Sorry if this feels repetitive, but just because there are no headlines about Syria right now, it doesn’t mean things aren’t happening. Above all it doesn’t meant the MSM are suddenly telling us the truth.
While the whole world rightly now stares at North Korea, there were two other events: a top-level meeting between the US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and the Russian Foreign Secretary Sergei Lavrov in Moscow, and a meeting of the Security Council at UN headquarters in New York, to debate the draft resolution on the syrian gas attack.
Firstly, as an aside, our British Ambassador did not, in my opinion, cover himself with glory:
“Britain’s envoy Matthew Rycroft accused Moscow of supporting “a murderous, barbaric criminal” – Syrian President Bashar Assad – “rather than siding with their international peers.”
Obviously, modern-day British Foreign policy is now dictated by the need to side with ‘international peers’ rather than finding out what actually happened in regard to the gas attack, as opposed to ‘the narrative’ provided by the USA. Once our diplomats and the FCO had at least a smidgen of an idea about ‘fair play’. That’s now gone.
The draft resolution was vetoed by Russia. One might say ‘they would, wouldn’t they’, but when I saw the report of what the resolution demanded, I can understand why.
Allow me to quote from this RT report. Our MSM simply write about the outrage that Russia dared to veto this draft resolution: Russia are the baddies, they always say ‘njet’ without any reason, as everybody knows – no need to ask why:
“It [the draft resolution] said inspectors chosen by the UN and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) must be given prompt and unrestricted access to “any and all sites” they choose, provided with flight plans and logs they request, and given the names of military officers “in command of any aircraft” they probe. Damascus would also have to “arrange meetings requested, including with generals or other officers, within no more than five days of the date on which such meeting is requested.” In the event of non-compliance with the terms, Syria could be exposed to military action mandated by the UN Security Council under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.”
Yes, that’s right: if Syria doesn’t do what the Security Council’s Resolution demands, the governments of the states voting for that resolution would be free to invade Syria. Have those governments, have their representatives, have our MSM, already forgotten how we all got suckered into the Iraq War? It was based on just such a ‘performance’ at the Security Council, followed by ‘failed inspections’ because the UN inspectors couldn’t find what wasn’t there – so: WAR!
We all know the results …
And what about fairness? This is what the UN Draft Resolution is prepared to ask of the ‘rebels’, a.k.a Al Nusrah:
“The rebel forces controlling Khan Shaykhun were only asked to “provide delay-free and safe access” to the site of the reported incident.”
Of course these rebels will fall all over themselves to allow UN Inspectors into their territory, immediately – right? Right!
But, one might say, the US has given clear evidence that it was Assad who used sarin gas, saying that this was ‘the consensus’ of their Intelligence Community – who also got their ‘evidence’ from open sources and social media (see this report). The internet was flooded with tweets about this attack – most of them were from people who showed clearly that this was planned not by Assad but by the rebels. Obviously, some ‘open sources’ and ‘social media’ are more equal than others. And obviously, without independent observers at that place, anyone can say anything. For example, look at how ‘everybody knows’ that this was sarin: there were samples! Who collected them? The rebels. Was there a secure chain of protecting evidence? No. So contaminating a sample with sarin before handing it over to ‘independent analysts’ is now proof that Assad used sarin!
But you don’t have to believe me. Here’s a report thoroughly refuting the US Intelligence ‘evidence’, written by a professor at MIT:
This analysis shreds the flimsy US Intelligence ‘evidence’ on which the UN Security Council has based its draft resolution – the draft which ‘in case of non-compliance’ would allow The West to intervene in Syria, against Assad and on the side of the rebels: Al Nusrah, ISIS and the rest.
It is also interesting that again, we are to take on faith that the US Intelligence ‘knows’, without providing this evidence. Odd, isn’t it, that the satellite surveillance data aren’t published which would show clearly what happened. It’s not credible that there was no US satellite surveillance and/or that they ‘couldn’t see’. After all, they happily publish detailed satellite data in the case of North Korea (scroll down here).
In 2002/2003, we ordinary people did not have the resources and facilities to query the ‘facts’ presented by our governments, but even so we knew there were holes in it. Today, more and more people across the world know what is going on, and have the means to refute “evidence” provided by “Intelligence”. We can see that again the Western Powers are hell-bent to fabricate another war in the Middle East. We know they are wrong, we are still powerless to prevent it, but we can at least ask why they are siding with ISIS while telling us they want to destroy it. Something stinks here!