Why did the US National Security Agency develope a hacking tool to install malware? Why is the US Security agency so incompetent that it could not prevent itself from being hacked and the tool stolen and used against 12 countries?
The digital revolution is proving to be a nightmare. The digital revolution has destroyed privacy and has made all information and all persons insecure.
The costs of the digital revolution exceed its benefits by many times. The digital revolution rivals nuclear weapons as the most catastrophic technology of our time.
On May 9th, 2017 Trump fired FBI director James Comey. The timing and the official justification for the move bordered on the absurd, and set off a firestorm of speculation and accusations. This is intentional. They want you chasing red herrings. He’s waving his left hand so he can make his real move on the right.We’ll get into that more in a moment.
Trump is dirty, he’s fully compromised, but not in the way most of his critics assume.
Both Trump and Bill Clinton were frequent fliers aboard the Lolita Express with Jeffery Epstein. Epstein is the billionaire pedophile who got busted running an elite child prostitution ring.
Victims testified that Epstein had them sleep with rich and powerful men from around the world. They also said that he directed them to collect information on these men. He referred to this as “investing in people”.
Now, we know from the John Pedestal email leaks that Hillary Clinton pulled strings with her friends in the media to make sure Trump rose to the top in the GOP primaries. This was referred to as the “pied piper strategy”. The “heads they win, tails we lose strategy” would be more accurate.
Epstein was let off with a slap on the wrist. Pled guilty to one count of soliciting prostitution from an underage girl, and agreed to settle complaints regarding 40 other women in a civil arrangements.
As part of this deal:
Prosecutors agreed not to bring far more serious federal charges against Epstein, and not to charge “potential co-conspirators”, including four named individuals.
Trump has tried to pretend that he hardly knew Epstein, but he made the following quote in an interview in 2002:
“He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it – Jeffrey enjoys his social life.” Trump in 2002
Now Mr. Comey did behave in a bizarre fashion during the Election. We won’t dive into the details here (lots of wedge issues there). But if you look at that story again in the context of a network of compromised politicians, royalty and ceo’s, one could make the case that it played out something like this: Comey was ordered to stand down. He resisted at first. He saw evidence of corruption. So levers were pulled. Bill Clinton’s conversation with Loretta Lynch on the tarmac was part of this, but we’ll probably never know the full extent. Everyone has skeletons in their closets. Very few have the integrity to do what’s right when facing total ruin.
Comey capitulated, but not before he demonstrated that he has a disobedient streak. This combined with the fact that he presided over the FBI during the investigation into the Lolita Express and therefore has access to information that could destroy Trump, Clinton and ultimately a whole gaggle of well placed puppets makes him a liability. Trump’s handlers want Comey replaced with someone who is compromised, and compliant, with a spotless public image.
Now let’s get back to those red herrings. Trump wants the left to obsess about Russia. That’s why he timed the firing to be during the investigation into Russian interference and right before a face to face meeting with Russian diplomats.
He wants the left to focus on this, because at the end of the day, they aren’t going to find any evidence. None. Why? Because it isn’t true. This was just a campaign tactic cooked up by the Clinton camp. But then group think kicked in and the story took on a life of its own. People built media followings on the topic. Even comedians cashed in.
The talking heads who are still pushing the Russian collusion conspiracy theory are either dishonest, or pay absolutely no attention to geopolitics.
After Trump launched airstrikes on the Syrian government, in effect strengthening ISIS, Russia immediately suspended its airspace agreement with the United States,. Putin then moved quickly to set up a network of no-fly zones which the United States was banned from. Turkey, which up to that point was a key NATO partner, will be one of the countries enforcing these new zones.
They also issued sharp warnings to the Trump administration and made it clear that they would be reinforcing Syria’s air defenses.
Trump for his part went from criticizing the anti-Russian narratives, and covert wars of the Obama administration, to engaging in exactly the same behavior in an even more aggressive way. Next up: Trump is moving a major occupation force into Raqqa, while simultaneously escalating on multiple fronts around the world.
Trump wants you chasing Russian windmills, so that he can carry on with World War 3.
This also gives talking heads on the alt-right who still support Trump an easy out. Instead of being pressured to admit that the man they helped put into office is evil, and utterly compromised, they get to spar over an issue that (for them and their audience) is patently absurd. This is shielding them from serious questions about their journalistic integrity, and their refusal to call Trump out for what he is.
Time to start confronting these rodeo clowns on both the left and the right. Stop letting them pull people into empty rabbit holes while the most dangerous war in human history kicks off with hardly a murmur of dissent. It just takes one voice to break the conformity principle. The emperor wears no clothes.
And to those positioned in the alphabet soup agencies that can access the evidence from these cases: You need to take a long hard look at the people you’re working for. When the rule of law has been hijacked by abject criminals, there comes a time when disobedience becomes a moral imperative.
If you want these ideas to catch on, spread them. This message is creative commons. You are encouraged to download and distribute it through any and all means.
“The problem is that the world has listened to Americans for far too bloody long.” — Dr. Julian Osborne, from the 2000 film version of Nevil Shute’s 1957 book, On the Beach
A reader asked why neoconservatives push toward nuclear war when there can be no winners. If all die, what is the point?
The answer is that the neoconservatives believe that the US can win at minimum and perhaps zero damage.
Their insane plan is as follows: Washington will ring Russia and China with anti-ballistic missile bases in order to provide a shield against a retaliatory strike from Russia and China. Moreover, these US anti-ABM bases also can deploy nuclear attack missiles unknown to Russia and China, thus reducing the warning time to five minutes, leaving Washington’s victims little or no time in which to make a decision.
The neoconservatives think that Washington’s first strike will so badly damage the Russian and Chinese retaliatory capabilities that both governments will surrender rather than launch a response. The Russian and Chinese leaderships would conclude that their diminished forces leave little chance that many of their ICBMs will be able to get past Washington’s ABM shield, leaving the US largely intact. A feeble retaliation by Russia and China would simply invite a second wave US nuclear attack that would obliterate Russian and Chinese cities, killing millions and leaving both countries in ruins.
In short, the American warmongers are betting that the Russian and Chinese leaderships would submit rather than risk destruction.
There is no question that neoconservatives are sufficiently evil to launch a preemptive nuclear attack, but possibly the plan aims to put Russia and China into a situation in which their leaders conclude that the deck is stacked against them and, therefore, they must accept Washington’s hegemony without a fight.
To feel secure in its hegemony, Washington would order Russia and China to disarm.
This plan is full of risks. Miscalculations are a feature of war. It is reckless and irresponsible to risk it all for nothing more than Washington’s hegemony.
The neoconservative plan puts Europe, the UK, Japan, S. Korea, and Australia at high risk were Russia and China to retaliate. Washington’s ABM shield cannot protect Europe from Russia’s nuclear cruise missiles or from the Russian Air Force, so Europe would fall. China’s response would hit Japan, S. Korea, and Australia.
The Russian hope and that of all sane people is that Washington’s vassals will understand that it is they that are at risk, a risk from which they have nothing to gain and everything to lose, repudiate their vassalage to Washington and remove the US bases. It must be clear to European politicians that they are being dragged into conflict with Russia. This week the NATO commander told the US Congress that he needed funding for a larger military presence in Europe in order to counter “a resurgent Russia.” https://www.rt.com/news/387063-nato-counter-resurgent-russia/
Let us examine what is meant by “a resurgent Russia.” It means a Russia that is strong and confident enough to defend its interests and those of its allies. In other words, Russia was able to block Obama’s planned invasion of Syria and bombing of Iran and to enable the Syrian armed forces to defeat the ISIS force sent by Obama and Hillary to overthrow Assad.
Russia is “resurgent” because Russia is able to block US unilateral actions against some other countries.
This capability flies in the face of the neoconservative Wolfowitz doctrine, which says that the principal goal of US foreign policy is to prevent the rise of any country that can serve as a check on Washington’s unilateral rule.
While the neocons were absorbed in their so-called “cakewalk” wars that have now lasted 16 years, Russia and China emerged as checks on the unilateralism that Washington had enjoyed since the collapse of the Soviet Union. What Washington is trying to do is to recapture its ability to act worldwide without any constraint from any other country. This requires Russia and China to stand down.
Are Russia and China going to stand down? It is possible, but I would not bet my life on it. Both governments have a moral conscience that is totally missing in Washington. Neither government is intimidated by the Western propaganda. Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov said yesterday that we hear endless hysterical charges against Russia, but the charges are always vacant of any evidence. https://sputniknews.com/politics/201705041053274379-lavrov-russia-us-relations/
Conceivably, Russia and China could sacrifice their sovereignty for the sake of no war. But this same moral conscience will propel them to oppose the evil that is Washington in order not to succumb to evil themselves. Therefore, I think that the evil that rules in Washington is leading the United States and its vassal states to destruction.
Having convinced the Russian and Chinese leaderships that Washington intends to nuke their countries in a surprise attack (see, for example, http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/04/us-forces-preparing-sudden-nuclear.html ), the question is how do Russia and China respond? Do they sit there and await an attack, or do they preempt Washington’s attack with an attack of their own?
What would you do? Would you preserve your life by submitting to evil, or would you attack the evil?
Writing truthfully results in my name being put on lists (financed by who?) as a “Russian dupe/agent.” Actually, I am an agent of all people who disapprove of the use of nuclear war to establish hegemony over the world, but let us understand what it means to be a “Russian agent.”
It means to respect international law, which Washington does not. It means to respect life, which Washington does not. It means to respect the national interests of other countries, which Washington does not. It means to respond to provocations with diplomacy and requests for cooperation, which Washington does not. But Russia does. Apparently, a “Russian agent” is a moral person who wants to preserve life and the national identity and dignity of other peoples.
It is Washington that wants to snuff out human morality and become the master of the planet. As I have previously written, Washington without any question is mad (nuts). The only important question is whether there is sufficient good left in the world to resist and overcome Washington’s evil.
What is the US up to in Syria? – This question is not simply bugging the Arab world … the whole international community asking. This matter became especially relevant after the so-called “chemical attack” in the Syrian Governorate of Idlib that occurred on April 4 and the subsequent cruise missile strike by the US against the Al-Shayrat air base that followed a few days later.
The initial false-flag attack, which immediately resulted in a stream of accusations against the Syrian army and the allied Russian troops, was abused by the so-called Syrian Observatory For Human Rights, which has repeatedly participated in spreading fake reports, along with unreasonable and unverified accusations against the Syrian authorities over the years. Then, in accordance with a clearly pre-planned scenario, the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Federica Mogherini, along with France and Britain joined the action thriller, quickly switching on a “wag-the-dog” blame game via select politicians along with TV news media … creating enemies where no real enemies exist. There can be no doubt that a stream of accusations being voiced against Damascus without a real investigation was what the Washington coalition was aiming at.
Why bother trying to provide any sort of evidence when Washington previously managed to bring down an unwanted regime by simply providing a tube filled with unknown substances that was handed over to Colin Powell for him to shake it in the air in front of the UN Security Council. Sure, it was a cheap trick and a blatant lie, but it worked since no one questions Washington’s “proofs” as a pretext to invade and destroy Iraq.
Once Washington, London, and Paris fomented a wave of public outrage by their baseless accusations against Damascus, French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault on April 26, acting in accordance with Washington’s instructions, rushed to present the world a “declassified report of the French secret services,” who were allegedly convinced that Damascus used sarin nerve agent to launch an attack against the town of Khan Shaykhun.
But one could remind Western powers, and Jean-Marc Ayrault in particular, that six days prior to the release of this so-called declassified report, Australian doctors fell victims of sarin gas in Iraq. Should we then hold Damascus responsible for that attack too? Or would we be better off admitting that ISIS militants have repeatedly used sarin and other nerve gas agents, both in Syria and Iraq, along with their own drones!
By the way, one would not be out of line to suggest the blood thirsty ISIS radicals, supposedly surrounded by the US coalition forces and cut off from outside support, are simply continuing to deploy nerve agents from the warehouses still in their control. Damascus has officially destroyed all of its chemical stockpiles as confirmed by representatives of the international community. As for the British, they are sending the so-called White Helmets into territories occupied by ISIS in Syria without the slightest concern for the security of these propaganda heroes.
In short, Washington’s actions and the steps taken by its loyal servants in Paris and London are creating the theatrical performance as evidence of “Assad’s chemical attack.” Plus the West’s unwillingness to conduct a thorough investigation of this incident bears a strong resemblance of the events of 2003 in Iraq which resulted in in the complete destruction of the country and the emergence of ISIS … that Washington claims to be fighting today.
Therefore, it is hardly worth explaining once again what sort of dangerous developments on both the regional and international levels can be triggered by the repetition of the reckless scenario when Washington first makes a political decision, and then invents political/media excuses to go along with it. This is how armed conflicts were started not only in Iraq in 2003, but Yugoslavia, Libya, and Afghanistan with the so-called Western humanitarian interventions.
Provocations like the one that occurred in Khan Sheikhoun, without a doubt, demand a professional investigation conducted under the supervision of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) with a team of international experts from various regions of the world. It is essential that such an investigation must be open and transparent. The current attempts to block a real investigation only confirm the criminality of western regimes that are trying to use the incident to push forward their own time-tested tactics of regime change via military invasion and bypass the UN Security Council Resolution 2254.
As for the United States, it is still difficult to say what plans Washington can pull out in Syria in a bid to bring Damascus down. However, Washington’s policies in the region conducted through the last two decades can be briefly described as “chaoskeeping.”
The events on September 11, 2001, changed the world. It was the pretext used by the US government to launch military attacks on seven Middle Eastern countries, causing civilian casualties in the millions and pushing waves of Muslim refugees out of their homes and into the Western world. The US government spent trillions of dollars destroying countries and murdering women and children, while public infrastructure in the US deteriorated, Americans’ homes were foreclosed, and American health needs went unattended. 9/11 was also the excuse for their assault upon the liberty of the American citizen.
On September 11, 2001, when a neighbor called and told me to turn on the TV, I stopped what I was doing and turned on the TV. What I saw was the two World Center Towers blowing up. I had often enjoyed lunch in the rooftop restaurant in one of the towers across the street from my office at the Wall Street Journal.
A minuscule by comparison, frail, aluminum airliner hit one massive steel tower, and then another aluminum airliner hit the other tower. There were some plumes of orange outside the buildings. Then approximately one hour later, less in one case, more in the other, the two towers exploded floor by floor as they fell straight down into their own footprint.
This was the way the news anchors were describing it as I was seeing. “It looks exactly like a controlled demolition,” the news anchors reported. And indeed it did. As a Georgia Tech student I had watched a controlled demolition, and that is what I was seeing on television, just as that was what the news anchors saw.
Later that day Larry Silverstein who owned or rather held the lease on the World Trade Center, explained on TV that the free fall collapse of the third WTC skyscraper, Building 7, into its own footprint was a conscious decision to “pull” the building. “Pull” is the term used by demolition technicians to describe the implosion of buildings with explosives to be destroyed. Building 7 had not been hit by an airliner, had suffered only minor damage, and very limited office fires. Silverstein’s statement was afterwards corrected by authorities to mean that he wanted to “pull” the firemen out of the building. However, many videos show the firemen already out of the building with the fireman stating that the building was going to be brought down.
There was no doubt whatsoever that Building 7 was wired for demolition, but the question was why?
Because Americans are an insouciant (unconcerned) and ignorant people, and confident of the inherent goodness of their country, years passed before even experts noticed that the official story stood in total contraction to known laws of physics, was in total contraction to how buildings collapse from asymmetrical damage, and the collapse could not have been caused by airliners hitting the buildings which met all code requirements for withstanding airliner collisions. Many Americans did not even know that the third skyscraper, Building 7, had collapsed.
Professor Steven E. Jones, a professor of physics at BYU, soon realized that the official story was pure fantasy. His reward for speaking out was to have his tenure contract bought out by BYU, many believe under orders from the federal government backed up with the threat that all federal support of science at BYU would be terminated unless Stephen Jones was.
Cynthia McKinney, a black woman who represented a Georgia congressional district in the US House of Representatives was either much brighter or much braver than her congressional colleagues. She raised obvious questions about 9/11, questions begging to be asked … and she lost her seat in Congress.
Approximately five years after 9/11, San Francisco architect Richard Gage noticed that the three WTC buildings did not fall down in any way consistent with the official explanation. He formed Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, currently about 3,000 members. This group includes high rise architects and structural engineers who actually are experienced in the construction of skyscrapers. In other words, they are people who know what they are talking about.
These 3,000 experts have said that the official explanation of the collapse of the three skyscrapers stands in contradiction to known laws of physics, architecture, and structural engineering
In other words, the official explanation is totally impossible. Only an uneducated and ignorant public can believe the official 9/11 story. Sadly, the US population fits this description.
A&E for 9/11 Truth is gaining assent from architects and engineers. It is very difficult for an architect or engineer to support the truth, because the American population, which includes patriotic construction companies, whose employees fly American flags on their trucks, don’t want to hire architects and engineers who are “enemies of America aligned with Arab terrorists.” In America, if you tell the truth, you are in great danger of losing your customers and even your life.
Think now about physicists. How many physics faculties do you know that are not dependent on federal grants, usually for military-related work? The same for chemistry. Any physics professor who challenged the official story of 9/11 with the obvious fact that the story contradicts the laws of physics would endanger not only his own career but the careers of his entire department.
Truth in America is extremely costly to express. It comes at a high cost that hardly any can afford.
Our masters know this, and thus they can cover up truth at will. Moreover, any expert courageous enough to speak the truth is easily branded a “conspiracy theorist.”
Who comes to his defense? Not his colleagues. They want rid of him as quickly as possible. Truth is a threat to their careers. They can’t afford to be associated with truth. In America, truth is a career-killing word.
In America, truth is also becoming a synonym for “Russian agent.” Apparently only Russian Agents tell the truth … by which they must mean that truth is unloved in America. Lists are being prepared of websites that speak truth to power and thus are seditious. In the United States today people can lie at will without consequence, but it is deadly to tell the truth.
Support A&E for 9/11 Truth. These are heroic people. 9/11 was the manufactured excuse for the neoconservatives’ 16 years of war crimes against millions of Muslim peoples, remnants of which now seek refuge in Europe.
Neoconservatives are a tiny number of people. No more than a dozen are of any consequence. Yet they have used America to murder millions. And now they are fomenting war with Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea.
Are Americans so insouciant that they will stand aside while a dozen neoconservative Zionists destroy our world?
“We formally sent a letter to the United Nations, we asked them in that letter to send a delegation in order to investigate what happened in Khan Shaykhun,” Assad said. “Of course till this moment they didn’t send (the experts), because the West and the US blocked any delegation from coming,” he added.
Bashar Assad believes that Washington is hampering the probe because if the experts arrive in Idlib, “they will find that all their (the US) narratives about what happened in Khan Shaykhun and then the attack on Shayrat airport was a false flag, was a lie.”
“Now the only contact I think is between Russia and maybe the other countries in order to send that delegation. Till this moment, we didn’t have any positive news regarding any delegation coming,” he added.
On April 4, an alleged chemical attack killed dozens of people in the town of Khan Shaykhun in Syria’s Idlib province.
Without any investigation carried out, the US labeled Assad’s government as perpetrators and fired a barrage of Tomahawk missiles at Shayrat airbase, which it said was the source of the chemical attack.
Russia has called for a thorough investigation of the chemical incident, which would include an on-site inspection in the rebel-held territory, before coming to any conclusions.
“Actually, since the first attack a few years ago that happened in Aleppo by the terrorists against our army, we asked the United Nations to send investigation delegation in order to prove what we said about the terrorists having gases used against our army, and later many incidents happened in that way, and they didn’t send any delegation. It’s the same now,” Assad told Sputnik.
Earlier this week, Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) said that it is identifying sarin in samples related to the April 5 incident.
However, the watchdog never explained how it obtained the samples, as its experts have not visited Khan Shaykhun yet.
The Russian military questioned the swift analysis of the samples, saying the OPCW did not act with such speed in another incident in which a militant group reportedly used mustard gas in Aleppo.
“Russian specialists on the site of the crime [in Aleppo] collected samples of the agent, which had been delivered to representatives of the OPCW and transported to the Hague. By the way, the Syrian leadership at the time offered safety guarantees and insisted that OPCW experts visit Aleppo, but nobody came,” Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov said Thursday.
“Four months later the OPCW still won’t come to a conclusion and admit the mustard gas found there was mustard gas, saying additional analysis is necessary,” he added.
Trump and the news media have blamed Russia and Syria for deploying poison gas, but they refuse to ask for a real investigation into the matter. In the West, TV news creates its own fake news. That, then, is used by the government and treated as “facts” without investigation. Now, backed by fake news, the US Government is threatening sanctions and war on Syria, North Korea, and Russia.
Today, April 19, 2017, is the 22nd anniversary of the Oklahoma City Bombing. The bombing of the federal Murrah office building was blamed by federal authorities on a bomb made from fertilizer inside a truck parked in front of the building by Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols.
There are many anomalies associated with the official explanation, including mysterious deaths of some, including a police officer, who understood that the actual facts did not accord with the explanation. Investigators who report the actual facts are branded “conspiracy theorists” and dismissed. This has been the Deep State’s way of controlling explanations since the 1940s.
Americans, being the insouciant (heedless; unconcerned) people that they are, never noticed that the Murrah building blew up from the inside out, not from the outside in.
After the bombing in Oklahoma city a very interesting video of the event was made by a citizen journalist (see below). It was titled ”Cover-up in Oklahoma”. It was largely composed of video taken from the local news channels immediately after the the bombing. The difference between the immediate local news coverage and the official story is the difference between x and not-x. Within an hour or two of the bombing the local news coverage featured an interview with a Mr. Randall Heather (as I remember his name). He was identified as an expert (on either terrorism or explosives) and he was positively giddy with joy. He stated that first responders going through the standing remains of the Murrah Building had discovered several unexploded bombs and that with this evidence the perpetrators were almost certainly going to be identified and caught in short order. (Of course Mr. Heather quickly vanished from the airways.) There are also several clips from the local news of bomb disposal vehicles backing up to the Murrah Building with the audio of the local reporter stating that unexploded bombs had been found and were being removed. There is also video of a talk by General Partin on the absolute certainty that the building was blown up from the inside. The speech was made over a local access TV station (as I recall) and recorded by a citizen journalist. Some time later I learned (from some other source) that the speech was made over a local access TV station because no MSN station would permit Partin to appear on-air. What appears to have happened is that the Murrah Building was intended to be brought totally down, producing nothing but a pile of rubble of essentially no obvious evidentiary value , but something went wrong, and several bombs failed to explode. Washington was not prepared for this and did not have a team of news censors on-site to take immediate control of the coverage. The result was that for several hours the local first responders had full access to the still-standing portions of the building, and the local reporters had a free hand to report on what was found. (These local reporters did in fact report shortly after the bombing that Washington had \”a team of investigators in the air\” heading to Oklahoma City. When I viewed this video with a group of people one of them groaned \”Here come the news censors\”. Indeed, after just about the length of time that it would have taken Washington to quickly assemble a team and fly them to Oklahoma City, the local news coverage utterly changed and began to reflect what became the official story.) Incidentally, you may be aware that both Time and Newsweek reported that the external bomb (which allegedly brought down the building) was so powerful that it left a massive crater in front of the Murrah building. The dimensions of this crater were said to be 30 feet across by 10 feet deep. (I imagine that computer modeling had shown that an explosion powerful enough to bring down the building, would have left such a crater. To tell a consistent story, the existence of such a crater was then reported. I used to work in the defense industry and in my experience such computer modeling of the effects of weapons is totally standard.) Of course, video taken by local news helicopters flying over the Murrah Building during the first hour or two after the explosion show no such crater. When I watched this video with a small group, one of the members of the audience screamed, \”Where is the crater?\” , and ran up to inspect the TV screen. He returned to his seat muttering, \”America is so sick. America is so sick.\” Several years ago (maybe six or seven) I found that this video, \”Cover-up in Oklahoma\” was still available on eBay or Amazon. It may be on YouTube. I have not checked. For about 4 hours after the bombing, the local news in Oklahoma was free of censorship. This video provides a good record of what actually happened. Here is a compilation of the first reports.
Air Force General Benton K. Partin, the US Air Force’s top explosive expert, noticed these things too. He prepared a detailed report containing “conclusive proof that the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, was not caused solely by the truck bomb. Evidence shows that the massive destruction was primarily the result of four demolition charges placed at critical structural points at the third floor level.” Here is a copy of General Partin’s letter accompanying the report he sent to US Senator Trent Lott. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/ok8.htm
General Partin was my neighbor in Alexandria, Virginia. I went through his report those years ago, and it is clear that the official “investigation” ignored all the facts presented by General Partin. Indeed, Partin’s report is not even part of the record. Wikipedia does not even mention the report as a “conspiracy theory” in Wikipedia’s recitation of the official line.
The Oklahoma City Bombing was orchestrated and then covered up just as the 9/11 bombing of the WTC in Manhattan was orchestrated and then covered up.
A number of people knew better than to come to work that day in the Murrah building. The motive behind the deep state perpetrators’ desire to kill several hundred people, including children, was planned with the objective of creating fear (and thus preventing rational thinking) among the public, stirring up wars against the predetermined targets in the middle east, and getting support to enlarge the military industrial complex while establishing a police state here at home.
It was targeted at the militias and the creation of police powers that could be used against them. Two years previously the Clinton regime murdered approximately 100 men, women, and children at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas. The religious sect was threatening no one and in violation of no laws, but it was a dissident group that the US government decided to terminate.
The focus on dissidents changed with 9/11, which Israel and Israel’s American neoconservative allies used to apply wide-ranging and long-lasting massive violence to seven Muslim countries, costing US taxpayers trillions of dollars and what remained of the reputation of the United States.
The main consequence of “terrorism” is the extraordinary growth of unconstitutional police state powers throughout the Western world. Every protective shield of individual rights, except for the Second Amendment, has been stripped from the US Constitution by the so-called “war on terror.”
All of the alleged terrorist attacks have puzzling, uninvestigated, and unreported anomalies. It is astonishing that the media never asks any questions. Consider, for example, the Nice, France, Truck attack.
Nice police authorities have the unambiguous evidence of the security cameras on every block of the truck’s alleged murderous route. There should be no question whatsoever about what really happened. Yet, the Minister of the Interior in Paris ordered the Nice public authorities to destroy the video evidence and not to release it. So all we have is a very grainy inconclusive video taken by a person allegedly married to a former Mossad intelligence officer. This person turns out to be the same person who provides the only video of an attack in Germany.
Sandy Hook is famous for the one bereaved parent, but there were allegedly scores of dead children. Where are the other parents? Aren’t they bereaved?
If these terror events are real, it is a simple matter for the media to ask questions, to investigate, and to give the public the facts. But the media never does. The media only repeats the official story without checking it.
In other words, the facts are whatever the government says they are. So what is the purpose of the media?
No purpose except to be a trumpet for the government.
The official stories of the Murrah office building bombing and 9/11 are now enshrined in memorials, the purpose of which is to make a lie the truth.
For insouciant Americans this works.
The US is without any doubt now the worst police state, not only in reality exceeding Gestapo Nazi Germany, but exceeding the human imagination of George Orwell and other authors of dystopias.
And this utterly corrupt criminal police state gets away with pretending to be the “defender of democracy and freedom.” The insouciant American population has no clue.
Freedom is dying in America. Sadly, the younger generations can’t see it because they’ve never experienced freedom. They don’t know what it is, so they don’t know what they have lost.
In my long experience in Washington, vice presidents did not make major foreign policy announcements or threaten other countries with war. Not even Dick Cheney stole this role from the weak president George W. Bush.
But yesterday the world witnessed VP Pence threaten North Korea with war. “The sword stands ready,” said Pence as if he is the commander in chief.
Perhaps he is.
Where is Trump? As far as I can tell from the numerous emails I receive from him, he is at work marketing his presidency. Once Trump won the election, I began receiving endless offers to purchase Trump baseball caps, T-shirts, cuff-links, coffee mugs, and to donate $3 to be entered into a raffle to win some memorabilia. The latest offer is a chance to win one of “personally signed five incredible photographs of our historic and massive inauguration.” See Trump Memorabilia Offer
For Trump, the presidency is a fund-raising device. If his VP, National Security Advisor, Secretary of Defense, UN Ambassador, CIA Director, whoever, want to start wars wherever, that’s just more memorabilia to raffle off for a $3 donation.
As a result of Trump’s failure to govern his own government, we have VP Pence telling Russia and China that there could be a nuclear exchange on their borders between the US and North Korea. Although Pence is not smart enough to know, this is not something Russia and China will accept.
Washington worries about North Korea having nuclear weapons, but the entire world worries that Washington has nuclear weapons. And so many of them! World polls have shown that the majority of the world’s population are far more concerned about the threat to peace posed by Washington and Israel than by Iran, North Korea, Russia and China.
Pence prefaced his “the sword stands ready” remark with “the United States of America will always seek peace,” which after Serbia, Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Pakistan, and Syria is as false a statement as it is possible to make. From Washington’s perspective it is always Washington’s victims that are “reckless and provocative,” never Washington.
The US stands for war. If the world is driven to Armegeddon, it will be by Washington, not North Korea, Iran, Russia, or China.
It is widely known that the U.S.-led NATO intervention to topple Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi in 2011 resulted in a power vacuum that has allowed terror groups like ISIS to gain a foothold in the country.
Despite the destructive consequences of the 2011 invasion, the West is currently taking a similar trajectory with regard to Syria. Just as the Obama administration excoriated Gaddafi in 2011, highlighting his human rights abuses and insisting he must be removed from power to protect the Libyan people, the Trump administration is now pointing to the repressive policies of Bashar al-Assad in Syria and warning his regime will soon come to an end — all in the name of protecting Syrian civilians.
But as the U.S. and its allies fail to produce legal grounds for their recent air strike — let alone provide concrete evidence to back up their claims Assad was responsible for a deadly chemical attack last week — more hazards of invading foreign countries and removing their heads of state are emerging.
This week, new findings revealed another unintended consequence of “humanitarian intervention”: the growth of the human slave trade.
The Guardian reports that while “violence, extortion and slave labor” have been a reality for people trafficked through Libya in the past, the slave trade has recently expanded. Today, people are selling other human beings out in the open.
“The latest reports of ‘slave markets’ for migrants can be added to a long list of outrages [in Libya],” said Mohammed Abdiker, head of operation and emergencies for the International Office of Migration, an intergovernmental organization that promotes “humane and orderly migration for the benefit of all,” according to its website. “The situation is dire. The more IOM engages inside Libya, the more we learn that it is a vale of tears for all too many migrants.”
The North African country is commonly used as a point of exit for refugees fleeing other parts of the continent. But since Gaddafi was overthrown in 2011, “the vast, sparsely populated country has slid into violent chaos and migrants with little cash and usually no papers are particularly vulnerable,” the Guardian explains.
One survivor from Senegal said he was passing through Libya from Niger with a group of other migrants attempting to flee their home countries. They had paid a smuggler to transport them via bus to the coast, where they would risk taking a boat to Europe. But rather than take them to the coast, the smuggler took them to a dusty lot in Sabha, Libya. According to Livia Manente, an IOM officer who interviews survivors, “their driver suddenly said middlemen had not passed on his fees and put his passengers up for sale.”
“Several other migrants confirmed his story, independently describing kinds of slave markets as well as kinds of private prisons all over in Libya,” she said, adding IOM Italy had confirmed similar stories from migrants landing in southern Italy.
The Senegalese survivor said he was taken to a makeshift prison, which the Guardian notes are common in Libya.
Those held inside are forced to work without pay, or on meager rations, and their captors regularly call family at home demanding a ransom. His captors asked for 300,000 west African francs (about £380), then sold him on to a larger jail where the demand doubled without explanation.
When migrants were held too long without having a ransom paid for them, they were taken away and killed. “Some wasted away on meager rations in unsanitary conditions, dying of hunger and disease, but overall numbers never fell,” the Guardian reported.
“If the number of migrants goes down, because of death or someone is ransomed, the kidnappers just go to the market and buy one,” Manente said.
Giuseppe Loprete, IOM Niger’s chief of mission, confirmed these disturbing reports. “It’s very clear they see themselves as being treated as slaves,” he said. He arranged for the repatriation of 1,500 migrants just in the first three months of this year and is concerned more stories and incidents will emerge as more migrants return from Libya.
“And conditions are worsening in Libya so I think we can also expect more in the coming months,” he added.
As the United States government continues to entertain regime change in Syria as a viable solution to the many crises in that country, it is becoming ever-more evident that ousting dictators — however detestable they may be — is not effective. Toppling Saddam Hussein led not only to the deaths of civilians and radicalization within the population, but also the rise of ISIS.
As Libya, once a beacon of stability in the region, continues to devolve in the fallout from the Western “humanitarian” intervention – and as human beings are dragged into emerging slave trades while rapes and kidnappings plague the population — it is increasingly obvious that further war will only create even further suffering in unforeseen ways.
(The US didn’t inspect or verify who was behind the chemical attack before ordering missile strikes against Syria. Unreliable claims from paid agents posing as political dissidents are not proof, and certainly not evidence to justify a US missile attack.
Again, Russia seems to be the only major power demanding an official investigation to determine the blame in Syria, and preventing more stupid and needless war. The criminals/fools who run the US Government, and its military, are ready to shoot and bomb without proof … a tactic the US repeats over and over. They did it in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and now in Syria. In every case they only create death, misery, and chaos while blaming the victims and Russia. And amazingly, most Americans actually believe the lies. -ed.)
TEHRAN – Russia will insist not only at the Organization for Prohibition of Chemical Weapon (OPCW), but also at the UN on urgent sending of inspectors for investigation into the incident with alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Saturday.
“We have shared with the Qatari counterparts the Russian vision on the situation,” Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said after a meeting with Qatar’s Foreign Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al-Thani.
“We consider it absolutely necessary to have thorough, objective and unbiased professional investigation,” he said. “We shall both at OPCW in New York and at the UN insist on urgent sending of inspectors both to the side of the accident and to the (Shayrat) aerodrome, where, as Western experts claim, shells were filled with chemical substances,” Lavrov said, Tass news agency reported.
The Russian foreign minister told reporters the parties had discussed key problems in the Middle East and Northern Africa, including the situation in Syria, Libya, Yemen, the Middle East settlement, including the Palestinian problem.
“As for Syria, our common position is the necessary overwhelming ceasefire between the government and armed opposition, further anti-terrorist fight against the Daesh (known as ISIL or ISIS ) and Habhat al-Nusra (terrorist groups outlawed in Russia – TASS), as well as acceleration of this crisis’ settlement on the basis of the UN SC resolution,” the Russian minister said.
According to data of the Russian Defense Ministry, Syrian warplanes delivered an air strike on April 4 that hit workshops where terrorists were producing munitions with chemical agents supplied to Iraq and used in Aleppo.
However, Washington concluded that Damascus had used chemical weapons. As a result, the US military fired 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles on the military aerodrome in the province of Homs, from which, as Washington believed, a chemical attack had allegedly started. The missile strike killed 10 people.
[It’s deja vu all over again. Watching Trump mouth the absurd excuses for his recent missile strikes on a Syrian airport brings back visions of monkey-faced Bush starring bewilderingly at cameras and mouthing his beyond-ridiculous claims about the 9-11 attacks on the World Trade Center back in 2011. Everyone knew he was lying through his teeth, but no one dared do anything about it.
A lot of Americans hoped that Trump might be different. But they needn’t wonder any longer. Trump has collected a whole bevy of bad people on his staff to advise him and to be his spokesmen. He is proving to be a typical idiot. America is run by idiots with gigantic egos and criminal hands reaching for money.
Anyone wanting to sit in the office of President nowadays must be either a psychopathic criminal or a complete fool. We haven’t seen a sane President in America for as long as I can remember. Eisenhower might be the last one to come close. Trump is looking and sounding more and more like a George Bush clone nowadays. One might wonder just how silly the buffoon president can look as he worms his way in with the criminal crowd that occupies Capitol Hill and the Pentagon. -ed.]
An absurd array of analysis has emerged, following the US airstrike on a Syrian airfield. The US Government’s position can be summarized in one sentence: “for peace to return and for civil war to end in Syria, Assad must sacrifice his presidency.”
While it is mind-boggling to see the mainstream Western media calling Syria’s chaos a “civil war” when fighters from 86 countries are reportedly fighting there, the US’ own direct intervention does strongly make it a war imposed from outside forces. The US intervention comes in addition to the proxy groups being funded by the Arab countries as well as Syria’s immediate neighbor, Turkey, as all of them have been looking, since the beginning of the crisis, for ways and means to impose a “regime change” in Syria to facilitate their own imperial projects.
The so-called chemical attack—something thatCIA itself is guilty of previously supporting and overlooking in the US manufactured gulf war—-is the latest excuse they seem to have invented to legitimize direct military intervention to prolong the war and facilitate their own sinister objectives for the region that extends far beyond Syria.
Prior to the attack, the five years of war had us to a point, until 2 weeks ago, where the US officials were reported to have changed their policy vis-à-vis Assad. Reportedly, ‘sending Assad home’ was no longer the US agenda. The agenda, as their various statements suggested, was to pave the way for a political solution of the crisis. This, however, seems to be out of the question now as we are back to square one with regard to the question of Assad’s future as the country’s president. The agenda of “Assad must go” is back on the table and so is the question of the role Russia, as also Iran, has played in helping Assad against the foreign funded “rebels” and the self-styled Islamic State.
If it hadn’t been for Russian military presence in Syria since September 2015, Syria would have fallen. Everyone knows this. Therefore, by projecting the blatant lies about Russia being an accomplice in the pseudo gas-attack, the US is attempting to push back the Russian led peace process to a point where the US can reinsert itself in the conflict and keep the region embroiled in war and bloodshed.
Notwithstanding the “humanitarian face” put on Trump’s motive behind the attack, the fact remains that at least two immediate reasons stood behind the attack:
The US’ allies, especially in the Middle East, were developing the perception of US’ indifference—and/or ineptness against the gradually increasing assertiveness of the Russia-Iran- Syrian government combine in the region.
US’ Establishment (of course including Pentagon) appears to have felt the necessity to apply a “check” to the increasing Russian military-geopolitical common sense in Ukraine/Crimea and now in Syria (and very recently inserting, albeit in low profile at this stage, in Afghanistan).
Therefore, against a subtly changing geo-political scenario in a region that was, until 2 years ago, solely under the US command, the US cannot help but put up a fight to regain the space it has lost. As such, the perception being built in the US via themainstream media that Washington is not frantic to upstage Russia is factually incorrect.
How is the world supposed to disregard the reality that not even a slight attempt at intelligence gathering, analysis and professional decision making by the US Establishment has been seen, and that only a “knee jerk” decision was made by the US president?
On the other hand, what appears more likely and logical is that that US government does have a settled plan to apply such “checks moves” to counter Russia’s moves to expand its own geopolitical influence.
However, what is not yet certain is whether the US plans to commence its long-term intervention moves in Syria, or only the “check moves” according to the evolving situation. So far what appears more likely is that US may not prefer to intervene militarily alone in a big way in Syria because US ’public is averse to heavy causalities of their kith and kin in US military, and continuation of the mutual attrition of the Muslim world helps US and its allies to maintain their geopolitical superiority and enables them to profit from the war (Read: the missile strike has added a whopping US$ 5billion to the Tomahawk market).
That is to say, while the US does want to retrieve some of the geo-political space it has lost to Russia, it wants to do this through a limited military engagement. On the one hand, this would help the US in maintaining its erstwhile allies, such as Turkey, in its own ambit and use them against Russia/Iran, and on the other, a tussle with Russia would equally help it maintain its military and political credibility amongst its European allies who have been expressing their “reservations” with regard to Trump’s possible opening up to Russia—something that now appears to be unrealistic and out of the question.
The attack on Syria, in this context, was not a spontaneous outcome of Trump’s emotions, it was a well calculated move; a part of the US new strategy for the region, in the war that is likely to go on in the years to come. And, although missiles landed on a Syrian airbase, the target was Russia and the message was loud and clear enough: the US wouldn’t allow Russia and its allies to end the war that allows the US to maintain its superior position amongst its allies as well as enemies.
The sarin-gas attack story prompted the US missile strike on a Syrian runway. Here are the top ten reasons for doubting that story, and instead calling it a convenient pretext:
ONE: Photos show rescue workers treating/decontaminating people injured or killed in the gas attack. The workers aren’t wearing gloves or protective gear. Only the clueless or crazy would expose themselves to sarin residue, which can be fatal.
TWO: MIT professor Thomas Postol told RT, “I believe it can be shown, without doubt, that the [US intelligence] document does not provide any evidence whatsoever that the US government has concrete knowledge that the government of Syria was the source of the chemical attack in Khan Shaykhun…Any competent analyst would have had questions about whether the debris in the crater was staged or real. No competent analyst would miss the fact that the alleged sarin canister was forcefully crushed from above, rather than exploded by a munition within it.” How would a canister purportedly dropped from an Assad-ordered plane incur “crushing from above?”
THREE: Why would President Assad, supported by Russia, scoring victory after victory against ISIS, moving closer to peace negotiations, suddenly risk all his gains by dropping sarin gas on his own people?
FOUR: In an interview with Scott Horton, ex-CIA officer Philip Giraldi states that his intelligence and military sources indicate Assad didn’t attack his own people with poison gas.
FIVE: Ex-CIA officer Ray McGovern states that his military sources report an Assad air strike did hit a chemical plant, and the fallout killed people, but the attack was not planned for that purpose. There was no knowledge the chemicals were lethal.
SIX: At consortiumnews.com, journalist Robert Parry writes, “There is a dark mystery behind the White House-released photo showing President Trump and more than a dozen advisers meeting at his estate in Mar-a-Lago after his decision to strike Syria with Tomahawk missiles: Where are CIA Director Mike Pompeo and other top intelligence officials?”
“Before the photo was released on Friday, a source told me that Pompeo had personally briefed Trump on April 6 about the CIA’s belief that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was likely not responsible for the lethal poison-gas incident in northern Syria two days earlier — and thus Pompeo was excluded from the larger meeting as Trump preferred a contrary decision.”
“After the attack, Secretary of State Tillerson, who is not an institutional intelligence official and has little experience with the subtleties of intelligence, was the one to claim that the U.S. intelligence community assessed with a ‘high degree of confidence’ that the Syrian government had dropped a poison gas bomb on civilians in Idlib province.”
“While Tillerson’s comment meshed with Official Washington’s hastily formed groupthink of Assad’s guilt, it is hard to believe that CIA analysts would have settled on such a firm conclusion so quickly, especially given the remote location of the incident and the fact that the initial information was coming from pro-rebel (or Al Qaeda) sources.”
“Thus, a serious question arises whether President Trump did receive that ‘high degree of confidence’ assessment from the intelligence community or whether he shunted Pompeo aside to eliminate an obstacle to his desire to launch the April 6 rocket attack.”
SEVEN: As soon as the Assad gas attack was reported, the stage was set for a US missile strike. No comprehensive investigation of the purported gas attack was undertaken.
EIGHT: There are, of course, precedents for US wars based on false evidence—the missing WMDs in Iraq, the claims of babies being pushed out of incubators in Kuwait, to name just two.
NINE: Who benefits from the sarin gas story? Assad? Or US neocons; the US military-industrial complex; Pentagon generals who want a huge increase in their military budget; Trump and his team, who are suddenly praised in the press, after a year of being pilloried at every turn; and ISIS?
TEN: For those who doubt that ISIS has ever used poison gas, see the NY Times (11/21/2016). While claiming that Assad has deployed chemical attacks, the article also states that ISIS has deployed chemical weapons 52 times since 2014.
These ten reasons starkly point to the lack of a rational and complete investigation of the “gas attack.”
And this lack throws a monkey wrench into Trump’s claim that he was ordering the missile strike based on “a high degree of confidence.”
“The United States Stands Before The World As A Criminal Nation
“Washington has murdered entire countries in whole or part: Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Afghanistan, Yemen, parts of Syria and Pakistan. Millions of Muslim peoples have been killed, maimed, orphaned, and dislocated. The dispossessed and dislocated are filling up the American Empire that destroyed their lives. The American genocide of nations has had the full support of “Western civilization” and the print and TV media of Western journalism. Every transparent lie out of Washington’s mouth has been repeated by European, Canadian, and Austrailian heads of state and by the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, NPR and all the rest of the presstitutes of the Western world.
“Trump is the fourth US president in a row who takes refuge in blatant lies as his justification for war crimes. The Western world has chosen lies and rejected truth.”(- Paul Craig Roberts)
News » Syria. The latest and breaking news from Syria
In order to prove the availability of chemical weapons at Shayrat airbase in Syria, one should send experts there, Russia’s Defence Ministry spokesman, Major-General Igor Konashenkov said, reports Interfax.
“Neither the Pentagon nor the State Department have provided any evidence proving the presence of chemical weapons at the airbase,” the official said.
“The only way to obtain objective evidence of the alleged presence of poisonous substances at Shayrat airbase is to send a missions of professional experts there,” Konashenkov said.
According to him, the possible presence of chemical weapons should be analysed with the use of special equipment to obtain samples, document them and conduct their scientific analysis.”
Konashenkov noted that neither warehouses nor ammunition with chemical weapons have been found after journalists, officials with the local administration, police and many others visited the Shayrat airbase. All those visitors, Konashenkov added, did not wear gas masks and felt “perfectly normal.”
On April 7, the US military conducted a cruise missile attack on Shayrat airbase in Syria’s Homs Province. The attack was carried out from US Navy ships in the Mediterranean Sea. The Pentagon said that the attack came in response to the chemical attack in Idlib Province, which, as US officials believe, was conducted by Bashar Assad’s troops. According to the United States, Syrian aircraft took off from Shayrat airbase before they gassed people in Idlib.
(OR HOW THE CIA HACKED, AND BOTCHED, THE US ELECTIONS AND MADE IT LOOK LIKE RUSSIA DID IT)
Apr 8 2017
Do we need any more reasons not to trust the government, especially the CIA? Well, thanks to Wiki Leaks we now have one more reason not to, and it is called “Grasshopper.”
According to the leaked information, Grasshopper framework allows the agency members to easily create custom malware. The Grasshopper framework will automatically put together the components sufficient for attacking a Windows machine, and once the target is selected the framework then puts together an installer that CIA agency members can use to install custom malware on the tart computer.
“The documents WikiLeaks publishes today provide an insights into the process of building modern espionage tools and insights into how the CIA maintains persistence over infected Microsoft Windows computers, providing directions for those seeking to defend their systems to identify any existing compromise,” WikiLeaks said.
Grasshopper allows tools to be installed and run on a machine without detection using PSP avoidance, allowing it to avoid Personal Security Products such as ‘MS Security Essentials,’ ‘Rising,’ Symantec endpoint’ or ‘Kaspersky IS.’
A Grasshopper executable contains one or more installers. And installer is a sstack of one or more installer components,” reads the manual. “Grasshopper invokes each component of the stack in series to operate on a payload. The ultimate purpose of an installer is to persist a payload.
CIA’s Grasshopper Uses ‘Stolen’ Russian Malware
Stolen Goods (Version 2) components mechanism were taken from a malware known as Carperb, “a suspected Russian organized crime rootkit,” alleges Wikileaks. Which means they can make it look like the Russians hacked something they actually did not.
The goal of this release is to help users seeking to defend their systems against any existing compromised security systems, Wickileaks stated. While I am sure it will not be easy to defend against this, with the knowledge that is out there steps can be taken to secure ourselves from it.
While we also do not know how the CIA has used the Grasshopper framework, but we do know according to WikiLeaks that the tools were used some time between 2012 and 2015.Other documents Wikileaks has revealed/ released are the “Year Zero” batch which uncovered CIA hacking exploits for popular hardware and software, the “Dark Matter” batch which focused on exploits and hacking techniques the agency designed to target iPhones and Macs, and the third batch called “Marble.”
THE TAIL IS WAGGING THE DOG AGAIN. POWELL LIED ABOUT SADDAM, NOW TRUMP AND THE US PRESS ARE LYING ABOUT ASSAD.
April 7, 2017
Paul Craig Roberts
Washington’s military attack on Syria is unambiguously a war crime. It occurred without any UN authorization or even the fake cover of a “coalition of the willing.” Washington’s attack on Syria occurred in advance of an investigation of the alleged event that Washington is trying to use as its justification. Indeed, Washington’s story of Syrian use of chemical weapons is totally implausible. All chemical weapons were removed from Syria by Russia and turned over to the US and its European allies. Syria has no such weapons and has no reason to use them and every reason not to. Moreover, it is none of Washington’s business whatsoever what weapons Syria uses against terrorist forces seeking to overthrow the Syrian government.
Governments in Europe, Canada, Australia, and Japan have not condemned this war crime. Indeed, the UK Foreign Minister has declared the UK’s support. Thus does the West reveal once again its hypocrisy.
As Russia has made clear, the alleged chemical weapons attack has every hallmark of a Washington orchestrated (false flag) event in order to set up a US military attack on Syria. As the Russian Defense Ministry explained, the US air attack had to have been planned in advance of the alleged chemical weapon event. The US air strike on Syria requires advanced planning, but followed immediately the event used as the excuse: http://eng.mil.ru/en/news_page/country/more.htm?id=12117678%40egNews