Complaint: Syria Solidarity UK at Amnesty event


Blairite labour MP's

Image via:

From: Robert Stuart

Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 7:23 PM

Subject: Complaint: Syria Solidarity UK at Amnesty event

Dear Louise

Thank you for speaking briefly with me at the Amnesty Refugees Welcome Autumn Fayre in Islington on Saturday.

I was startled to hear your MC refer to the “revolution in Syria”. Do you not feel that “a largely Sunni Islam uprising, dominated by Sunni extremists who are armed and funded from the heartland of religious extremism, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and their paymaster the United States” [1] might approach a more accurate description of events in Syria since 2011?

I was then appalled to discover that the speaker being introduced was a representative of Syria Solidarity UK [2], an organisation which “appears to support all the al Qaeda aligned armed groups” [3] in Syria.

This speaker stated as fact the unproven – not to say thoroughly debunked [4] – claim that the Syrian government has used chemical weapons and called upon the audience to support the illegal violation of Syrian air space with “humanitarian” aid-drops. As has often been observed, the notion that the Syrian government can prevent food, but cannot prevent armaments and munitions, from entering areas held by militant groups rather illustrates the dubiety of the former claim.

Your MC then publicly congratulated the speaker on her “call to arms” – a figure of speech, of course, but one which was thoroughly justified by the blood and thunder rhetoric to which the assembly on Islington Green had just been subjected.

Yours sincerely

Robert Stuart



———————————————SYRIA EYE WITNESS————————————————-

Subject: Re: Complaint: Syria Solidarity UK at Amnesty event
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 07:10:51 +0200

Dear Mr. Stuart and Ms. Orton,

As an eye witness to the entire war in Syria, from March 2011 to present, I can state this was no revolution.  I am an American citizen living permanently in Syria, which is my husband’s birthplace.  I have been here 24 years.

A real revolution would have the support of the people, inside Syria, not Syrian living in Paris and London for the past 40 years.  To have a real grassroots uprising, you need the support of the people living inside Syria, who would share your views.

If it had been a real uprising/revolution, the whole process could have taken 3-6 months, because the Army would have followed the will of the people, given the fact the Syrian Army is made up of Syrians of all ethnic and religious sects.   The Syrian Army is a true representative of the Syrian population.  If the population wanted the goals stated by the ‘protesters’, which was to  establish Islamic law in Syria, and to abolish the current secular government, the Army would have eventually followed along, expressing the will of the people.

However, you had a small minority in the Syrian population who were for regime change, but this very small group was backed by USA, UK, NATO, EU, and the Arab Gulf Monarchies.   Money talks, as we say in America.

Yes, Syria is home to many Radical Islamic ideology followers, as is UK, USA and Europe.  However, their numbers are still in the minority.  In a democracy, the majority rule.  The Syrian opposition does include non-Islamist political people, mainly communists and other secular thinkers, but those people have never held a gun, and have never advocated violence, destruction or armed revolution.  It has been strictly the Radical Islamic ideology  followers who have supported armed rebellion.  Because their numbers were, and are still, so small comparing to the rest of the 20 million Syrians, they never had a chance to win, and can not win on the ground.  Their ‘revolution’ has just been an attack on the unarmed  civilian population who do not agree with them.

We are hoping that a peaceful negotiated settlement, with positive changes and reforms, can be made through joint talks between the UN, and both sides of the Syrian conflict.  This is our chance for peace.

Finally, this morning Sept 14, 2016 on the BBC they announced a UK Members of Parliament commission, studying the role of the UK in the war in Libya, had concluded the UK role was wrong, shameful and  “opportunistic, and for regime change”.  Meaning, the UK under PM Cameron should not have participated in the NATO and US attack on Libya, which was not a humanitarian effort, but an ‘opportunistic attack for regime change’, as stated on BCC.  This is the same story of Syria.   Perhaps in 5 years time, we may watch BBC announcing a UK Parliament commission, studying the UK role in the death and destruction in Syria.  My question to myself, and all others: Why can’t we study these types of decisions BEFORE we commit to destroying lives and countries abroad?  I said this question out-loud at the breakfast table this morning, and my son who is an MBA graduate, answered back, “Mom, because UK always takes their  orders from USA, regardless of the consequences”.   That view should be the  focus of every UK citizen and politician, on how UK can stand alone, and make decisions in the future which benefit UK, and not follow USA blindly, down a road of regret.

Best regards,

Lilly Martin




Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.