Doc's Talk: MG Vallely meets with Syrian Opposition Leaders

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

MG Vallely meets with Syrian Opposition Leaders

Scott W. Winchell

Does anyone really know what is going on in Syria? Who are the combatants? Who is supporting the regime, both internally and externally? Who is supporting the opponents of the regime of Bashar al-Assad? Where is aid actually going and why?

With so much conflicting information, it’s very hard for anyone, including our own intelligence and diplomatic services to understand the composition of the ‘freedom fighters’, their needs, and the forces they face, internally and externally.

MG Paul E. Vallely, US Army (Ret.)

One thing we do know, there are parties here in the US and in other capitols that have the ear of the administrations and have vested interests in the region. However, these are not the interests of the people on the ground actually fighting.

The Syrian National Council (SNC) has a PR firm working for them, but not for the true freedom fighters. A man named Ausma Monajed speaks and lobbies for the SNC, but who lobbies for the people on the ground?

Due to the fact that these questions, ones the State Department, the White House, the Armed Services Committee, and others cannot or will not answer, MG Paul E. Vallely, US Army (ret.) and his team accepted an invitation to go on a fact finding mission to the region to see this first hand, and they just returned on Friday, June 30.

With the team’s long and robust relationship in the Middle East, they met with key leaders of Syrian opposition forces at the border of Turkey and Syria, and toured the area.

SUA was able to glean much information on the Syrian struggle from the team, including the political situation in Turkey and in the entire region. It is with this type of information that SUA ensures that policy makers listen, they will prevent taking the wrong path diplomatically, and committing the same mistakes seen in Libya and Egypt.

It is also apparent now, that the opposition forces certainly have a voice now, heretofore deprived of them in the halls of power. That voice is MG Vallely.

MG Vallely staying cool near the border in Hatay Province

The trip was arranged by the Syrian Revolution.

They asked the General to accompany them to Turkey to see and hear firsthand, to meet with those without voices, and to offer guidance in achieving aid for the people.

Once in Antakya, Turkey they were interviewed by Turkish, and other regional media outlets as the first private team to come to the region to research and evaluate the situation inside Syria. They also visited a refugee camp in Hatay Province near Antakya.

A tour was arranged to bring the team to the border (See Video #1) to talk with the leaders of the freedom fighters and determine what they needed, and what the facts were regarding the struggle; to learn just who is who inside the opposition forces.

Now they are trusted friends.

Leaders from Homs and Idlib came across the border that day specifically to meet the General and his team at their own peril. There were also leaders from other locations inside the battle zones of Syria among the more than 40 leaders who attended, including the Mayor.

These leaders were predominantly from the Syrian Liberation Army (SLA) and the Free Syrian Army (FSA). There is a distinction, one the world seems to overlook. SUA asks why? More on this later.

Initially, they openly expressed amazement that this man, a retired general would risk so much to come and see them; to listen to them, as a private citizen of the USA. They were very adamant about this point because he was the first private American to come see them, and they expressed a great distrust of Americans prior.

They were quickly endeared and ready to talk for hours, and they did. A meeting area was set up, and Vallely and Qdemati answered their questions and spoke of what most of America thinks. They also listened, a new thing for these leaders: to be listened too. (See Video #2 below)

They described their plight and their plans for an emerging Syria, one without Assad and his thugs in charge any longer. They also described that the Sunnis are united, and al Qaeda is not helping them. They know there is much misinformation out in the public, and they are incensed that their message is not being heard, or even cultivated. It is also clear to them, that others are getting credit for their deeds, yet they get no help. They know they do not have those kinds of connections in DC and the UN.

Nagi Najjar, MG Vallely, Sam Qdemati dine at a safe house on the border with Syrian opposition leadership

They do know at this time though; that they must work together for the time being to erase the current regime, then tackle their permanent future despite their differences.

They are deeply saddened, that no one is consulting them about their future, as if they are children in need of direction from other world leaders and the UN. The world is ignoring the 20 million Sunnis of Syria. Kofi Annan is not respected, nor liked. They distrust the UN and its leadership.

The Sunnis described the carnage and attacks as an attempt at ‘ethnic cleansing’ mainly in the Lattakia province in the Kurdish mountains where the regime forces are clearing 12 Sunni villages. They are systematically being expunged from their ancestral homes in a most heinous fashion by Shiites and their allies (Including Alawites who are Shiia).

They explained that soon, when times of last resort arrive, they know chemical weapons will be used and they know where they are. The problem is, they possess almost no defensive equipment for such an eventuality, and are woefully deficient in medicines, food, and other logistics just to survive.

They described a need for securing pathways for humanitarian aid to be provided along the Turkish border. To this end, MG Vallely gave them a tactical plan on how to establish and secure these pathways with the aid of the Turks and other supporters.

They asked Vallely to spread the word, to be their voice in America. A confidence and trust developed, one that opened a line of communication, and the dialogue now continues. Vallely pledged to continue to spread their voice, now for world leaders to actually listen.

In addition to the insight on Syria, MG Vallely and his team evaluated the political climate in Turkey as well. They spoke with the common people in their homes. What they heard was not a surprise, but it validated previous inquiries.

MG Vallely has constituted a detailed report and pledged to bring their voices to leadership in the US, to offset that of the powerful Middle Eastern interests, like those who have worked for, and have the ear of the White House. More on this to follow as well.

VIDEO #1 – MG Vallely and team traverse an Olive grove to meet opposition leadership on the Syria/Turkey border

IMG 0087

VIDEO #2 – MG Vallely addresses leaders of the FSA and SLA freedom fighters on the border in Turkey

IMG 0098

--
Scott W. Winchell

National Editor-In-Chief;
Stand Up America US

Managing Director;
Scott Vallely Soldiers Memorial Fund

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk