ALEPPO: Open Letter to French President Hollande ~ from Pierre Le Corf

I use the term « terrorist » because there are no rebels in Aleppo, at least nothing that could allow us to consider them as such. It is irresponsible to continue qualifying them as rebels in Syria while we list them as terrorist organizations in France.

On the White Helmets which actor George Clooney supports:

The « White Helmets » the French government financed among others like UK and that we received at the Élysée are, for most of them, first aid workers by day and terrorists by night, or vice versa. They pledge allegiance to Jabhat al-Nosra (Al-Qaeda), as shown by documents found after their departure and as civilians testify. The majority of their teams rescued fighters first, and civilians every once in a while.

A noteworthy feature is that each team had a cameraman, and the team of rescuers helped only while the camera was filming. A lot of civilians have told me that others had stayed under the rubbles because the rescuers refused to go there. Others told me the rescuers even staged fake attacks, fake bombings, fake wounds and interventions.

January 27, 2017


by Pierre Le Corf

Mr President,

Today, I question all the values I have been raised with, the values of a country I love, my country: France. I am writing to you as a French citizen who arrived without any preconceived ideas in Syrian territory and lives in what was previously known as Western Aleppo, now Aleppo. I am a politically neutral humanitarian, and I have been here for a year.

The situation I am in is tough. First of all, because I am the only French citizen living here, which makes me an easy target because of the testimony I offer that often goes against the official line. Second of all, because what we witness here everyday is outraging and hard to talk about. I have been the witness of a massacre and humanitarian crisis in which we, as a nation, are actors and even backers by supporting terrorism. I address this message to you, and to all the others who could have the decision making power to make peace and make all civilian populations a priority.

Every single day, I had to face death as everyone else in this city. The mission I gave myself led me to visit families living close to the ones we have been labeling as « opponents » since the beginning of the conflict. However the only elements I witnessed were black flags – and I have pictures – on all of the front-lines. These signs are the symbols used by the groups that France has been fighting against for years.

Today, the Syrian people stands united to fight not against the government but against terrorist groups, no matter what we call them to hold them accountable for their actions or the reason they have to exist. These terrorist groups are named Al-jaïch al-hour (Free Syrian Army), Jabhat al-Nosra (or Fatah al-Cham, branch of Al-Qaïda), Jaïch al-Islam, Harakat Nour al-Din al-Zenki, Brigade Sultan Mourad, etc. An anti governmental opposition exists, as for every government. This opposition is more or less peaceful, but represents a minority of the population. Since the beginning of the conflict and until now, almost all the forces on the ground that have kept bombarding Aleppo are armed fighters belonging to terrorist groups.

I use the term « terrorist » because there are no rebels in Aleppo, at least nothing that could allow us to consider them as such. It is irresponsible to continue qualifying them as rebels in Syria while we list them as terrorist organizations in France. The terrorists have been forced out with their weapons following agreements with the government and « all » went to Idlib, an area now almost entirely occupied by fighters and their families. However, many of the terrorists left Idlib to come back to Aleppo to resume bombings and suicide attacks, here as everywhere else in Syria.

I have evidence for everything I am writing. For months I have been gathering the testimonies of civilians on video and on paper, independently of their religion or political opinion and without any member of the military or government around. I publish these testimonies and occasionally give them to a UN Commission of Inquiry in charge of studying terrorist attacks and crimes, while putting the commission in contact with witnesses.

We have directed the attention of the public opinion and the bombing of zones in which were a minority of opponents but a majority of terrorists. Civilians were dying every day in these zones, without us saying that the majority of civilians in Eastern Aleppo could not run away because they were held back by the terrorists. It is by trying to run away by using the humanitarian corridors organized by the Russian and Syrian governments that many civilians were targeted and killed by armed forces (corridors indicated one to two days earlier, with precisions on the time of opening by a text message directed to all mobile phone owners using the syrian networks MTN and Syriatel, including me). Thankfully, thousands of civilians were able to make it out alive by using alternative routes, sometimes even passing through mined zones.

Few are the media which stated that these civilians were used as human shields, which the testimonies corroborate. Medias have preferred describing them as caught in the crossfire of a fight opposing revolutionary armed forces to their government, while this government was protecting its people against terrorists who are primarily foreign mercenaries. They came to Syria heavily armed and are fanatics for whom human lives hardly matter. To talk only about Aleppo, these mercenaries invaded the surroundings and the center of the city, shelling the population of Western Aleppo every day and allowing themselves to murder civilians in the eastern part of the city for no reason.

Continue reading

Advertisements

France’s National Assembly demands lifting of economic sanctions against Russia. Hollande refuses

Global Research, April 30, 2016
Russia-1

French parliamentarians have approved a non-binding resolution today asking for the lifting of EU sanctions imposed on Russia, allegedly for its role in Ukraine.

The lower house of the French Parliament has voted against the sanctions by 55 to 44. In favor of the resolution have voted parliamentarians from the center-right, the right and the radical left.

The Hollande government has recommended the rejection of the proposal to lift sanctions. Against the proposal have voted Socialist and Green deputies. Both parties and the mainstream media in France are extremely hostile to Russia, as never before in French history!

France was traditionally a pillar of European independence. It has opposed the Vietnam war and, more recently, the invasion of Iraq and had left the military wing of the Atlantic Alliance. But, after the election of Sarkozy as President and also under Hollande, it not only returned fully to NATO, it became the privileged “actor” of neoconservatives in Europe. Paris has played a critical role in the “humanitarian” interventions which destroyed Syria and Libya and are directly responsible for the flow of millions of refugees to Europe and for the development of the Islamic State.

But now Sarkozy, under the pressure of the rise of Le Pen and trying to reconstruct the once gaulliste French right, tries to make some corrections to his unconditional siding with Washington on international policy.

The vote in France comes only weeks after the Dutch voters have put also into question western policy towards Russia, by rejecting the EU-Ukraine agreement. It comes also at the worse moment for President Hollande who faces strong social opposition in France and, according to most observers, is presiding over his own end – and also the end of an era if not of a regime.

Today French police has clashed with and used tear gas against demonstrators protesting the new labour law in several cities including Paris, Nantes, Lyon and Rennes.

French lawyer asks every MP to impeach Hollande for war crimes in Donetsk, Syria

Why not President Obama, Vice President Biden, and Senator John McCain?

From Fort Russ

Deposition of Anna Touve

  Egalité-Reconciliation, December 11, 2015
  Translated from French by Tom Winter, December 18, 2015

Original title: Impeachment procedure, François Hollande, President of the Republic:
Communiqué of Master Viguier and testimony of victims

Here is the press release of Damien Viguier, Esq. 
Criminal policy in Syria and Donbass: Hollande impeachment Paris, December 11, 2015 – 

Two women, victims in Syria and in Donbass, speaking through their lawyer, have addressed a request to each French parliamentarian to bring François Hollande before the High Court. 

One of these two women, the one from Syria, was raped in front of her husband, the other, a resident of Donbass, saw her house blown up in a bombing that killed her husband and two of her children, and wounded her two other children, and made her lose an arm. 

These criminal acts are the direct consequences of the actions of François Hollande. One tenth of parliamentarians either House may take the initiative for impeachment proceedings against François Hollande by filing a Motion for a resolution calling for a session of the High Court.

MPI TV broadcast Mr. Viguier’s the call to impeach Francois Hollande: 

Video
Master Damien Viguier interrogates a young Syrian woman who was kidnapped, beaten, and raped by “moderate rebels,” supported and armed by France:
Master Damien Viguier interrogates a young mother from Ukrainian Donbass whose family was decimated by the shells of the “loyalist” army supported by France:
Master Damien Viguier sent the following letter to MPs: 
Sir, 
I appeal to the representative of the nation, in the name of Madame Anna Touve, a Ukrainian national, civilian residing in Donetsk, and in the name of a young woman, also a civilian, residing in Damascus (Syria), who, for understandable reasons, remains anonymous. On May 26, 2015 in Gorlovka (Donbass) Touve, Anna lost her husband and two of her children in the explosion of shells fired by the militias of the Kiev regime.

Seriously injured, she lost her left arm. As for the young Syrian woman, she was assaulted in 2013, at her home, raped and tortured in the presence of her husband by so-called rebels against the Syrian regime.

My two clients are the victims of a certain conception of international relations. In accordance with the principles of law, it is the senior military or political officials who must be punished, and by the State to which they belong.

Regarding Donbass, François Hollande has supported and encouraged a de facto regime that took power illegally, by violence, in Kiev. And therefore he bludgeoned any attempt at liberation on the part of the eastern regions of Ukraine. He does not cease encouraging abuses against the people of Donbass.

Regarding Syria, this same François Hollande, since taking office, has unceasingly kept up the offensive against the Syrian state. He has acknowledged arms shipments to the “rebels.” 

And the statements of his foreign minister, including “the Al-Nusra Front did a good job,” statement, were said by the administrative courts, to note the foreign policy of France.

These facts correspond to the definition that is given of crimes against peace, and of a crime of war. And there is certainly a case of complicity in the crimes committed. The question arises, before history, of our responsibility to all, confronted as we are with the atrocities committed by those who clearly abuse their position and turn aside from the mission that has been entrusted to them.

According to Article 68 of the Constitution, and the Organic Law of November 24, 2014, in the case of breach of the duties of a President of the Republic, manifestly incompatible with the exercise of a mandate, a High Court may order the dismissal of the head of state. The initiative for this procedure is yours: one tenth of the parliamentarians of one or the other chamber deposit on the desk of their assembly a reasoned resolution for impeachment and calling the High Court to a meeting.

Therefore Anna Touve and the young Syrian woman appeal to you and urge you, Mr Deputy, kindly take the initiative. For them, yes, but for all the civilians, the wounded, the prisoners, the women, the children, the elderly, who are suffering in their flesh because of a criminal policy of boundless cynicism and utter unscupulousness that certain politicians are conducting.

I stand at your entire dispositon, to provide you with all clarifications and any details that you consider useful. I beg you to accept, Sir, the assurances of my highest consideration. 

                                        — Damien Viguier

Translator note: There are many applauding comments, e.g. “Nixon got dumped for 100 times less”

http://www.fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/12/french-lawyer-asks-every-mp-to-impeach.html

The gospel according to NATO

 

• Was Russia in Turkish airspace? NATO says “yes” according to Turkish and allies’ intelligence; US representatives say the US and allies don’t know yet. Why is NATO lying?

Here is the transcript and video of the press conference with NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg.
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/events_67375.htm

Here is the press conference with Col. Steve Warren.
http://www.c-span.org/video/?401224-1/defense-department-briefing-military-operations-isis

Here is the later press conference with Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook
http://www.c-span.org/video/?401225-1/defense-department-briefing

Also, the press conference by Presidents Obama and Hollande, where they also answered questions on the Turkish action:
http://www.c-span.org/video/?401211-1/president-obama-joint-news-conference-french-president-francois-hollande

Pentagon spokesman Cook said several times including at 14:00 – “the US and several other allies are not able to conclude definitively” that the Russian jet went into Turkish air space. He said the report of going into Turkish airspace is from Turkey. “We are still gathering the details to find out exactly what happened here.”

President Obama said the U.S. doesn’t know yet.

Both Col. Warren and Mr. Cook state that they are still evaluating data. Col. Warren says it is not easy.

But, NATO’s Stoltenberg says

The Allied assessments we have got from several Allies during the day are consistent with information we have been provided with from Turkey. So the information we have from other Allies is consistent with what we have got from Turkey.

So who are the allies Stoltenberg is referring to? Is he lying?

• Secretary General Stoltenberg on the NATO club: “We support the territorial integrity of Turkey”…but not Syria

At 30:36, Col. Warren says, “All aircraft should respect the sovereignty of nations around them, absolutely. “

Oops. He didn’t mean that. The US, France and other partners are continually violating the sovereignty of Syria and other countries. Only NATO club members get territorial integrity. They can invade anyone outside the club because non-members don’t have territorial integrity according to them.

• Solidarity with Turkey…or solidarity with ISIS/Daesh

Turkey’s alliances with Daesh are well known. Connections with Daesh/ISIS go all the way to the top. Plus, Turkey has stolen Syrian manufacturing infrastructure, transported it across its border, and reassembled it in Turkey. Smuggled Syrian and Iraqi oil is going to Turkey, across Turkey’s open border. So, solidarity with Turkey is solidarity with ISIS, pure and simple.

Of course, NATO members are also up to their elbows in Daesh/ISIS. They supply, advise, arm, and protect their mafia. It’s a family affair, after all.

• Obama says Turkey has a right to defend its airspace. Doesn’t Syria?

Turkey has rights and Syria has no rights.

Peter Cook: “The United States and NATO support the right of Turkey to defend its airspace and sovereignty.”…”As a NATO ally, they have a right to defend NATO airspace.”

NATO has rights, but no one outside NATO does, like Libya or Yemen or Iraq or eastern Ukraine. That is how Messrs. Obama, Stoltenberg, Hollande, et al see it.

Is NATO airspace something holy, inviolate, sacrosanct, and righteous? No, it’s pure bullshit. However, this chilling predatory worldview is held by the people that control our countries and our militaries, including the United States.

Syria has every right to defend its airspace by any means necessary including enlisting the aid of other countries to help them do so. It can defend its sovereignty and attack anyone who enters its territory and airspace without its express permission.

• US has no control over its mercenaries

The attacks on Russian pilots and rescue helicopter were done by US-trained mercenaries (“moderates”). In answer to a question on that, Col. Steve Warren said (11:50), “US control of its [mercenary] forces ends when they cross over into Syria.”

So, the Pentagon has no control over US-trained mercenaries once they cross the Syrian border. These mercenaries are wind-up assassins. And it was American-made TOW missiles that those mercenaries may have used to shoot down the Russian helicopter. Wind up these mercenaries, give them lots of weapons, boost them over the territorial border of another sovereign country, and let them run free.

Now that’s sensible, moral, and responsible foreign policy.

• The NATO press conference came to an abrupt end.

Perhaps the questions were getting too uncomfortable for Secretary General Stoltenberg.

NOTE: These press conferences have many very useful quotes.

Will Nuland’s Nazis push the world into war?

From Executive Intelligence Review, February 20, 2015
by Jeffrey Steinberg

Feb. 17—As of midnight on Feb. 15, a ceasefire went into force in eastern Ukraine. The deal that was hammered out among Russian President Vladimir Putin, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President François Hollande, and Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko—i.e., without the direct involvement of the Obama Administration and the U.K. government—after 17 hours of non-stop negotiations in Minsk last week, is fragile, to say the least.

 

The immediate danger lies with an identifiable force—the neo-Nazi militias who are an integral part of the Kiev government, which came to power one year ago in a Nazi-driven coup d’état. Those Nazis are acting as protected assets of the Obama Administration, specifically Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland.

 

These neo-Nazi forces have officially rejected the ceasefire. The battalions they control in southeastern Ukraine are not fully under the control of the central government in Kiev, but are armed by Ukraine’s “oligarchs”—big businessmen such as Dnepropetrovsk Governor Ihor Kolomoysky. They are the offshoot of the Bandera movement, which was fascist in its own right even before World War II, then welcomed Hitler’s invasion of Ukraine and carried out atrocities against the people of Ukraine and Poland that should have landed them in the dock at the Nuremberg war crimes tribunal. Instead, they were recruited by British and American intelligence services for the Cold War against the Soviet Union.

 

The neo-Nazi representatives within the government in Kiev are also out to sabotage any peace agreement. According to Russian media, former Commandant of the Maidan and current First Deputy Speaker of the Ukrainian parliament (the Supreme Rada) Andriy Parubiy is coming to Washington this week. A cofounder of the neo-Nazi Svoboda party and of one of the paramilitary groups that became the Right Sector spearhead of the February 2014 coup, Parubiy today is a leader in the People’s Front, the political party of the man Victoria Nuland hand-picked as Ukraine’s post-coup prime minister, Arseniy Yatsenyuk.

 

Speaking Feb. 14 on Ukrainian TV, Parubiy announced the purpose of the trip: to get weapons. He said that Ukraine needs to strengthen its armed Forces and get “the USA to give us highly precise modern weaponry.” He added,

 

“Next week I am going to the United States, to discuss this in a very concrete and targeted way.”

 

The possibility that the U.S. would arm Ukraine—a move Moscow would see as an act of war—is precisely what impelled the leaders of France and Germany to work frenetically to get a ceasefire in Ukraine. It would be a step to World War III.

 

The Rush for a Ceasefire

 

President Hollande and Chancellor Merkel saw the Minsk talks as existential. They agreed that, if there were no diplomatic breakthrough, the Obama Administration would begin arming the Ukrainian military and this would escalate the crisis. Over the past weeks, more and more strategic analysts and policymakers have come to view the Ukraine crisis as a potential trigger for thermonuclear war between the United States and Russia. Articles headlining the danger have appeared in Germany’s Der Spiegel and even Britain’s Daily Telegraph.

 

The specter of a war of annihilation starting in the center of Europe was a powerful incentive for Merkel and Hollande to team up to preempt the U.S. weapons flows by the last-ditch diplomacy.

 

On the eve of the Minsk talks, Chancellor Merkel flew to Washington on Feb. 9 to confer with President Obama. She delivered a blunt message, according to German and American sources. First, she told the President that Europe was adamantly opposed to the U.S. arming the Ukrainian Army. Second, she told Obama that the lack of a direct dialogue between him and Russian President Putin was putting the world at risk. Only the leaders of the two nations with the thermonuclear arsenals that could destroy the planet could be the ultimate guarantors of mankind’s survival. They had to resume a direct, personal dialogue, Merkel insisted.

 

Her admonition appears to have had some impact. On Feb. 11, on the eve of the Minsk talks, Obama called Putin, and the two men had a 90-minute conversation, the content of which has been kept secret. According to Spiegel Online, which published a detailed account of Merkel’s and Hollande’s diplomatic efforts, the mere fact that the phone call took place demonstrated that Washington was deeply interested in the outcome of the Minsk talks.

 

At one point in the marathon diplomatic session, according to the Spiegel account, Putin, in private, spoke by phone to the heads of the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics (DPR and LPR). He secured their agreement to the ceasefire terms. In addition, Kremlin aide Vladislav Surkov shuttled between the Hollande-Merkel-Poroshenko-Putin meeting and the Minsk contact group, which also met through the night at another location in Minsk (because Poroshenko refused to speak with the DPR/LPR delegation directly). It was the contact group, consisting of Alexander Zakharchenko (DPR), Igor Plotnitsky (LPR), Ukrainian ex-President Leonid Kuchma, Russian Ambassador to Kiev Mikhail Zurabov, and OSCE negotiator Heidi Tagliavini, who actually signed the 10-point Minsk accord.

 

In the previous months of renewed fighting in eastern Ukraine, after the September 2014 ceasefire broke down, the DPR/LPR forces captured an additional belt of territory, especially within the Donetsk Region, as they moved to push the Kiev battalions out of the range from which they could shell Donetsk and other cities. While the Minsk talks were proceeding, the DPR/LPR militias had nearly encircled 6,000 to 8,000 Ukrainians in the town of Debaltseve, the major rail junction between Donetsk and Lugansk. With growing defections, collapsing morale, and widespread draft evasion, the Ukraine Armed Forces were already at a break-point. For Merkel and Hollande, the idea of arming such a disintegrating army was a grave mistake, reflecting a lack of understanding of the reality of the Ukraine crisis in official Washington.

 

The Nuland Factor

 

Indeed, the policy of the Obama Administration towards Ukraine and Russia has been hijacked from day one by a collection of neo-conservatives and humanitarian interventionist ideologues—led by Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland. The wife of neo-con Robert Kagan, Nuland served as a foreign policy advisor to then-Vice President Dick Cheney, before being appointed as the Bush Administration’s Ambassador to NATO.

 

Nuland publicly boasted that the U.S. had poured $5 billion into the “democracy” movement in Ukraine since the end of the Cold War, and she made clear, in an infamous taped phone call in January 2014, that the man who is now Ukrainian Prime Minister, Yatsenyuk, was owned by Washington. She is responsible for covering up the powerful role of the Banderite Nazis in the Maidan coup and the conflict in eastern Ukraine.

 

Nuland’s current role in sabotaging efforts for peace was highlighted in a Feb. 15 article in Germany’s Der Spiegel, entitled “America’s Riot Diplomat.”[1] The column stated that Nuland poses a threat to America’s allies, and that while she is supposed to solve the crisis of Ukraine and relations with Russia, “in the crisis, Nuland herself has become the problem.”

 

Der Spiegel described a closed-door meeting, apparently reported anonymously both to it and to the Bild newspaper, held by Nuland at the Munich Security Conference one week ago, with “perhaps two dozen U.S. diplomats and Senators.” There Nuland gave instructions to “fight against the Europeans” on the issue of arming Ukraine to fight Russia. She was described as referring “bitterly” to the German Chancellor’s and French President’s meeting with President Putin as “Merkel’s Moscow junk,” and “Moscow bullshit,” and she welcomed a Senator’s calling German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen the “Defeatism Minister.”

 

These reports give the lie to Nuland’s claim on the morning of Feb. 11, when the Minsk Agreement was announced, that “we [the United States] enthusiastically support it.”

 

Der Spiegel says that Nuland does not stop short of calling for “heavy weapons” to be given by NATO to Ukraine.

 

Raising the Alarm

 

In a statement issued on Feb. 14, Lyndon LaRouche warned that the war danger would persist until Nuland was fired and her links to hardcore Banderite Nazis exposed publicly (see box).

 

The larger threat of thermonuclear war, stemming from the Ukraine crisis, was a dominant theme behind the scenes at the annual Munich Security Conference. On the eve of that meeting, three national security specialists, former U.S. Sen. Sam Nunn (D-Ga.), former Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, and former British Secretary of State for Defence Des Browne, wrote an op-ed calling for an overhaul of the Euro-Atlantic security architecture, with an inclusive role for Russia.

 

The same view was echoed in two other high-visibility venues. On Feb. 11, Jack Matlock, who was President Reagan’s ambassador to the Soviet Union during the closing days of the Cold War, told a packed audience at the National Press Club in Washington that the West had violated some of the most essential agreements with Moscow, those which had allowed for the peaceful demise of the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union, and that the danger of a world war was grave (see transcript in this Feature).

 

Two days later, Markus Becker, writing about the Munich Security Conference in Spiegel Online, warned that the “Threat of War Is Higher than in the Cold War.” He presented some of the same arguments as the Nunn-Ivanov-Browne article.

 

Unless LaRouche’s demand for Nuland’s ouster is acted upon swiftly, the chances of the neo-Nazis in Ukraine wrecking the fragile peace are immense. Nuland’s ouster must be followed by the agreement among governments to disqualify and remove the Nazi elements now running rampant, and participating in government, in Ukraine. This demand has been raised repeatedly by the Russian government, and by LaRouche.

 

If the cycle of violence in eastern Ukraine resumes full-force, the prospects of escalation into a direct Russia-U.S. military confrontation are very high.

 

Richard Burt, who was one of the chief U.S. arms control negotiators with the Soviets, told Spiegel Online (Feb. 9) that the danger of nuclear war is very great. “Both American and Russian nuclear arms are essentially on a kind of hair-trigger alert. Both sides have a nuclear posture where land-based missiles could be authorized for use in less than 15 minutes.” He acknowledged that the kind of “hybrid warfare” now underway in eastern Ukraine adds greatly to the danger of miscalculation into thermonuclear confrontation. Former Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov concurred, telling Spiegel, “Now the threat of a war is higher than during the Cold War.”

 

It must be understood, in addition, that the primary driver for war is the bankruptcy of the trans-Atlantic financial system, centered in London and Wall Street. The desperation of financier circles over the looming doom of their system and the collapse of their political power is driving the war danger. As Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has observed in recent statements, if there had been no Ukraine crisis, some circles in the West would have created one—to deal with the larger collapse they are facing.

Source:
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2015/4208nuland_nazis_world_war.html

[1] Der Spiegel article is here (in German):
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/victoria-nuland-barack-obamas-problem-diplomatin-a-1017614.html