\tIl y a deux et trois jours, les traces sans doute innombrables et certainement accusatrices d’explosions d’obus de chars sur les lieux du massacre de Houla \u00e9taient la preuve irr\u00e9futable de la culpabilit\u00e9 du gouvernement syrien. C’\u00e9tait, sinon la th\u00e8se officielle du bloc BAO, du moins le badigeonnage rationnel et universel de la r\u00e9action de l’hyst\u00e9rie en mode turbo<\/em> : un massacre \u00e0 l’obus de char, ce qui ne peut \u00eatre que du syrien officiel Cette version a compl\u00e8tement disparu puisqu’il s’av\u00e8re que la plupart des victimes du massacre l’ont \u00e9t\u00e9 par des tirs \u00e0 bout portant par balles, et surtout par des s\u00e9vices plus traditionnels de tel ou tel groupe (\u00e9gorgements, d\u00e9capitations, coups et blessures multiples, etc.).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tC’est sur de telles assertions extr\u00eamement changeantes et volatiles, \u00e0 propos desquelles rien d’assur\u00e9 n’est prouv\u00e9 puisqu’une enqu\u00eate approfondie de l’ONU a \u00e9t\u00e9 ordonn\u00e9e et doit \u00eatre conduite, qu’une mesure diplomatique aussi grave que l’expulsion des ambassadeurs de Syrie a \u00e9t\u00e9 prise par plusieurs pays du bloc BAO. Une telle l\u00e9g\u00e8ret\u00e9 dans l’exercice de ce qu’il y a beaucoup de peine \u00e0 continuer \u00e0 nommer diplomatie est la preuve, irr\u00e9futable elle, que l’hyst\u00e9rie assortie de la panique devant l’empire d’une communication enti\u00e8rement orient\u00e9e dans le sens qu’on sait, en sont \u00e9videmment la matrice.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tAu reste, et puisqu’il est question de preuves pour \u00e9tayer ces d\u00e9cisions capitales de l’expulsion d’ambassadeurs, on rappellera que la principale de ces preuves est le t\u00e9moignage d’un jeune gar\u00e7on de 11 ans, dans des conditions de surveillance et de discipline qui font honneur \u00e0 ses \u00e9ducateurs. Le Guardian<\/em>, qui l’est de la v\u00e9rit\u00e9 (Gardien de la v\u00e9rit\u00e9), est le principal pourvoyeur de la preuve. Patrick Henningsen, de Infowars<\/em>, revient sur le fait, ce 29 mai 2012<\/a>, et il est \u00e9vident, comme le mentionne Henningsen, que cette soupe \u00e9quivaut, en valeur journalistique, aux preuves grotesques accumul\u00e9es par les neocons<\/em> pour justifier en 2002-2003 l’attaque de l’Irak, et que d\u00e9non\u00e7ait furieusement et vertueusement le susdit Guardian<\/em> C’est bien la preuve, solide celle-l\u00e0, que le drame qui se d\u00e9roule depuis 2001 et 9\/11 n’est pas le fait d’un homme (Bush), d’un groupe (les neocons<\/em>), mais bien d’une communaut\u00e9 enti\u00e8re, d’une direction politique g\u00e9n\u00e9rale avec ses adjoints de show<\/em> de la communication, qui repr\u00e9sentent le bloc BAO, principal ex\u00e9cutant du Syst\u00e8me et moteur de la contre-civilisation en voie d’autodestruction<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abIn the case of<\/em> Syrian boy<\/em><\/strong>, The Guardian Newspaper claims to have contacted the boy through a town elder who also happens to be a member of the Syrian Revolutionary Council, and is now caring for him in their protective custody. After page upon page of spinning a conclusion as to who is responsible for the killings, the Guardian quietly squeezes in the admission that: We are unable to independently verify the account and have chosen not to name the boy for security reasons.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbWhen pressed how he could actually confirm what forces actually committed this massacre, quite cannily for a 11 year old child, he changed his tact: Throughout a 15-minute conversation, the boy remained calm and detached until he was pressed on how he knew the gunmen were pro-regime militia men, known as al-Shabiha. The irregular forces have been widely accused by residents of Houla of entering homes and slaughtering families. At least 32 of the dead are children and many of them appear to have been killed at close range. Why are you asking me who they were? I know who they were. We all know it. They were the regime army and people who fight with them. That is true.’<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tUn article de Russia Today<\/em>, qui s’impose aujourd’hui comme une des rares sources acceptables des grands m\u00e9dias, d\u00e9crit l’\u00e9tat actuel des consid\u00e9rations d’identifications du massacre, ce 29 mai 2012<\/a>. Nous en sommes donc \u00e0 un massacre qui se serait fait en au moins deux massacres, peut-\u00eatre plus, qui n’est plus celui d’un carpet shelling<\/em> de chars (seuls les am\u00e9ricanistes savent faire, la tactique du tapis), mais plut\u00f4t le cas de diverses interventions qu’on a voulues r\u00e9unir en une<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abThe UN High Commissioner for Human rights Rupert Colville said Tuesday that under 20 of 108 killed in the attack can be attributed to artillery and tank fire, Reuters cites him as saying. \u00ab\u00a0What is very clear is this was an absolutely abominable event that took place in Houla, and at least a substantial part of it was summary executions of civilians, women and children,\u00a0\u00bb Colville told reporters in Geneva. \u00ab\u00a0At this point, it looks like entire families were shot in their houses,\u00a0\u00bb the agency reports.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tQui sont les coupables ? La chose est ouverte, avec le choix des explications et des identifications \u00abSurvivors told UN monitors at the scene that the score of door to door killings which left 49 children and 39 women dead, were carried out by pro-government Shabbiya militia forces. Other eyewitnesses have pinned the blame on rebel fighters, claiming the attacks were retribution for those who refused to take up arms against government forces.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tSans doute l’aspect le plus int\u00e9ressant de l’article de RT est le t\u00e9moignage recueilli par la station de t\u00e9l\u00e9vision aupr\u00e8s d’Alastair Crooke. Identifi\u00e9 comme ancien officier britannique du renseignement, ou MI6 (il fut aussi diplomate du Foreign Office), Crooke est aussi un ancien conseiller principal de Javier Solana lorsque ce dernier dirigeait la diplomatie europ\u00e9enne. Crooke a quitt\u00e9 volontairement son poste parce qu’il avait des positions et des jugements qui ne correspondaient pas aux normes de la maison, que ce soit des \u00e9l\u00e9ments neocons<\/em> de la Commission europ\u00e9enne comme l’Anglais Cooper, que ce soit de la bureaucratie en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral, que ce soit des influences ext\u00e9rieures type-Isra\u00ebl. Depuis, Crooke<\/a> est intall\u00e9 \u00e0 Beyrouth o\u00f9 il dirige le Conflicts Forum. (Certains services europ\u00e9ens de politique ext\u00e9rieure, lorsqu’ils \u00e9chappent aux influences mentionn\u00e9es, font encore appel \u00e0 lui comme consultant, ou conf\u00e9rencier ext\u00e9rieur, \u00e0 cause de son expertise, de son exp\u00e9rience et de son jugement remarquables sur la situation de la r\u00e9gion.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abWhile the investigation into the Houla massacre is ongoing, former British intelligence officer Alastair Crooke told RT these attacks are not characteristic of the cultural region to which Syria belongs. This type of killing, beheadings, slitting of throats (of children too), and of this mutilation of bodies, has been a characteristic not of Levantine Islam, not of Syria, not of Lebanon, but what happened in the Anbar province of Iraq. And so it seems to point very much in the direction of groups that have been associated with the war in Iraq against the United States who have perhaps returned to Syria, or perhaps Iraqis who have come up from Anbar to take part in it, he says.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbCrooke believes the Al-Qaeda connection is misleading, as the massacre has its tactical and ideological roots in the Iraq war. I think the attack is more close to Musab al-Zarqawi<\/em> [who declared an all out war on Shia in Iraq<\/em>], than Al-Qaeda as we know it, in the sense that Zarqawi and Iraq gave birth to this very strong, bigoted, anti-Shia, anti-Iranian rhetoric. Much of that came into Syria when fighters from Anbar returned to their homes around Homs and Hama. So yes, we’re talking about Al-Qaeda like groups that are at the very end of the spectrum of the opposition. They may be a minority in terms of the numbers of the overall opposition, but they are defining the war, Crooke maintains.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n