Jeremy F Kreuz
Dagobah Resident
That is what he says, but in the video just a box of vitamins is shown. They dont show the supposed hidden drugs underneath it.
DPR denies “Doctors without borders” accreditation because of espionage
- Thread starter Jeremy F Kreuz
- Start date
That is what he says, but in the video just a box of vitamins is shown. They dont show the supposed hidden drugs underneath it.
Jeremy F Kreuz said:
Yeah, in animals Aminazin often used as tranquilizer, sedation before transportation to another location. In humans with serious psychological problems it is used as a strong calming agent. But in the video you can see also other drugs with names not in Ukrainian or Russian.
Jeremy F Kreuz said:
Have no idea about their intentions, but incorrect storage can be definitely used as a good and legal excuse to either cause trouble or even close the place. Also notice in the video that they suspect that all these drugs reached Ukraine under a pretense of "diplomatic package", meaning, it wasn't checked by customs, etc.
Another thing to consider that Ukraine is known for its drug market of faked or stolen medicaments. Meaning, that I often hear from vet doctors here that they complain about the quality, and the response they get, "what did you expect, it came from Ukraine". So people know that they should be careful, as there and also in Russia there is a flourishing business of contraband drugs from unknown origin. On the other hand, some things you can get only in Ukraine. So maybe there was something going on, or they suspected that something was going on.
Maybe DWB wanted to do good, at least some of them, but maybe there was something going on, and this was used by whoever wants them closed. Basically, the bureaucratic machine was used against them.
Keit said:
In Russia, counterfeit drugs are most often of Asian origin. Because of the semi-open borders and free trade international agreements between Russia and a number of Asian allies, these drugs can often cross the border unchecked. And this is why Russian authorities have nothing left to do, but to counteract this counterfeit on the ground by identifying and arresting the dealers at home.
I wouldn't compare the case of Russia with Ukraine though, because Russian legislation is certainly way stricter in this respect. Here is this methadone case which I mentioned earlier, for example.
Sometimes we even have the opposite problem in Russia: many superpotent substances are forbidden in Russia, and in cases where the patient is dying of a serious condition, they actually need those substances to relief their suffering. But since those drugs are forbidden, there is a black market to meet their needs. So, I would say that there is no easy solution to this problem, as it is complex and multilevel, fwiw.
Jeremy F Kreuz
Dagobah Resident
http://novostiua.org/news/194147-okkupirovannyj_donbass_otkazalisj_ot_vrachej_bez_granits_v_interesah_ukrainskih_biznesmenov
angelburst29
The Living Force
In reading over numerous articles, I'm getting the impression NATO is behind the deprivation of accreditation for MSF in Ukraine and is working in concert with the U.S. (Kunduz hospital bombing) and with help from the Saudi's (bombing MSF in Yemeni city of Saada). NATO has mobility and connections in all these areas, including over-sight at Border check points. As for the Red Cross in Ukraine, they are another can-of-worms but I don't see them involved in any of the hospital bombings. The Red Cross, in my investigations of the organization, especially in it's role in the Katrina flooding and destruction in the U.S. are mainly a "donation scheme" to elicit funds with 10 to 15% actually making it's way to the intended purpose. As for NATO, they have "a history" of delivering "out of date" canned food and medical supplies as Humanitarian Aid. A few days ago, I came across an article of two areas in Syria that NATO had delivered food and medicine, both having expiration dates. I'm unable locate that exact article now but there have been many incidences of NATO supplying outdated humanitarian aid, even in the Ukraine. And also gave supplies to the Gaza Freedom Flotilla.
'Gaza Freedom Flotilla' aid included expired medicines, old supplies
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2010/jun/1/Gaza-Freedom-Flotilla-aid-included-expired/
But what’s not being reported by the majority of news outlets is at the very heart of the matter: if the so-called “Gaza Freedom Flotilla” activists were really so concerned with getting humanitarian aid to Gaza, why is much of the supply stock they were bringing totally unusable?
According to Israel National News, the Israeli air force checked much of the ‘aid’ inventory aboard the ships in the Port of Ashdod and found it to be in such poor shape - the stash included old equipment and expired medicines - that most of it was useless.
Humanitarian corridors in Syria: Way out of crisis or way in for invaders?
https://www.rt.com/news/syria-humanitarian-corridors-intervention-669/
A good article on the pro's and con's of humanitarian aid in Syria and why Russia became the top suppler in aid. (To keep NATO and NGO's out.)
No firsthand info on alleged Russian 'airstrike' on hospital in Syria – Red Cross top executive
https://www.rt.com/news/320046-stillhart-red-cross-hospital-russia/
Red Cross personnel on the ground in Syria have not reported any 'airstrikes' allegedly delivered by Russian jets on civilian targets including hospitals, the medical charity’s top executive told RT.
Stillhart revealed his organization had two employees at the medical facility bombed by US forces in Kunduz, saying the Red Cross “is still shocked” by the tragic attack, “even more so, because hospitals, medical facilities and health staff are protected by international humanitarian law.”
On Tuesday, the Russian Ministry of Defense summoned military attaches from NATO countries and Saudi Arabia, to clarify their countries' allegations that Russian airstrikes in Syria have hit civilian targets.
The ministry demanded the military officials “give official validation to their statements, or issue a rebuttal,” Defense Ministry deputy head Anatoly Antonov said.
The smear campaign against Russian military operating in Syria began last week, with media outlets citing reports from the London-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and the Syrian American Medical Society (SAMS) foundation based in Canfield, Ohio.
Sopel's 'Mistake'
http://medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2015/804-sick-sophistry-bbc-news-on-the-afghan-hospital-mistakenly-bombed-by-the-united-states.html
... the Pentagon perspective presented earlier by General John Campbell, the US senior commander in Afghanistan, when he claimed that: 'A hospital was mistakenly struck. We would never intentionally target a protected medical facility'.
In fact, the US has done so before, many times. In November 2004, the first target of the huge American ground assault on Fallujah, following several weeks of bombing, was the city's General Hospital. This was a 'war crime', Noam Chomsky noted, and it was even depicted on the front page of the New York Times, but without it being labelled or recognised as such by the paper: 'the front page of the world's leading newspaper was cheerfully depicting war crimes for which the political leadership could be sentenced to severe penalties under U.S. law, the death penalty if patients ripped from their beds and manacled on the floor happened to die as a result.'
Going further back in time, US veterans of the Vietnam war have reported that hospitals in Cambodia and Laos were 'routinely listed' among targets to be struck by American forces. In 1973, Newsweek magazine quoted a former US army intelligence analyst saying that: The bigger the hospital, the better it was'.
And now, in the case of the MSF hospital in Kunduz, Associated Press reported that: 'US analysts knew Afghan site was hospital'.
Moreover, it has since emerged that the American crew of the AC-130 gunship even questioned whether it was legal to attack the hospital.
Doctors Without Borders now saying the US-backed, Saudi-led coalition destroyed its hospital *in Yemen* last night
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/28/world/middleeast/doctors-without-borders-yemen-airstrikes.html
The Saudi-led coalition, which is fighting Houthi rebels, has bombed several health facilities during the seven-month war, but the airstrikes appeared to be the first time coalition warplanes had directly struck a clinic run by Doctors Without Borders.
Saudi Arabia Bombs Second Doctors Without Borders Hospital
http://www.activistpost.com/2015/10/saudi-arabia-bombs-second-doctors-without-borders-hospital.html
In early October a hospital in northern Afghanistan operated by Doctors Without Borders also suffered an attack from U.S.-led coalition forces. Twenty-two people were killed in the bombing, including 12 hospital staffers. Three of the deaths have been reported as children in the intensive care unit.
This article on Yemen uncovers Saudi-led coalitions, with the aid of US and UK, as reported by Amnesty International of possible War Crimes in indiscriminate bombings of civilian infrastructure, schools, mosques, etc.
Invisible War Crimes – The Corporate Media On Yemen
http://www.medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2015/801-invisible-war-crimes-the-corporate-media-on-yemen.html
'Gaza Freedom Flotilla' aid included expired medicines, old supplies
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2010/jun/1/Gaza-Freedom-Flotilla-aid-included-expired/
But what’s not being reported by the majority of news outlets is at the very heart of the matter: if the so-called “Gaza Freedom Flotilla” activists were really so concerned with getting humanitarian aid to Gaza, why is much of the supply stock they were bringing totally unusable?
According to Israel National News, the Israeli air force checked much of the ‘aid’ inventory aboard the ships in the Port of Ashdod and found it to be in such poor shape - the stash included old equipment and expired medicines - that most of it was useless.
Humanitarian corridors in Syria: Way out of crisis or way in for invaders?
https://www.rt.com/news/syria-humanitarian-corridors-intervention-669/
A good article on the pro's and con's of humanitarian aid in Syria and why Russia became the top suppler in aid. (To keep NATO and NGO's out.)
No firsthand info on alleged Russian 'airstrike' on hospital in Syria – Red Cross top executive
https://www.rt.com/news/320046-stillhart-red-cross-hospital-russia/
Red Cross personnel on the ground in Syria have not reported any 'airstrikes' allegedly delivered by Russian jets on civilian targets including hospitals, the medical charity’s top executive told RT.
Stillhart revealed his organization had two employees at the medical facility bombed by US forces in Kunduz, saying the Red Cross “is still shocked” by the tragic attack, “even more so, because hospitals, medical facilities and health staff are protected by international humanitarian law.”
On Tuesday, the Russian Ministry of Defense summoned military attaches from NATO countries and Saudi Arabia, to clarify their countries' allegations that Russian airstrikes in Syria have hit civilian targets.
The ministry demanded the military officials “give official validation to their statements, or issue a rebuttal,” Defense Ministry deputy head Anatoly Antonov said.
The smear campaign against Russian military operating in Syria began last week, with media outlets citing reports from the London-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and the Syrian American Medical Society (SAMS) foundation based in Canfield, Ohio.
Sopel's 'Mistake'
http://medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2015/804-sick-sophistry-bbc-news-on-the-afghan-hospital-mistakenly-bombed-by-the-united-states.html
... the Pentagon perspective presented earlier by General John Campbell, the US senior commander in Afghanistan, when he claimed that: 'A hospital was mistakenly struck. We would never intentionally target a protected medical facility'.
In fact, the US has done so before, many times. In November 2004, the first target of the huge American ground assault on Fallujah, following several weeks of bombing, was the city's General Hospital. This was a 'war crime', Noam Chomsky noted, and it was even depicted on the front page of the New York Times, but without it being labelled or recognised as such by the paper: 'the front page of the world's leading newspaper was cheerfully depicting war crimes for which the political leadership could be sentenced to severe penalties under U.S. law, the death penalty if patients ripped from their beds and manacled on the floor happened to die as a result.'
Going further back in time, US veterans of the Vietnam war have reported that hospitals in Cambodia and Laos were 'routinely listed' among targets to be struck by American forces. In 1973, Newsweek magazine quoted a former US army intelligence analyst saying that: The bigger the hospital, the better it was'.
And now, in the case of the MSF hospital in Kunduz, Associated Press reported that: 'US analysts knew Afghan site was hospital'.
Moreover, it has since emerged that the American crew of the AC-130 gunship even questioned whether it was legal to attack the hospital.
Doctors Without Borders now saying the US-backed, Saudi-led coalition destroyed its hospital *in Yemen* last night
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/28/world/middleeast/doctors-without-borders-yemen-airstrikes.html
The Saudi-led coalition, which is fighting Houthi rebels, has bombed several health facilities during the seven-month war, but the airstrikes appeared to be the first time coalition warplanes had directly struck a clinic run by Doctors Without Borders.
Saudi Arabia Bombs Second Doctors Without Borders Hospital
http://www.activistpost.com/2015/10/saudi-arabia-bombs-second-doctors-without-borders-hospital.html
In early October a hospital in northern Afghanistan operated by Doctors Without Borders also suffered an attack from U.S.-led coalition forces. Twenty-two people were killed in the bombing, including 12 hospital staffers. Three of the deaths have been reported as children in the intensive care unit.
This article on Yemen uncovers Saudi-led coalitions, with the aid of US and UK, as reported by Amnesty International of possible War Crimes in indiscriminate bombings of civilian infrastructure, schools, mosques, etc.
Invisible War Crimes – The Corporate Media On Yemen
http://www.medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2015/801-invisible-war-crimes-the-corporate-media-on-yemen.html
Here is a new article which quotes Zakharchenko (in Russian) _http://antifashist.com/item/zaharchenko-specsluzhby-zapada-pronikayut-v-dnr-pod-vidom-gumanitarnyh-organizacij.html
Zakharchenko said during a press-conference that western secret services work on the territory of DNR under the cover of humanitarian organisations. Last year two spies, members of a humanitarian organisation, were arrested and sent back to US. Zakharchenko notices that the most medicines come from Russia and not from humanitarian organisations. "How can we trust people who allegedly offer humanitarian aid and at the same time spy on the positions of our military?", he says-
For me it makes sense: we know that western secret services with high probability use NGOs as cover for their subversive activity in Russia. Why can't they use humanitarian organisations for the same purpose, especially in war zones?
Zakharchenko said during a press-conference that western secret services work on the territory of DNR under the cover of humanitarian organisations. Last year two spies, members of a humanitarian organisation, were arrested and sent back to US. Zakharchenko notices that the most medicines come from Russia and not from humanitarian organisations. "How can we trust people who allegedly offer humanitarian aid and at the same time spy on the positions of our military?", he says-
For me it makes sense: we know that western secret services with high probability use NGOs as cover for their subversive activity in Russia. Why can't they use humanitarian organisations for the same purpose, especially in war zones?
Altair said:
NGO's and humanitarian organizations are pretty much the same. It's just that some are fronts for government operations. Doctor's Without Borders US arm at least has some questionable connections. It was established by Richard Rockefeller, David Rockefeller's son, who had an interest in using psychotropic substances (MDMA) to treat trauma. And while it doesn't have direct ties to big pharma, it does have financial backing from Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, Google, Microsoft, Bloomberg, Mitt Romney's Bain Capital, and so on. While I think it's pretty likely that most of the doctors working on the ground are sincere and trying to help people in war torn areas, it wouldn't surprise me there would be some covert operations involved.
There was a story on Sott that explains how this was done in North Korea:
US Christian charity used as front for espionage program in North Korea
It could be possible that Doctors Without Borders just got caught in the cross fire so to speak, and a different organization was responsible. But I also think such a decision to remove them wouldn't have been made lightly given their dire need for medical services either.
Jeremy F Kreuz
Dagobah Resident
Please not that this is one French member of the organisation saying this. In the official Press release MSF is not accusing anybody, stating that they do not know who did the bombing. The Russian media is quoting the official statement correctly.
http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20160216/1034852678/russia-syria-turkey-hospital-shelling.html
And the russians see clearly through the game the MSM is playing, by abusing MSF for its own purposes. this is the spokeperson of the Russian Ministery of Defense
https://www.rt.com/news/332626-russia-msf-hospital-turkey/
Within the French Branch of MSF there seems to be a hard core of Russian haters that have taken this opportunity to use the name of the organizations for its own purposes.
angelburst29
The Living Force
The Latest: Syria Accuses Alliance of Striking Hospital
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/latest-test-syrian-commitment-deliver-aid-36975282
The Associated Press ·BEIRUT — Feb 16, 2016
11:57 p.m.
Syria's United Nations ambassador says his government has "credible information" that the U.S.-led alliance struck a hospital in northern Syria run by Doctors Without Borders and is accusing the medical aid organization of being a branch of French intelligence.
Bashar Ja'afari accused the U.S. and its allies of triggering a hostile media campaign blaming Syria and its ally Russia for the "criminal act against a hospital."
The doctors group, known as MSF, said Tuesday that at least 11 people were killed in Monday's attack, and two remain missing.
Pentagon press secretary Peter Cook said Tuesday it was not a U.S. attack.
Ja'afari told reporters Tuesday at U.N. headquarters that the hospital was installed without prior consultation with the Syrian government.
Therefore, he said, MSF must "assume the full consequences of their act because ... they did not operate with the Syrian government permission," he said.
———
11:55 p.m.
France's new foreign minister has issued a statement in which he has "firmly" condemned the bombing of a hospital in northern Syria run by Doctors Without Borders.
Jean-Marc Ayrault said Monday that attacks like these, in which six patients and a hospital employee were killed, are "unacceptable and must stop immediately."
He said that they "could constitute war crimes." Ayrault, who was given the post of foreign minister last week following the departure of
Laurent Fabius, said that countries should work to guarantee the delivery of humanitarian assistance in all troubled areas of Syria.
———
8:30 p.m.
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says close to 50 civilians have been killed and many more wounded in missile attacks on at least five medical facilities and two schools in northern Syria.
U.N. deputy spokesman Farhan Haq said Monday that victims of the attacks included children.
He quotes the secretary-general as calling the attacks "blatant violations of international laws" that "are further degrading an already devastated health care system and preventing access to education in Syria."
Haq quoted Ban as saying the attacks "cast a shadow on commitments" made by nations seeking to end the Syrian conflict at a conference in Munich on Feb. 11, which included a cessation of hostilities within a week and an end to attacks on civilians.
———
8:20 p.m.
The European Union's top diplomat has condemned a deadly attack on a clinic in northern Syria run by the medical aid organization Doctors Without Borders. EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said Monday that the attack "is completely unacceptable," but said nothing about who was responsible.
The organization, also known by its French acronym MSF, said the airstrike had killed seven people and that another eight are presumed dead.
Speaking after chairing talks between EU foreign ministers, Mogherini said they underlined that all hostilities must end, apart from specific action targeting the Islamic State group and Al Nusra Front.
———
7:15 p.m.
The head of the U.N. children's agency says he is "appalled" at reports of attacks on four medical facilities in Syria — two supported by UNICEF.
UNICEF Executive Director Anthony Lake said Monday that one facility was a child and maternal hospital where children were reportedly killed and scores evacuated.
He says two strikes took place in the northern city of Azaz and two in the Idlib province, where one hospital was reportedly struck four times.
He says there are also reports that two schools were attacked at Azaz, reportedly killing six children.
Lake says a third of hospitals and a quarter of schools in Syria are no longer functioning.
Aside from diplomatic considerations and obligations under international humanitarian law, Lake said, "let us remember that these victims are children. Children."
———
9:40 a.m.
A spokeswoman for an international aid agency says a makeshift clinic supported by Doctors Without Borders has been destroyed by an airstrike in northern Syria.
Mirella Hodeib says her group, also known by its French acronym MSF, had no immediate word on casualties from Monday's airstrike in the town of Maaret al-Numan in Idlib province.
The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said Russian warplanes targeted the makeshift hospital, destroying it and killing and wounding dozens.
An aid official says at least one patient died and nine Syrian staffers are missing. The official was not authorized to talk to reporters and spoke on condition of anonymity.
Syrian troops have been on the offensive in northern Syria under the cover of Russian airstrikes.
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/latest-test-syrian-commitment-deliver-aid-36975282
The Associated Press ·BEIRUT — Feb 16, 2016
11:57 p.m.
Syria's United Nations ambassador says his government has "credible information" that the U.S.-led alliance struck a hospital in northern Syria run by Doctors Without Borders and is accusing the medical aid organization of being a branch of French intelligence.
Bashar Ja'afari accused the U.S. and its allies of triggering a hostile media campaign blaming Syria and its ally Russia for the "criminal act against a hospital."
The doctors group, known as MSF, said Tuesday that at least 11 people were killed in Monday's attack, and two remain missing.
Pentagon press secretary Peter Cook said Tuesday it was not a U.S. attack.
Ja'afari told reporters Tuesday at U.N. headquarters that the hospital was installed without prior consultation with the Syrian government.
Therefore, he said, MSF must "assume the full consequences of their act because ... they did not operate with the Syrian government permission," he said.
———
11:55 p.m.
France's new foreign minister has issued a statement in which he has "firmly" condemned the bombing of a hospital in northern Syria run by Doctors Without Borders.
Jean-Marc Ayrault said Monday that attacks like these, in which six patients and a hospital employee were killed, are "unacceptable and must stop immediately."
He said that they "could constitute war crimes." Ayrault, who was given the post of foreign minister last week following the departure of
Laurent Fabius, said that countries should work to guarantee the delivery of humanitarian assistance in all troubled areas of Syria.
———
8:30 p.m.
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says close to 50 civilians have been killed and many more wounded in missile attacks on at least five medical facilities and two schools in northern Syria.
U.N. deputy spokesman Farhan Haq said Monday that victims of the attacks included children.
He quotes the secretary-general as calling the attacks "blatant violations of international laws" that "are further degrading an already devastated health care system and preventing access to education in Syria."
Haq quoted Ban as saying the attacks "cast a shadow on commitments" made by nations seeking to end the Syrian conflict at a conference in Munich on Feb. 11, which included a cessation of hostilities within a week and an end to attacks on civilians.
———
8:20 p.m.
The European Union's top diplomat has condemned a deadly attack on a clinic in northern Syria run by the medical aid organization Doctors Without Borders. EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said Monday that the attack "is completely unacceptable," but said nothing about who was responsible.
The organization, also known by its French acronym MSF, said the airstrike had killed seven people and that another eight are presumed dead.
Speaking after chairing talks between EU foreign ministers, Mogherini said they underlined that all hostilities must end, apart from specific action targeting the Islamic State group and Al Nusra Front.
———
7:15 p.m.
The head of the U.N. children's agency says he is "appalled" at reports of attacks on four medical facilities in Syria — two supported by UNICEF.
UNICEF Executive Director Anthony Lake said Monday that one facility was a child and maternal hospital where children were reportedly killed and scores evacuated.
He says two strikes took place in the northern city of Azaz and two in the Idlib province, where one hospital was reportedly struck four times.
He says there are also reports that two schools were attacked at Azaz, reportedly killing six children.
Lake says a third of hospitals and a quarter of schools in Syria are no longer functioning.
Aside from diplomatic considerations and obligations under international humanitarian law, Lake said, "let us remember that these victims are children. Children."
———
9:40 a.m.
A spokeswoman for an international aid agency says a makeshift clinic supported by Doctors Without Borders has been destroyed by an airstrike in northern Syria.
Mirella Hodeib says her group, also known by its French acronym MSF, had no immediate word on casualties from Monday's airstrike in the town of Maaret al-Numan in Idlib province.
The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said Russian warplanes targeted the makeshift hospital, destroying it and killing and wounding dozens.
An aid official says at least one patient died and nine Syrian staffers are missing. The official was not authorized to talk to reporters and spoke on condition of anonymity.
Syrian troops have been on the offensive in northern Syria under the cover of Russian airstrikes.
Jeremy F Kreuz
Dagobah Resident
it would not surprise me that this is actually the case. At least some elements.
angelburst29
The Living Force
MSF admits withholding Syria hospital coordinates from Damascus & Moscow
https://www.rt.com/news/332950-msf-hospitals-coordinates-syria/
Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) does not provide GPS coordinates of health facilities it supports in Syria to either Damascus or Moscow over fears of “deliberate” attacks, the medical charity said, blaming a recent strike on “probably” Syrian or Russian forces.
“We gave to the Russian ambassadors in Paris [and] in Geneva coordinates for three hospitals located in very intense conflict zones,
but not for all of them, and it was a decision taken together with the medical staff of the health facilities that we support,” said MSF operations director Isabelle Defourny.
According to MSF, the coordinates had not been shared with the authorities or relevant Russian representatives because of safety concerns that were voiced by doctors operating in Syria.
https://www.rt.com/news/332950-msf-hospitals-coordinates-syria/
Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) does not provide GPS coordinates of health facilities it supports in Syria to either Damascus or Moscow over fears of “deliberate” attacks, the medical charity said, blaming a recent strike on “probably” Syrian or Russian forces.
“We gave to the Russian ambassadors in Paris [and] in Geneva coordinates for three hospitals located in very intense conflict zones,
but not for all of them, and it was a decision taken together with the medical staff of the health facilities that we support,” said MSF operations director Isabelle Defourny.
According to MSF, the coordinates had not been shared with the authorities or relevant Russian representatives because of safety concerns that were voiced by doctors operating in Syria.
angelburst29
The Living Force
Lies and the Invisible MSF Hospital Allegedly Hit by Russian and Syrian Airstrikes
https://syria360.wordpress.com/2016/02/19/lies-and-the-invisible-msf-hospital-allegedly-hit-by-russian-and-syrian-airstrikes/
Editorial Comment:
The following report was sent to me by Marinella Correggia. The complete article in Italian follows her English outline.
Please use a translator because this article contains invaluable information you will not find anywhere else.
Alexandra Valiente
1) MSF does NOT have any personnel or medical facilities in Syria.
In the opposition-controlled areas, MSF supports hospitals and medical centers (controlled by the opposition).
MSF stated in a press briefing yesterday that all the medical facilities supported by MSF (with the exception of three) ARE HIDDEN and were NOT disclosed as medical centers, in any manner, to either Russia of the Syrian government because the staff and directors were afraid of being hit in airstrikes. But there were no airstrikes in government-controlled areas.
2) About the Idlib hospital allegedly hit days ago, MSF yesterday stated that”the attack to the Ma’arat al Numan hospital was deliberate” – a huge contradiction because the hospital was hidden, operating secretly, so there can be no accusation of hitting a hospital deliberately.
3) MSF also said yesterday that the culprits “were likely the Syrian-government led coalition”. Where is their evidence?
Surviving staff, belonging to the opposition, that deliberately concealed the existence of the hospital?
4) In a report published yesterday, about the tragedy of the civilians in Syria, MSF stated that the source of this report (please remember: MSF does NOT have anyone in Syria) come from the dozens of medical centers it supports (in “rebel”-controlled areas). Their information comes from the opposition. In this same report, MSF refers to the many medical centers hit by airstrikes, but they were secret and hidden!
5) MSF also spoke of the hospital hit in Azaz a few days ago. But that hospital is NOT supported by MSF, so who gave this information to MSF? It was a third hand information at best. Those who blamed Russia for this attack? Turkey, (known to be very active in the area) and the White Helmets, a not neutral group.
marinella
Marinella Correggia
19 febbraio 2016
Nella tragedia assoluta che da anni colpisce la Siria, occorre molta attenzione da parte degli operatori umanitari i quali rischiano di essere strumentalizzati da chi fomenta il conflitto, con il risultato di ulteriori deflagrazioni. Un caso emblematico è qui descritto.
Prima tappa. Urlo mondiale: «La Russia bombarda deliberatamente un ospedale di Msf». Il 15 febbraio da Gaziantep, Turchia, un comunicato dell’organizzazione medica internazionale Médecins sans frontières (MSf) denuncia un fatto odioso: la distruzione, in due attacchi che fanno molti morti, di un ospedale «sostenuto da Msf» (Msf-supported) nella provincia di Idlib, a Ma’arat al Numan.
Il capo missione Msf dice che «sembra trattarsi di un attacco deliberato a una struttura medica». Msf in quel momento non indica una responsabilità precisa. Ma siccome l’Osservatorio siriano per i diritti umani (dell’opposizione) accusa gli aerei russi, la notizia in mondovisione diventa: «La Russia bombarda deliberatamente un ospedale di Msf». In una situazione tragica, notizie come queste sono quel che Turchia e sauditi aspettano per entrare definitivamente nel paese e aiutare una guerra senza fine.
Seconda tappa. Richiesta di chiarimento a Msf: Sulla base del comunicato di Msf, dell’assenza di riflessioni critiche da parte dei media e del fatto che l’organizzazione medica non è presente in Siria né con proprie strutture né con proprio personale, bensì opera a sostegno di strutture locali e solo nelle zone controllate militarmente dall’opposizione (il governo non ha dato il permesso di aprire strutture nelle aree che controlla, così diceva un comunicato di tempo fa), il 16 mattina mandiamo alla struttura alcune domande. Intanto Russia e Siria negano recisamente ogni responsabilità e additano la mancanza di prove in merito. Domande:
1.La struttura di Ma’arat non era un ospedale di Msf ma solo sostenuto da Msf. Chi la gestiva?
2.Perché l’ospedale non era segnalato e le sue coordinate non sono state comunicate alle parti in lotta, come era avvenuto invece per l’ospedale direttamente gestito da Msf di Kunduz in Afghanistan?
3.Chi accusa gli aerei russi? E su quali basi e prove?
4.Prima della guerra, l’edificio era già un ospedale?
5.Sulla base di quali elementi Msf parla di «attacco deliberato a una struttura medica» (crimine di guerra) visto che l’ospedale non era segnalato?
6.Come mai Msf dice che adesso 40mila persone sono senza ospedali? Non ci sono ospedali governativi nell’area?
7. Quanto all’ospedale materno-infantile colpito ad Azaz, sempre indicato nel vostro comunicato, poiché Msf dichiara che non si tratta di una struttura che sostiene, qual è la fonte della notizia?
Terza tappa. Msf dichiara da Ginevra : Per giorni e giorni, Msf non riesce a rispondere malgrado i solleciti (è la sede entrale a Ginevra a rispondere a questo genere di domande). Ma ecco che il 17 febbraio la direttrice delle operazioni di Msf Francia Isabelle Defourny e la presidente di Msf Johanne Liu in conferenza stampa a Ginevra rilasciano dichiarazioni che in pratica rispondono a buona parte dei nostri dubbi.
Ecco dunque le dichiarazioni che dà Msf. Si possono leggere in inglese qui: e qui tanto per citare due fonti molto diverse).
L’ospedale era nascosto, nient’affatto segnalato. Msf ha deciso di non segnalare in nessun modo a Russia e Siria le coordinate delle strutture mediche nelle aree controllate dall’opposizione e sostenute e finanziate da Msf (senza la presenza di personale Msf). Solo tre strutture in zone di intensi combattimenti sono segnalate agli ambasciatori russi a Ginevra e Parigi. Le altre no. Perché questa stranezza? Perché non segnalare in tutti i modi un ospedale, struttura protetta dalle Convenzioni di Ginevra? Risposta: perché non lo vogliono gli staff e la dirigenza delle strutture siriane sostenute da Msf nelle aree controllate dall’opposizione. Paura di essere colpiti. In un appello diffuso il 18 febbraio, Msf chiede ai membri del Consiglio di sicurezza «e in particolare a Francia, Russia, Regno unito e Stati uniti che sono parte attiva nel conflitto», di impegnarsi per fermare il massacro e per la protezione dei civili evitando i combattimenti in aree civili. Nel rapporto che accompagna l’appello e che è stato redatto sulla base dei dati «raccolti in 70 fra gli ospedali e strutture sanitarie supportate dall’organizzazione in Siria nordoccidentale, occidentale e centrale», Msf «denuncia che 63 ospedali e strutture sanitarie supportate da MSF sono state attaccate o bombardate in 94 diverse occasioni nel solo 2015; e nel 2016 ben 17, di cui sei supportate da Msf». Ma appunto: queste strutture, per ammissione di Msf, non erano segnalate come ospedali. Comunque, dopo il fatto degli ultimi giorni, sostiene che si aspetta che suoi affiliati siriani si coordinino con il governo siriano.
«Attacco deliberato a una struttura medica», quando questa non era in alcun modo riconoscibile come tale? Davanti a questa contraddizione, Msf (non) precisa: «The attack can only be considered deliberate». Se l’inglese ci assiste, vuol dire: «l’attacco non può che essere considerato deliberato». Ma anche se la frase fosse solo possibilista, la contraddizione rimarrebbe.
Quali i colpevoli e con quali prove e chi lo dice? Joanne Liu, presidente internazionale di Msf, dichiara: «L’attacco è stato probabilmente portato dalla coalizione guidata dal governo siriano, la più attiva nella regione», cioè dall’esercito siriano o dagli aerei russi. Probabilmente? Quali le prove dunque? «Parliamo di probabilità perché come unici fatti abbiamo le percezioni dello staff locale. I sopravvissuti ritengono che l’attacco sia stato condotto dalla coalizione guidata dal governo». E anche «raccogliere prove richiede tempo». Ma insomma: possono forse dichiarare qualcosa di diverso gli operatori di un ospedale dell’opposizione che ha preferito non segnalarsi come struttura medica? (Va detto che anche il Pentagono non ha fornito prove sulle responsabilità dell’attacco imputato ai russi o ai siriani, ad aerei o a missili, affermando che «il punto non è chiaro»).
Rimane inevasa la domanda sulla presenza o meno nelle aree controllate dall’opposizione, di ospedali governativi e statali, ovviamente prima esistenti. Approfondiremo in altra sede. Ma di certo la zona di Idlib è sotto il controllo di una coalizione ombrello di gruppi islamisti, Jaish Al Fatah (Esercito della conquista), in un rapporto a geometria variabile con altre formazioni salafite o qaediste come al Nusra. E secondo precedenti denunce governative (tanto per citare anche l’altra parte), questi armati hanno via via occupato o distrutto i centri medici del governatorato, compreso il famoso ospedale Jisr al Shugur.
Rimane la domanda sull’ospedale di Azaz. Ma non può essere Msf ad avere informazioni, che non sosteneva la struttura e non è presente in Siria con propri operatori. In quel caso le accuse agli aerei russi vengono dal governo turco e dall’opposizione siriana, in particolare i White Helmts ovvero Elmetti bianchi. Ma chi sono gli Elmetti bianchi, o Syrian Civil Defense, “organizzazione di volontari per il soccorso”? Non proprio una fonte imparziale e nemmeno immacolata. Alcuni loro membri, che a differenza dell’ospedale di Idlib sono ben identificabili (elmetto bianco e simbolo sulla divisa) sono stati coinvolti in esecuzioni sommarie che lo stesso organismo non nega pur condannando l’accaduto. Come dichiara il loro fondatore, l’ex ufficiale britannico James Le Mesurier alla tivù amica Al Jazeera del Qatar, gli Elmetti sono stati formati in Turchia (dove l’inglese lavorava, non si sa a che cosa) a partire dal 2013, con finanziamenti di Stati Uniti, Giappone e Gran Bretagna.Mark Ward, che al Dipartimento guida l’assistenza Usa alla Siria, spiega che «niente tiene insieme una comunità meglio degli sforzi di soccorrere le vittime».
Peccato che proprio Usa, Turchia e alleati abbiano fatto di tutto per trasformare la Siria in un cimitero.
https://syria360.wordpress.com/2016/02/19/lies-and-the-invisible-msf-hospital-allegedly-hit-by-russian-and-syrian-airstrikes/
Editorial Comment:
The following report was sent to me by Marinella Correggia. The complete article in Italian follows her English outline.
Please use a translator because this article contains invaluable information you will not find anywhere else.
Alexandra Valiente
1) MSF does NOT have any personnel or medical facilities in Syria.
In the opposition-controlled areas, MSF supports hospitals and medical centers (controlled by the opposition).
MSF stated in a press briefing yesterday that all the medical facilities supported by MSF (with the exception of three) ARE HIDDEN and were NOT disclosed as medical centers, in any manner, to either Russia of the Syrian government because the staff and directors were afraid of being hit in airstrikes. But there were no airstrikes in government-controlled areas.
2) About the Idlib hospital allegedly hit days ago, MSF yesterday stated that”the attack to the Ma’arat al Numan hospital was deliberate” – a huge contradiction because the hospital was hidden, operating secretly, so there can be no accusation of hitting a hospital deliberately.
3) MSF also said yesterday that the culprits “were likely the Syrian-government led coalition”. Where is their evidence?
Surviving staff, belonging to the opposition, that deliberately concealed the existence of the hospital?
4) In a report published yesterday, about the tragedy of the civilians in Syria, MSF stated that the source of this report (please remember: MSF does NOT have anyone in Syria) come from the dozens of medical centers it supports (in “rebel”-controlled areas). Their information comes from the opposition. In this same report, MSF refers to the many medical centers hit by airstrikes, but they were secret and hidden!
5) MSF also spoke of the hospital hit in Azaz a few days ago. But that hospital is NOT supported by MSF, so who gave this information to MSF? It was a third hand information at best. Those who blamed Russia for this attack? Turkey, (known to be very active in the area) and the White Helmets, a not neutral group.
marinella
Marinella Correggia
19 febbraio 2016
Nella tragedia assoluta che da anni colpisce la Siria, occorre molta attenzione da parte degli operatori umanitari i quali rischiano di essere strumentalizzati da chi fomenta il conflitto, con il risultato di ulteriori deflagrazioni. Un caso emblematico è qui descritto.
Prima tappa. Urlo mondiale: «La Russia bombarda deliberatamente un ospedale di Msf». Il 15 febbraio da Gaziantep, Turchia, un comunicato dell’organizzazione medica internazionale Médecins sans frontières (MSf) denuncia un fatto odioso: la distruzione, in due attacchi che fanno molti morti, di un ospedale «sostenuto da Msf» (Msf-supported) nella provincia di Idlib, a Ma’arat al Numan.
Il capo missione Msf dice che «sembra trattarsi di un attacco deliberato a una struttura medica». Msf in quel momento non indica una responsabilità precisa. Ma siccome l’Osservatorio siriano per i diritti umani (dell’opposizione) accusa gli aerei russi, la notizia in mondovisione diventa: «La Russia bombarda deliberatamente un ospedale di Msf». In una situazione tragica, notizie come queste sono quel che Turchia e sauditi aspettano per entrare definitivamente nel paese e aiutare una guerra senza fine.
Seconda tappa. Richiesta di chiarimento a Msf: Sulla base del comunicato di Msf, dell’assenza di riflessioni critiche da parte dei media e del fatto che l’organizzazione medica non è presente in Siria né con proprie strutture né con proprio personale, bensì opera a sostegno di strutture locali e solo nelle zone controllate militarmente dall’opposizione (il governo non ha dato il permesso di aprire strutture nelle aree che controlla, così diceva un comunicato di tempo fa), il 16 mattina mandiamo alla struttura alcune domande. Intanto Russia e Siria negano recisamente ogni responsabilità e additano la mancanza di prove in merito. Domande:
1.La struttura di Ma’arat non era un ospedale di Msf ma solo sostenuto da Msf. Chi la gestiva?
2.Perché l’ospedale non era segnalato e le sue coordinate non sono state comunicate alle parti in lotta, come era avvenuto invece per l’ospedale direttamente gestito da Msf di Kunduz in Afghanistan?
3.Chi accusa gli aerei russi? E su quali basi e prove?
4.Prima della guerra, l’edificio era già un ospedale?
5.Sulla base di quali elementi Msf parla di «attacco deliberato a una struttura medica» (crimine di guerra) visto che l’ospedale non era segnalato?
6.Come mai Msf dice che adesso 40mila persone sono senza ospedali? Non ci sono ospedali governativi nell’area?
7. Quanto all’ospedale materno-infantile colpito ad Azaz, sempre indicato nel vostro comunicato, poiché Msf dichiara che non si tratta di una struttura che sostiene, qual è la fonte della notizia?
Terza tappa. Msf dichiara da Ginevra : Per giorni e giorni, Msf non riesce a rispondere malgrado i solleciti (è la sede entrale a Ginevra a rispondere a questo genere di domande). Ma ecco che il 17 febbraio la direttrice delle operazioni di Msf Francia Isabelle Defourny e la presidente di Msf Johanne Liu in conferenza stampa a Ginevra rilasciano dichiarazioni che in pratica rispondono a buona parte dei nostri dubbi.
Ecco dunque le dichiarazioni che dà Msf. Si possono leggere in inglese qui: e qui tanto per citare due fonti molto diverse).
L’ospedale era nascosto, nient’affatto segnalato. Msf ha deciso di non segnalare in nessun modo a Russia e Siria le coordinate delle strutture mediche nelle aree controllate dall’opposizione e sostenute e finanziate da Msf (senza la presenza di personale Msf). Solo tre strutture in zone di intensi combattimenti sono segnalate agli ambasciatori russi a Ginevra e Parigi. Le altre no. Perché questa stranezza? Perché non segnalare in tutti i modi un ospedale, struttura protetta dalle Convenzioni di Ginevra? Risposta: perché non lo vogliono gli staff e la dirigenza delle strutture siriane sostenute da Msf nelle aree controllate dall’opposizione. Paura di essere colpiti. In un appello diffuso il 18 febbraio, Msf chiede ai membri del Consiglio di sicurezza «e in particolare a Francia, Russia, Regno unito e Stati uniti che sono parte attiva nel conflitto», di impegnarsi per fermare il massacro e per la protezione dei civili evitando i combattimenti in aree civili. Nel rapporto che accompagna l’appello e che è stato redatto sulla base dei dati «raccolti in 70 fra gli ospedali e strutture sanitarie supportate dall’organizzazione in Siria nordoccidentale, occidentale e centrale», Msf «denuncia che 63 ospedali e strutture sanitarie supportate da MSF sono state attaccate o bombardate in 94 diverse occasioni nel solo 2015; e nel 2016 ben 17, di cui sei supportate da Msf». Ma appunto: queste strutture, per ammissione di Msf, non erano segnalate come ospedali. Comunque, dopo il fatto degli ultimi giorni, sostiene che si aspetta che suoi affiliati siriani si coordinino con il governo siriano.
«Attacco deliberato a una struttura medica», quando questa non era in alcun modo riconoscibile come tale? Davanti a questa contraddizione, Msf (non) precisa: «The attack can only be considered deliberate». Se l’inglese ci assiste, vuol dire: «l’attacco non può che essere considerato deliberato». Ma anche se la frase fosse solo possibilista, la contraddizione rimarrebbe.
Quali i colpevoli e con quali prove e chi lo dice? Joanne Liu, presidente internazionale di Msf, dichiara: «L’attacco è stato probabilmente portato dalla coalizione guidata dal governo siriano, la più attiva nella regione», cioè dall’esercito siriano o dagli aerei russi. Probabilmente? Quali le prove dunque? «Parliamo di probabilità perché come unici fatti abbiamo le percezioni dello staff locale. I sopravvissuti ritengono che l’attacco sia stato condotto dalla coalizione guidata dal governo». E anche «raccogliere prove richiede tempo». Ma insomma: possono forse dichiarare qualcosa di diverso gli operatori di un ospedale dell’opposizione che ha preferito non segnalarsi come struttura medica? (Va detto che anche il Pentagono non ha fornito prove sulle responsabilità dell’attacco imputato ai russi o ai siriani, ad aerei o a missili, affermando che «il punto non è chiaro»).
Rimane inevasa la domanda sulla presenza o meno nelle aree controllate dall’opposizione, di ospedali governativi e statali, ovviamente prima esistenti. Approfondiremo in altra sede. Ma di certo la zona di Idlib è sotto il controllo di una coalizione ombrello di gruppi islamisti, Jaish Al Fatah (Esercito della conquista), in un rapporto a geometria variabile con altre formazioni salafite o qaediste come al Nusra. E secondo precedenti denunce governative (tanto per citare anche l’altra parte), questi armati hanno via via occupato o distrutto i centri medici del governatorato, compreso il famoso ospedale Jisr al Shugur.
Rimane la domanda sull’ospedale di Azaz. Ma non può essere Msf ad avere informazioni, che non sosteneva la struttura e non è presente in Siria con propri operatori. In quel caso le accuse agli aerei russi vengono dal governo turco e dall’opposizione siriana, in particolare i White Helmts ovvero Elmetti bianchi. Ma chi sono gli Elmetti bianchi, o Syrian Civil Defense, “organizzazione di volontari per il soccorso”? Non proprio una fonte imparziale e nemmeno immacolata. Alcuni loro membri, che a differenza dell’ospedale di Idlib sono ben identificabili (elmetto bianco e simbolo sulla divisa) sono stati coinvolti in esecuzioni sommarie che lo stesso organismo non nega pur condannando l’accaduto. Come dichiara il loro fondatore, l’ex ufficiale britannico James Le Mesurier alla tivù amica Al Jazeera del Qatar, gli Elmetti sono stati formati in Turchia (dove l’inglese lavorava, non si sa a che cosa) a partire dal 2013, con finanziamenti di Stati Uniti, Giappone e Gran Bretagna.Mark Ward, che al Dipartimento guida l’assistenza Usa alla Siria, spiega che «niente tiene insieme una comunità meglio degli sforzi di soccorrere le vittime».
Peccato che proprio Usa, Turchia e alleati abbiano fatto di tutto per trasformare la Siria in un cimitero.
angelburst29
The Living Force
Syrian Hospital Strikes & the Unexpected War Criminals
http://journal-neo.org/2016/02/21/syrian-hospital-strikes-the-unexpected-war-criminals/
Accusations and denials continue to be traded between the West’s NGO, Doctors Without Borders or officially Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), and the Russian and Syrian government. Despite the gravity of the accusations by the West and MSF, which suggest “deliberate” and egregious war crimes, they have thus far produced no evidence. Not only have they produced no evidence, they openly admit that so far, they have none.
Reuters in their article, “MSF seeks independent probe into bombing of Syria hospital,” reveals as much by claiming (emphasis added):
“This attack can only be considered deliberate. It was probably carried out by the Syrian government-led coalition that is predominantly active in the region,” she told a news briefing.
Accounts from surviving hospital staff led MSF to believe that the government-led coalition had carried out the attack.
“We say a probability because we don’t have more facts than the accounts from our staff,” Liu said, noting that it took time to collect forensic evidence. “The only thing predominantly in the region is the Syrian government-led coalition.”
For an international organization to accuse two nations of “war crimes” with admittedly nothing more than “accounts,” not from an MSF hospital and their staff, but from an alleged hospital “supported by” MSF and run by local staff, indicates self-serving political motivation, not impartial, selfless charity. But beyond baseless accusations, this most recent incident reveals something far more sinister MSF may be guilty of.
MSF’s Use and Abuse of the Geneva Conventions
When the United States inexplicably bombed MSF’s hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan last year, among the many statements released by MSF would include one published on their own website titled, “Afghanistan: Enough. Even war has rules.” In it, it claims that (emphasis added):
This was not just an attack on our hospital – it was an attack on the Geneva Conventions. This cannot be tolerated. These Conventions govern the rules of war and were established to protect civilians in conflicts – including patients, medical workers and facilities. They bring some humanity into what is otherwise an inhumane situation.
The Geneva Conventions are not just an abstract legal framework – they are the difference between life and death for medical teams on the frontline. They are what allow patients to access our health facilities safely and what allows us to provide healthcare without being targeted.
It is precisely because attacking hospitals in war zones is prohibited that we expected to be protected. And yet, ten patients including 3 children, and 12 MSF staff were killed in the aerial raids.
In another entry on MSF’s website titled, “Kunduz Hospital Airstrike,” MSF clearly states that (emphasis added):
All parties to the conflict, including in Kabul and Washington, were clearly informed of the precise location (GPS Coordinates) of the MSF facilities – hospital, guest-house, office and an outreach stabilization unit in Chardara (to the north-west of Kunduz). As MSF does in all conflict contexts, these precise locations were communicated to all parties on multiple occasions over the past months, including most recently on 29 September.
It appears that not only is MSF very familiar with the Geneva Conventions, and more specifically, those articles and additional protocols that govern their work as medical care providers amid armed conflict, they also clearly understand how they apply in a modern context.
For instance, the Geneva Conventions, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) states clearly under, “Emblem: relevant articles of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols,” that (emphasis added):
Civilian hospitals shall be marked by means of the emblem provided for in Article 38 [red cross or red crescent] of the Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field of August 12, 1949, but only if so authorized by the State.
The Parties to the conflict shall, in so far as military considerations permit, take the necessary steps to make the distinctive emblems indicating civilian hospitals clearly visible to the enemy land, air and naval forces in order to obviate the possibility of any hostile action.
In view of the dangers to which hospitals may be exposed by being close to military objectives, it is recommended that such hospitals be situated as far as possible from such objectives.
MSF clearly understands the Geneva Conventions, and in a modern context, understands that to avoid violating the Conventions, making a hospital visible to military land, air, and naval forces requires that the GPS coordinates of the hospital be given to all parties of the conflict. They are thus, “marked,” satisfying the Geneva Conventions’ requirements.
However, in Syria, MSF is in clear violation of the Geneva Conventions.
Unmarked Hospitals Violate the Geneva Conventions
In Reuters article, “MSF seeks independent probe into bombing of Syria hospital,” it would also admit (emphasis added):
MSF said it had not provided the hospital’s GPS coordinates to Syrian or Russian authorities, at the request of local staff.
Furthermore, MSF’s admission that its hospitals are unmarked directly contradict their assertion that the attacks on these unmarked hospitals were “deliberate.” Indeed, in the same Reuters article, MSF would paradoxically claim that:While MSF accuses Syria and Russia of violating the Geneva Conventions – accusations both Syria and Russia deny, MSF itself blatantly admits that it violated the Conventions itself.
“This attack can only be considered deliberate. It was probably carried out by the Syrian government-led coalition that is predominantly active in the region,” she [Dr. Joanne Liu] told a news briefing.
If the hospitals were unmarked and concealed in fear of being deliberately attacked, how then, were they still deliberately attacked? That will be yet another significant claim now incumbent upon MSF and their “independent inquiry” to answer adequately with accompanying evidence.
Undermining Humanitarianism While Hiding Behind It
In reality, like a previous string of accusations leveled at both Syria and Russia, no evidence will be provided, no inquiry will be opened, and no truth will be arrived at.
MSF, in partaking in politically-motivated war propaganda, not only undermines its own alleged mission statement, but undermines all humanitarian charity undertaken during times of conflict. MSF poses as standing for humanitarianism while undermining and cynically taking advantage of every rule, regulation, and convention defined to truly uphold it.
For those honest volunteers among MSF who are not involved in rendering aid to terrorists, in terrorist-held territory, in unmarked hospitals in direct violation of the Geneva Conventions, they may want to either search out another organization with more genuine means and methods, or better still, start one of their own.
Readers should recall that it was also MSF who played a pivotal role in attempting to frame the Syrian government for a large-scale chemical weapons attack near Damascus in 2013. It would later turn out that evidence implicated terrorists and their Turkish and Saudi sponsors. Even at that time, MSF would admit that its organization focused on providing “care” to those fighting the Syrian government – now all admittedly Al Qaeda-affiliates and/or “Islamic State” terrorists. It appears that in addition to medical aid, MSF is providing significant rhetorical aid to their cause as well.
http://journal-neo.org/2016/02/21/syrian-hospital-strikes-the-unexpected-war-criminals/
Accusations and denials continue to be traded between the West’s NGO, Doctors Without Borders or officially Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), and the Russian and Syrian government. Despite the gravity of the accusations by the West and MSF, which suggest “deliberate” and egregious war crimes, they have thus far produced no evidence. Not only have they produced no evidence, they openly admit that so far, they have none.
Reuters in their article, “MSF seeks independent probe into bombing of Syria hospital,” reveals as much by claiming (emphasis added):
“This attack can only be considered deliberate. It was probably carried out by the Syrian government-led coalition that is predominantly active in the region,” she told a news briefing.
Accounts from surviving hospital staff led MSF to believe that the government-led coalition had carried out the attack.
“We say a probability because we don’t have more facts than the accounts from our staff,” Liu said, noting that it took time to collect forensic evidence. “The only thing predominantly in the region is the Syrian government-led coalition.”
For an international organization to accuse two nations of “war crimes” with admittedly nothing more than “accounts,” not from an MSF hospital and their staff, but from an alleged hospital “supported by” MSF and run by local staff, indicates self-serving political motivation, not impartial, selfless charity. But beyond baseless accusations, this most recent incident reveals something far more sinister MSF may be guilty of.
MSF’s Use and Abuse of the Geneva Conventions
When the United States inexplicably bombed MSF’s hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan last year, among the many statements released by MSF would include one published on their own website titled, “Afghanistan: Enough. Even war has rules.” In it, it claims that (emphasis added):
This was not just an attack on our hospital – it was an attack on the Geneva Conventions. This cannot be tolerated. These Conventions govern the rules of war and were established to protect civilians in conflicts – including patients, medical workers and facilities. They bring some humanity into what is otherwise an inhumane situation.
The Geneva Conventions are not just an abstract legal framework – they are the difference between life and death for medical teams on the frontline. They are what allow patients to access our health facilities safely and what allows us to provide healthcare without being targeted.
It is precisely because attacking hospitals in war zones is prohibited that we expected to be protected. And yet, ten patients including 3 children, and 12 MSF staff were killed in the aerial raids.
In another entry on MSF’s website titled, “Kunduz Hospital Airstrike,” MSF clearly states that (emphasis added):
All parties to the conflict, including in Kabul and Washington, were clearly informed of the precise location (GPS Coordinates) of the MSF facilities – hospital, guest-house, office and an outreach stabilization unit in Chardara (to the north-west of Kunduz). As MSF does in all conflict contexts, these precise locations were communicated to all parties on multiple occasions over the past months, including most recently on 29 September.
It appears that not only is MSF very familiar with the Geneva Conventions, and more specifically, those articles and additional protocols that govern their work as medical care providers amid armed conflict, they also clearly understand how they apply in a modern context.
For instance, the Geneva Conventions, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) states clearly under, “Emblem: relevant articles of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols,” that (emphasis added):
Civilian hospitals shall be marked by means of the emblem provided for in Article 38 [red cross or red crescent] of the Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field of August 12, 1949, but only if so authorized by the State.
The Parties to the conflict shall, in so far as military considerations permit, take the necessary steps to make the distinctive emblems indicating civilian hospitals clearly visible to the enemy land, air and naval forces in order to obviate the possibility of any hostile action.
In view of the dangers to which hospitals may be exposed by being close to military objectives, it is recommended that such hospitals be situated as far as possible from such objectives.
MSF clearly understands the Geneva Conventions, and in a modern context, understands that to avoid violating the Conventions, making a hospital visible to military land, air, and naval forces requires that the GPS coordinates of the hospital be given to all parties of the conflict. They are thus, “marked,” satisfying the Geneva Conventions’ requirements.
However, in Syria, MSF is in clear violation of the Geneva Conventions.
Unmarked Hospitals Violate the Geneva Conventions
In Reuters article, “MSF seeks independent probe into bombing of Syria hospital,” it would also admit (emphasis added):
MSF said it had not provided the hospital’s GPS coordinates to Syrian or Russian authorities, at the request of local staff.
Furthermore, MSF’s admission that its hospitals are unmarked directly contradict their assertion that the attacks on these unmarked hospitals were “deliberate.” Indeed, in the same Reuters article, MSF would paradoxically claim that:While MSF accuses Syria and Russia of violating the Geneva Conventions – accusations both Syria and Russia deny, MSF itself blatantly admits that it violated the Conventions itself.
“This attack can only be considered deliberate. It was probably carried out by the Syrian government-led coalition that is predominantly active in the region,” she [Dr. Joanne Liu] told a news briefing.
If the hospitals were unmarked and concealed in fear of being deliberately attacked, how then, were they still deliberately attacked? That will be yet another significant claim now incumbent upon MSF and their “independent inquiry” to answer adequately with accompanying evidence.
Undermining Humanitarianism While Hiding Behind It
In reality, like a previous string of accusations leveled at both Syria and Russia, no evidence will be provided, no inquiry will be opened, and no truth will be arrived at.
MSF, in partaking in politically-motivated war propaganda, not only undermines its own alleged mission statement, but undermines all humanitarian charity undertaken during times of conflict. MSF poses as standing for humanitarianism while undermining and cynically taking advantage of every rule, regulation, and convention defined to truly uphold it.
For those honest volunteers among MSF who are not involved in rendering aid to terrorists, in terrorist-held territory, in unmarked hospitals in direct violation of the Geneva Conventions, they may want to either search out another organization with more genuine means and methods, or better still, start one of their own.
Readers should recall that it was also MSF who played a pivotal role in attempting to frame the Syrian government for a large-scale chemical weapons attack near Damascus in 2013. It would later turn out that evidence implicated terrorists and their Turkish and Saudi sponsors. Even at that time, MSF would admit that its organization focused on providing “care” to those fighting the Syrian government – now all admittedly Al Qaeda-affiliates and/or “Islamic State” terrorists. It appears that in addition to medical aid, MSF is providing significant rhetorical aid to their cause as well.
angelburst29
The Living Force
“Dirty Players in Geopolitics”: Letter to “Doctors Without Borders” (MSF)
http://www.globalresearch.ca/dirty-players-in-geopolitics-letter-to-doctors-without-borders-msf/5509805
I noticed an attack on this letter (below) in the comments at third party media basically smearing Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) by association with Bernard Kouchner, a man that departed the organization over 35 years ago over philosophical differences. I had supported Doctors Without Borders because they had been apolitical, and largely neutral in conflicts. This neutrality had begun a process of erosion in Syria. Unlike the attack on the MSF hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan, where there was no question of which belligerent controlled the air power responsible (NATO’s USA), and where the organization called for an independent, third party investigation, those actors responsible for the attacks concerning the MSF aligned clinics in Syria are not as convincing and clear, arguably creating even more pressing demand for impartial, third party investigation.
Following these most recent attacks on clinics aligned with Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) in Syria, Mego Terzian, President of MSF France, immediately blamed Russia and Assad. MSF International President has gone on record also blaming Russian aligned forces, stating “It was probably carried out by the Syrian-government-led coalition that is predominantly active in the region.” This statement of Dr Liu is disingenuous. Turkey is a major player in its support for jihadi militia in that very area and has a vested interest in information operations intended to undermine the coalition supporting the Assad regime. This is the purpose of false flag attacks. Recent history demands if the finger of superficial appearance had pointed to the NATO aligned nations, there would be calls for impartial investigation rather than immediate trial and conviction by propaganda operations perpetrated in western media.
Following these most recent attacks on clinics aligned with Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) in Syria, Mego Terzian, President of MSF France, immediately blamed Russia and Assad. MSF International President has gone on record also blaming Russian aligned forces, stating “It was probably carried out by the Syrian-government-led coalition that is predominantly active in the region.” This statement of Dr Liu is disingenuous. Turkey is a major player in its support for jihadi militia in that very area and has a vested interest in information operations intended to undermine the coalition supporting the Assad regime. This is the purpose of false flag attacks. Recent history demands if the finger of superficial appearance had pointed to the NATO aligned nations, there would be calls for impartial investigation rather than immediate trial and conviction by propaganda operations perpetrated in western media.
Relevant to this preceding, it is a fairly safe presumption all high profile international non-governmental organizations will be targets of intelligence agencies for diverse purpose. However there is a large qualitative difference between that organization and the organization which, on the whole, has been tipped by intelligence to a point of co-option; where the organization itself has become the intelligence asset. Médecins Sans Frontières would appear to pointed towards co-option. Here is my response:
Dear MSF,
A monthly donor of many years, I feel an explanation is in order for my cancellation and further refusal to participate as a MSF “Field Partner.” I am a former military special operations intelligence professional and anti-corruption investigator of many years. Based on my expertise in open source intelligence analysis and closely following several of the ongoing conflicts, including Ukraine and SYRIA, it has become clear MSF is becoming a tool for geopolitical ends. Either you’ve been penetrated by intelligence agencies for this purpose of promoting false flag information operations or your organization is being manipulated to same effect. I cannot, with clear conscious, be a party to this with further contributions.
The several NATO intelligence agencies are in full force pursuing anti-Russian propaganda operations, which likely include the recent attacks on MSF aligned Syrian clinics; purposeful and professional operations intended to smear Russia and President Putin for purposes of generating political capital for pursuit of geopolitical manipulations. Your organization immediately pointing the finger at Assad and/or the Russians, without time taken to properly investigate, is unethical.
NATO aligned intelligence agency false flag examples provided:
NATO’s Turkey suppressing investigation into their intelligence agency, MIT, providing sarin gas to al Nusra (al Qaida) that killed 1,400 Syrians at Ghouta, blamed on the Assad regime, in August, 2013. Turkish parliamentarians complain of the suppressed facts:
Noteworthy state sponsored crimes committed to demonize Putin include but are not limited to:
- The Litvinenko report by the British
- The Maidan snipers in Kiev trained by the CIA according to Member of European Parliament, backed by a leaked phone call between the EU foreign policy chief and the Estonian Foreign minister revealing the snipers were aligned with the new regime in Kiev. This crime had been blamed on the Russian aligned preceding government.
The crimes in Syria against MSF aligned facilities serve the same propaganda purposes and the Erdogan government cannot be ruled out as committing them, whereas it is NOT in the Russian interest to perpetrate these attacks. Here is a list of Turkish support for bad actors in Syria compiled by Jihad Watch:
It is sad to see MSF go the route of some other organizations and become a pawn of dirty players in geopolitics. I suggest your organization pursue a professional investigation to determine how, and by who, you’ve become manipulated to both a stooge and minion of evil.
Regards,
Ron West
http://www.globalresearch.ca/dirty-players-in-geopolitics-letter-to-doctors-without-borders-msf/5509805
I noticed an attack on this letter (below) in the comments at third party media basically smearing Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) by association with Bernard Kouchner, a man that departed the organization over 35 years ago over philosophical differences. I had supported Doctors Without Borders because they had been apolitical, and largely neutral in conflicts. This neutrality had begun a process of erosion in Syria. Unlike the attack on the MSF hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan, where there was no question of which belligerent controlled the air power responsible (NATO’s USA), and where the organization called for an independent, third party investigation, those actors responsible for the attacks concerning the MSF aligned clinics in Syria are not as convincing and clear, arguably creating even more pressing demand for impartial, third party investigation.
Following these most recent attacks on clinics aligned with Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) in Syria, Mego Terzian, President of MSF France, immediately blamed Russia and Assad. MSF International President has gone on record also blaming Russian aligned forces, stating “It was probably carried out by the Syrian-government-led coalition that is predominantly active in the region.” This statement of Dr Liu is disingenuous. Turkey is a major player in its support for jihadi militia in that very area and has a vested interest in information operations intended to undermine the coalition supporting the Assad regime. This is the purpose of false flag attacks. Recent history demands if the finger of superficial appearance had pointed to the NATO aligned nations, there would be calls for impartial investigation rather than immediate trial and conviction by propaganda operations perpetrated in western media.
Following these most recent attacks on clinics aligned with Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) in Syria, Mego Terzian, President of MSF France, immediately blamed Russia and Assad. MSF International President has gone on record also blaming Russian aligned forces, stating “It was probably carried out by the Syrian-government-led coalition that is predominantly active in the region.” This statement of Dr Liu is disingenuous. Turkey is a major player in its support for jihadi militia in that very area and has a vested interest in information operations intended to undermine the coalition supporting the Assad regime. This is the purpose of false flag attacks. Recent history demands if the finger of superficial appearance had pointed to the NATO aligned nations, there would be calls for impartial investigation rather than immediate trial and conviction by propaganda operations perpetrated in western media.
Relevant to this preceding, it is a fairly safe presumption all high profile international non-governmental organizations will be targets of intelligence agencies for diverse purpose. However there is a large qualitative difference between that organization and the organization which, on the whole, has been tipped by intelligence to a point of co-option; where the organization itself has become the intelligence asset. Médecins Sans Frontières would appear to pointed towards co-option. Here is my response:
Dear MSF,
A monthly donor of many years, I feel an explanation is in order for my cancellation and further refusal to participate as a MSF “Field Partner.” I am a former military special operations intelligence professional and anti-corruption investigator of many years. Based on my expertise in open source intelligence analysis and closely following several of the ongoing conflicts, including Ukraine and SYRIA, it has become clear MSF is becoming a tool for geopolitical ends. Either you’ve been penetrated by intelligence agencies for this purpose of promoting false flag information operations or your organization is being manipulated to same effect. I cannot, with clear conscious, be a party to this with further contributions.
The several NATO intelligence agencies are in full force pursuing anti-Russian propaganda operations, which likely include the recent attacks on MSF aligned Syrian clinics; purposeful and professional operations intended to smear Russia and President Putin for purposes of generating political capital for pursuit of geopolitical manipulations. Your organization immediately pointing the finger at Assad and/or the Russians, without time taken to properly investigate, is unethical.
NATO aligned intelligence agency false flag examples provided:
NATO’s Turkey suppressing investigation into their intelligence agency, MIT, providing sarin gas to al Nusra (al Qaida) that killed 1,400 Syrians at Ghouta, blamed on the Assad regime, in August, 2013. Turkish parliamentarians complain of the suppressed facts:
Noteworthy state sponsored crimes committed to demonize Putin include but are not limited to:
- The Litvinenko report by the British
- The Maidan snipers in Kiev trained by the CIA according to Member of European Parliament, backed by a leaked phone call between the EU foreign policy chief and the Estonian Foreign minister revealing the snipers were aligned with the new regime in Kiev. This crime had been blamed on the Russian aligned preceding government.
The crimes in Syria against MSF aligned facilities serve the same propaganda purposes and the Erdogan government cannot be ruled out as committing them, whereas it is NOT in the Russian interest to perpetrate these attacks. Here is a list of Turkish support for bad actors in Syria compiled by Jihad Watch:
It is sad to see MSF go the route of some other organizations and become a pawn of dirty players in geopolitics. I suggest your organization pursue a professional investigation to determine how, and by who, you’ve become manipulated to both a stooge and minion of evil.
Regards,
Ron West
