Syria “Timeline””] Unarmed protesters?

It is imperative that we listen to these voices and understand that the war in Syria was not a revolution, organic uprising, part of the Arab Spring, or a civil war. Unless we understand this important point we will not be able to understand everything that has happened since March 2011.

About Sarah Abed (65 Articles)
Syrian-American independent journalist and political commentator. I focus on exposing the lies and propaganda in mainstream media news as it relates to domestic and foreign policy with an emphasis on the Middle East. I have contributed to various radio shows, news publications and spoken at forums. For media inquiries please email me at

8 Comments on War in Syria: Staged Uprising NOT a Revolution

  1. Here is the thing, a civil war and a revolution are two different things. Second, I believe in the right of the Syrian people to self determination and the sovereignty of United Nations member states There is a method and reality to the actions in the past few years, both self serving and humanitarian purposes. In some instances the situation is obvious and in others the complexities converge. .

    United Nations States have a responsibility to protect. The UN charter is supposed to protect state sovereignty of its member states. The Charter states, All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

    Although, there is that stipulation which allows a member state to intervene for humanitarian purposes. During the situation in Rwanda we saw a test of this part of the charter. Conflict between the need to intervene in Rwanda type situations and the need to respect state sovereignty and international law. Reacting to this, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan challenged the international community to reconcile the two important concepts of the inviolability of state sovereignty and the need to respond to ‘to gross and systematic violations of human rights that offend every precept of our common humanity.”

    The Canadian Government established the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS), which published its highly influential report in 2001 putting forward for the first time the concept of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) in response to Annan’s challenge. This led to a supportive report from the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, and most significantly world leaders agreeing to the essence of R2P at the 2005 World Summit.

    The international community’s responsibility to protect is to be achieved through primarily non-military means, such as developing a better ‘early warning capacity’,using ‘appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means’ to protect populations with a focus on vulnerable states ‘which are under stress’ to prevent crises from breaking out and to help them ‘build capacity to protect their populations’. This approach is more effective than military methods; they are ‘easier to initiate and sustain’ and avoid the huge risks, costs, and destruction which military action brings.This effectiveness was demonstrated in the response to post-election violence in Kenya. Diplomatic efforts helped prevent the violence from escalating,described by Annan as ‘a successful example of R2P at work’, notwithstanding the lack of military intervention.

    The conception of sovereignty is not novel. If the state could no longer perform the function it was given power to do, then it does not qualify as sovereign and is not owed obedience. This is remarkably similar to the idea that failure to protect a population is a failure in the exercise of sovereignty.

    Sovereignty’s duties were extended towards the protection of populations in the UN Charter with Articles 1(3) and 55 including important statements regarding human rights protections, which Annan argues shows that the Charter was not ‘a licence for governments to trample on human rights and human dignity’.Moreover, R2P as expressed at the World Summit applies to genocide, ethnic cleansing, war crimes and crimes against humanity, all of which are prohibited by international law, from which no derogation is permitted. Therefore it is possible to say that states have the existing duty and responsibility to respect them, regardless of R2P.

    Some writers contend that R2P creates a new legal duty on the wider international community to respond to atrocities.

    Firstly with regards to military intervention should peaceful means fail, states merely proclaimed that they are ‘prepared’ to take action on a ‘case-by-case’ basis.This tentative language points towards ‘a voluntary, rather than a mandatory engagement’.

    However there is another, more controversial element of R2P which has an alleged impact on international law. Orford, while agreeing that R2P does not impose any new obligations upon states, contends that it changes international law to confer legal authority on actors to use force in the application of R2P.

    The use of force is prohibited in international law by Article 2(4) of the UN Charter and is referred to as being of ‘fundamental or cardinal importance’ and at the ‘cornerstone’ of the UN Charter. Given the ostensible strength of the prohibition, it is apparent that the express terms of the Charter do not readily embrace humanitarian intervention’.There are two exceptions to this prohibition in the Charter. Article 51 permits force used in self-defence under certain conditions, and most significantly for R2P, Chapter VII allows the UNSC to authorise force in response to a threat to the peace. This is where R2P fits in; it was made clear at the World Summit that under R2P authorisation for the use of force will be made ‘through the Security Council, in accordance with the Charter, including Chapter VII’.

    This process of incremental development is at risk due to R2P’s application in Libya, and lack thereof for Syria. When the UNSC, in the spirit of R2P, authorised states to take ‘all necessary measures’ to protect civilians in Libya, it was not a unique legal development, the authority for the UNSC to use force for civilian protection under Chapter VII is well established as shown above. It was however a significant political development, as it was achieved due to R2P’s influence. It also appeared to mark a departure from the apathy and inaction which characterised the responses to Rwanda and Darfur. This is even more significant as parallels can be seen between Libya and Rwanda; Gaddafi urged his supporters to attack the opposition ‘cockroaches’, a very similar incitement to violence to that seen in Rwanda.

    These positives were short lived due to NATO’s implementation of the resolution. Force under the resolution was only authorised for the purposes of protecting civilians; NATO acted ultra vires as their actions were ‘less about protecting the population and more about regime change’. NATO deliberately sided with the Libyan rebels and TNC, using its airpower to overthrow Gaddafi. This was despite the resolution reaffirming Libya’s ‘sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity’ and the 5 abstaining states voicing their concern that military force of this kind could be abused for ulterior purposes.

    R2P is facing two significant problems at present which affect both sceptical and enthusiastic supporters, hampering its continued support and development. Important emerging states are concerned that R2P, even if authorised through the UNSC, will be used for ulterior purposes. At the same time, due to the UNSC’s failure to act in Syria R2P could be viewed as having no practical utility, leading to the paradoxical situation where R2P is simultaneously attacked for going both too far and not far enough.

    In Conclusion, the situation in Syria began as a state protest against inhuman actions and developed into a civil war (A civil war is war is a polarizing war between rebels and government entities. Which is what happened when rebels fought Assad’s forces. A revolution is an uprising of the people agains the state) before outside forces became involved. The insertion of outside forces, conscripts from other nations, is not unusual in war time. The developing situation further became exacerbated by invasion and occupation by IS. The further intervention of state actors increased and destabilized the situation. At this time it is no longer a civil war. It is a proxy war between Saudi and Iran and Russia and the U.S., but to say that that the use of mercenaries voids the act of civil war is erroneous. The U.S. of mercenaries is an active part of war. Assad has used mercenaries extensively.

    Assad had a right to rule his nation. The the position of the U.S. is that they had to act according to UN specific resolutions to protect human rights. The accusation of initial human rights violations by Assad is still suspect. It was the catalyst for action in Syria. Although, not enacted by the UN Security Council.

    Liked by 1 person

    • So what are you saying? heh

      Liked by 2 people

    • antirepublocrat // May 24, 2017 at 3:28 pm // Reply

      To actually understand what a fraud R2P is, you need only read Enduring Lies by Edward S. Herman and David Peterson. They explain that 1) the majority of victims of the Rwandan genocide were in fact Hutu, not Tutsi as widely reported by the Western media and 2) the genocide was the result of US and Canadian actions in support of Paul Kagame’s RPF invasion of Rwanda before the genocide started, rather than Western inaction and 3) the RPF did most of the killing. It’s a short read, only 89 pages, unless you carefully read the 35 pages of extensive documentation in the footnotes.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. Were it not for foreign intervention, it is extremely likely there would have been no conflict at all, and disputes would have been resolved..well…civilly..Your extremely (and unnecessarily) long winded comment can be boiled down to spliting hairs.The premise of your argument that the presence of foreign mercs does not invalidate the characterization of the conflict (in your eyes) as a civil war, would itself appear to be invalidated by that same foreign interference in provoking hostilities in the first place.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. Thank you for taking the time to write your comment. If you are implying that I do not know the difference between a civil war and a revolution which anyone at a middle school level would probably be able to differentiate between then you are mistaken. I know very well the differences. I also know that this was never a civil war. As a journalist I am surprised you haven’t come across the plethora of information that explains how this was a planned invasion. Decades ago the plans were made to invade Syria and the only ones that knew that the war would start in mid march were the ones that were planning it. The Omari mosque in Daraa was stockpiled with weapons right before the war broke out. The CIA agents running the Deraa operation from their office in Jordan had already provided the weapons and cash needed to fuel the flames of revolution in Syria. With enough money and weapons, you can start a revolution anywhere in the world. In reality, the uprising in Deraa in March 2011 was not fueled by graffiti written by teenagers, and there were no disgruntled parents demanding their children to be freed. This was part of the Hollywood style script written by skilled CIA agents, who had been given a mission: to destroy Syria for the purpose of regime change.  Deraa was only Act 1: Scene 1.

    The excuse that the USA used this time was that “Assad was killing innocent protestors” where have we seen the US use a lie to invade a country? Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya.. and now Syria, each time it was a particular reason to go in and “save the people from their leader”. I will provide you with information to catch up on what really happened so that you can be sure to report the truth and not the same lies and propaganda that have been spewed over mainstream media for the past 6 years. Lies that have cost hundreds of thousands of Syrians their lives. The following 3 links will give you a good idea of the lies that were debunked. I have a ton of other information too.. to counter every single claim that was made. Once you are done with these three articles, if you want more please let me know.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. But why would the US represented in this case by the CIA lie? I suppose you also think they were lying when the sweet young Kuwaiti girl testified to Congress no less, that Iraqi soldiers were dumping babies out of incubators. (Gulf War l) Or that Saddam Hussein was stockpiling WMDs and buying yellowcake uranium. (GWll). You are forgetting a simple rule that will always help you determine who is telling the truth. USA = Good always tells truth–all else is lies.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. I don’t believe in much, only what i have to.
    But if i had to, i would believe this because it makes the most sense.
    when i see CIA agents did this or that, i tend to shrug it off as bullshit but in this case, it makes the most sense.
    i don’t know what the truth is but as a US citizen, i know for absolute certain that we do not and never had any interest in the conflict and it’s high time our national actions reflected that. We have no business being there other than to rebuild w/ NGOs.

    Liked by 1 person

6 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. The Decade-Long U.S. Campaign to Foment Syria’s “Revolution” and Unseat Assad – The Rabbit Hole
  2. GODINE OBMANE! Desetljeće duga američka kampanja promocije sirijske “revolucije” i smjene Assada | GlobalCir
  3. A “New Hollywood Plot” to Undermine Syrian Peace Negotiations – The Rabbit Hole
  4. Hell Cannons – The Homegrown Horror of Syria’s Terrorist Invaders – The Rabbit Hole
  5. Hell Cannons - The Homegrown Horror of Syria’s Terrorist Invaders
  6. Dissecting the Propaganda on Syria – The Rabbit Hole

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: