veritas_party The Veritas Party are advertising a petition on their website  calling for an independent investigation of the British government’s behaviour and involvement in the Syrian Civil War.

Whilst I agree with their opinion on this issue I do not share their views on other crucial political issues, particularly their stance on multiculturalism – they don’t like it and want everyone to ‘blend in’ echoing Cameron’s stance  – or their rather narrow understanding of Islam which relies on the exaggerated alarmist notion that large numbers of British Muslims are becoming radicalised. Much of their philosophy is sound but there is a worrying streak of carping nationalism woven into its political fabric that has strong echoes of UKIP. Were they to put up candidates at the next election I would not be voting for them.

On the issue of Syria, though I felt the petition was worth signing because of my concerns over the handling of the Syrian crisis by Hague and others and because the petition itself has not been set up specifically in the Veritas Party name. I leave others to make their own decisions.


E-petition On Syria Published – Please Sign

An e-petition has been set up calling for an independent high level investigation into the behaviour, actions and involvement of the current UK coalition government in the Syrian Civil War.

The link to the e-petition is:


The e-petition parameters do not allow a full explanation for the call so it is provided below.

Biased support

During the Syrian Civil War, there has been strong evidence that the UK government has shown unreasonable support for the Free Syrian Army and Syrian National Council, reacting to apparent atrocities by the Syrian government yet ignoring apparent atrocities by the insurgent forces. This has been largely mirrored by mainstream UK news media.

Examples of misleading or false reports leading to thoughtless reactions and comments from William Hague (UK Foreign Secretary) wrongly condemning the Syrian government, or ignoring apparent atrocities by the Syrian rebels, are as follows,

25th May 2012: The Houla massacre of 108 people was immediately blamed on the Shabiha and Syrian Army, The UN Human Rights Council laid the blame on the Syrian government. However, it later revealed that there was insufficient evidence and the likelihood that the massacre was committed by Sunni rebels could not be dismissed.

12th Jul 2012: Massacre of up to 250 people by government forces at Tremseh reported by the UK press with condemnation by the UK government. Subsequent investigations revealed that no such massacre took place. The findings were not reported by the UK news media or publicly acknowledged by the UK government.

20th Aug 2012: A massacre of upwards of 400 people was widely reported and condemned and immediately blamed on the Syrian Army. Subsequent enquires suggest that insurgents may have been responsible. There are also many witness reports of dead bodies before the Syrian Army entered the town. This new evidence has not been acknowledged by the western media and UK government.

23rd Dec. 2012: A massacre of civilians by government forces at Halfaya was extensively reported by the UK press and widely condemned by many governments including the UK. The purported airstrike by the Syrian Air Force on civilians at a bakery has since been shown to be false – there was no bakery and no airstrike. The video purporting to be of the airstrike is most likely to have been of a car bomb or mortar round. The dead were identified as rebel fighters.

27th May 2013: The arrest and detainment of 12 member of Al Nusra Front in southern Turkey by Turkish police and the finding of 2kgs of Sarin in their possession. No western media reports and no UK government reaction on this significant development and apparent proof that Syrian rebels held (or hold) chemical agents.

5th August 2013: A report of an apparent massacre of 450 Kurds by Al Nusra was largely ignored by western press, despite a number of independent witnesses. It received no reaction from the UK government (indeed, any western government).

20th August 2013: Continuing reports of 30,000 Kurds displaced into Kurdish Iraq by the activities of rebel forces (inclusive of Al Nusra) in NE Syria, lending credence to reports of kidnapping and massacres committed by rebel forces in the region. No report by the UK media and no reaction from the UK government.

21st August 2013: A chemical attack in Damascus was immediately blamed on the Syrian government. The apparent death toll of 1300 was revised to 350 (as of the time of writing). William Hague has laid the blame directly on the Syrian government citing only hearsay evidence and eye witness accounts also stating that the evidence had been destroyed. He ignores evidence and independent eye witness accounts of equal weight that the rebels were responsible.


Many other reports of war crimes remain unconfirmed pending the results of UN investigations. However, it is noteworthy that the government only reacts to apparent atrocities and war crimes committed by the Syrian Army and allied forces, largely or wholly ignoring reports of equal weight of apparent atrocities and war crimes committed by rebel forces.

William Hague has consistently condemned the Syrian government for the above attacks (and others), all of which have either been shown to be false or unverifiable. This is the reaction of a man that is either exceptionally naive or is knowingly complicit in rebel propaganda and who has, to all intents and purposes ‘gone native’. This is exceptionally dangerous and not representative of the UK and its people that value truth, decency and accountability above all else. His attitude and language also suggests that he may be colluding with the rebels and knowingly taking part in a propaganda war against the Syrian government which includes lying to the British people. This is of course wholly undemocratic and utterly immoral. Hague’s and the UK government’s support for the rebels must be deeply questioned.

Support of terrorists

It is now well established that Al Nusra form the greater and strongest part of the insurgents. Al Nusra Front and Jabhat al-Nusrah, affiliated with Al Qa’ida, are registered as terrorist groups in the USA, UK and the EU. The US, France, and the UK have been the strongest proponents of arming the ‘rebels’. However, it is quite obvious that while such arms may be distributed to the moderate (non-terrorist) rebels, there is no way of ensuring that they will not reach terrorist hands and used to commit murder and other atrocities. It is dangerously ignorant to think that this would not happen. In a war that has increasingly become sectarian and where terrorist groups have been gaining the upper hand amongst the rebels, this ‘fuelling of the fire’ is likely to result in further war crimes.

Knowing that such arms could (will) end up in the hands of terrorists, the supply of arms to terrorists contravenes numerous anti-terrorist legislation in the UK, EU and internationally.

Finally, the CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell has stated recently that the fall of the Asaad government and, most likely, its replacement with an Al Qa’ida state, is the greatest threat to United States national security. By inference this will include the UK. Such a statement further strengthens the scepticism of UK government policy on Syria.

The perpetration of any lies and deceit by the UK government that may result or has resulted in further violence and the deaths of people within Syria is to be condemned. The arming of any side involved in the Syrian civil war that results in the killing or injury of innocent people is also to be condemned. It is very strongly felt that an independent investigation into the government’s role in Syria is needed to clarify the situation.

Please sign this petition if you agree with the above sentiment and want a full investigation into the UK government’s involvement in the Syrian Civil War.



  1. beastrabban

    I’ve also signed it. As I recall, Veritas was the UKIP breakaway party, whose leading members included Kilroy Silk and Joan Collins. They are very anti – EU and firmly against immigration. A few years ago Kilroy Silk drew the public’s outrage for a long rant in one of the papers against the Arabs, stating that they hadn’t contributed anything to global civilisation since the 12th century or so. When he was standing for parliament on either the Veritas or the UKIP platform he was filmed walking around his prospective constituency asking foreign workers when they intended to go home. When a French gentleman said his contract was due to end in about three months, Kilroy Silk immediately asked ‘Why not how?’ I think this came to an end when a couple of lads through a bucked of excrement over him. Veritas are an unpleasant lot.

    This time, however, I think they’re right on this issue. The rebel forces do include Jihadists to the extent that the anti-Islam blogs have stated that they are almost exclusively Jihadis. These forces have massacred Christians and are aiming for the replacement of the secular Syrian state with an Islam state ruled by sharia law. I do wonder what our government is doing promoting the rebels. It may be that Assad’s regime has links to Iran, and Hague believes that destroying it will curtail Iranian power in the region. Syria’s Baath party is also Arab socialist, with the state dominating a large section of the country’s economy. There has been some liberalisation in recent years to a limited extent. Possibly Hague and his cronies believe that if the rebels win, it will result in large scale privatisation and the dismantlement of the state sector, in which they and various British firms think they will participate.

    I also wonder how far the Saudis are involved in all this. Greg Palast in his book, ‘Armed Madhouse’, has made a very strong case that they Saudis campaigned for the removal of Saddam Hussein simply because his policies threatened the global price of oil. Because of their massive oil wealth, the Saudis control the price of oil, and have shown themselves ruthless in protecting their dominant position. They are backing the rebels, which leads me to wonder what ulterior motives they have for doing so, quite apart from wishing to export further their own brand of intolerant, repressive Islam.

    1. sparaszczukster Post author

      I think you’re right that Hague et al see rich pickings in Syria for their sponsors and thus themselves, as do the Americans and I guess the French don’t want to lose their footing there either. The complex and confusing mix of players on the ground, lumped together as the rebels, seem to me to be an unofficial US/Saudi army stage managed by the CIA. Listening to John Kerry earlier was like listening to Bush in 2003, It could almost have been the same speech with Assad’s name substituted for Saddam’s. There was the same heavily asserted reference to strong evidence without revealing the substance of that evidence;we had to accept his word alone. The only difference was the slight sense of irritation (fear?) in Kerry’s manner as if he was becoming frustrated that the public weren’t buying his lies as easily as they did Bush’s. You could almost see the threatening shadow of Goldman Sachs at his shoulder making sure their mouthpiece got it right ( shades of Reagan’s post election address to the nation).
      I’m not convinced the Saudi princes are truly religious themselves. They instil it in others to manipulate their young men to fight their battles and keep their women silently servile. Faith and patriotism, which is a form of religion (in the Durkheimian sense) engender a sense of duty in their young men’s hearts making crazed cannon fodder of them.
      I can see no other motive behind all this than an insatiable desire for power by all players, including the Russians and Chinese. Hague and Cameron et al have been sent off the pitch and are not too happy about it, as Gove’s tantrum demonstrates.Maybe we’re about to see how spiteful they can be when thwarted.

  2. Pingback: Fwd: FW: Call for investigation into UK government’s involvement in the Syrian Civil War – Dave B. |

  3. beastrabban

    There was a piece in Counterpunch a few years ago stating that when he was a soldier in Vietnam, Kerry was part of a secret operations team involved in some very dirty tricks. Counterpunch is a left-wing publication, but I’ve also heard it suggested that this might be a Republican smear run to stop Left-wingers voting Democrat. If it’s right, then Kerry’s nastier than he appears.

  4. Pingback: Secrets and Lies: The Real Reasons Obama and Cameron Want to Attack Syria | Beastrabban's Weblog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s