Chemical Attack: Russia Warns Of ‘Grave’ Response If US Launches Strike on Syria

Standard

The Russian Defense Ministry immediately denied and dismissed the US allegations that the Syrian government was responsible for the chemical attack in Eastern Ghouta’s Douma.

Major General Yury Yevtushenko, head of the Reconciliation Center in Syria, said on Sunday; “We strongly refute this information,”

“We declare our readiness, after Douma is liberated from the militants, to immediately send Russian radiation, chemical and biological protection specialists to collect data that will confirm the fabricated nature of these allegations,”

Yevtushenko said that “a number of Western countries” are trying to prevent the resumption of an operation aimed at driving militants from the city of Douma.

“For this purpose, the use of chemical weapons by Syrian government forces – one of the most widespread claims in the West – is being used,” he added.

And, knowing where this is all headed, Russia’s Foreign Ministry says in statement on website that reports of chemical weapons attack in rebel-held town of Douma are fabricated, and any military operations against Syria on false pretenses may lead to “gravest consequences,”

The Russians added that “The goal of such reports is to aid terrorists and justify possible military strikes from outside Syria.”

Russia is correct, and it is now just a matter of time before Trump unveils his next grand diversion from the chaos at home and the trade war with China, by launching another 50 or so Tomahawks at some venue deep inside Syria, in a carbon copy repeat of what happened exactly one year ago.

False Flag: Trump Warns ‘Animal Assad’ Over Chemical Weapons Attack That Killed 70

Standard

Caving to neocon interests, US President Donald Trump has said Syrian President Bashar al-Assad will have a “big price to pay” for allegedly launching a deadly chemical weapons attack on civilians — and blamed Iran and Russian President Vladimir Putin for backing “animal Assad”.

This follows Trump’s earlier decision to strike a Syrian airbase in April 2017 in retaliation for Assad’s alleged use of chemical weapons against his own people.

Recent tweets from Trump appear to advocate a direct overthrow of Assad.

In one of the tweets, Trump slammed Obama, who vowed in 2012 that such actions (a chemical weapons attack) would cross a “red line,” but later failed to enforce the promise a year later when hundreds of Syrians were killed by sarin gas.

Instead, Obama brokered a multi-nation deal in which Syrian President Bashar Assad pledged to remove his chemical-weapons stockpile.


The continuation of war.

This latest, likely false flag chemical weapons attack in Syria follows the defeat of ISIS, and provides the much-needed justification for the Zionist-neocon lobby to keep the US forces in Syria indefinitely — and judging by the heated rhetoric, maybe even move to overthrow Assad.

Despite all this, at a rally in Cleveland last week, Trump said that the US will get out of Syria “very soon.” It is now clear that the 4,000 US troops currently occupying Syria will in fact stay in Syria.

But just as Trump again comes out urging for military withdrawal, a false flag crops up and the US is thrown back into contention. The strings are being pulled.

Trump buying into this latest publicity stunt is a worrying sign of escalation and further interventionism — it was only a matter of time before something came up and the banker’s war was given a new lease of life.

30443265_481782188890667_6331916112679982069_n


There’s no motive for Syria to use chemical weapons and draw more attention to itself.

There is no reason for Assad to attack his own people with chemical weapons, the motive is not there, he wants deescalation and for NATO to leave Syria, why would he create reasons for further occupation? — also, the means of carrying out the attack aren’t there if we take Assad’s word for the dismantlement of Syria’s chemical weapons. If there are no means, there is no opportunity to carry out the attack to begin with.

Last year, a Syrian military statement published by state media on 4 April denied the use of “any chemical or toxic substance”, saying that the military “has never used them, anytime, anywhere, and will not do so in the future”.

President Bashar al-Assad subsequently said the 2017 chemical weapons incident was a “fabrication” used to justify a US cruise missile strike on Syria’s Shayrat airbase on 7 April.

Now, in 2018, history is repeating itself.

This shock-factor child poster image from the Zionist-owned Associated Press is up across all the mainstream media outlets.


US intelligence has links to training ‘moderate’ rebels in using chemical weapons.

Globalresearch reports:

CNN accuses Bashar Al Assad of killing his own people while also acknowledging that the “rebels” are not only in possession of chemical weapons, but that these “moderate terrorists” affiliated with Al Nusra are trained in the use of chemical weapons by specialists on contract to the Pentagon.

Moscow has provided evidence that the U.S is training Al Qaeda affiliated “militants groups” in the use of chemical. A March 17, Russia’s Ministry of Defense  states the following:

“We have reliable information at our disposal that US instructors have trained a number of militant groups in the vicinity of the town of At-Tanf, to stage provocations involving chemical warfare agents in southern Syria. The provocations will be used as a pretext by the United States and its allies to launch strikes on military and government infrastructure in Syria.”

The CNN report by Barbara Starr below dated September 2013 ultimately confirms Russia’s allegations.

Moreover, in an earlier report dated December 9 2012, CNN confirms that:

“The training [in chemical weapons], which is taking place in Jordan and Turkey, involves how to monitor and secure stockpiles and handle weapons sites and materials, according to the sources. Some of the contractors are on the ground in Syria working with the rebels to monitor some of the sites, according to one of the officials.

The nationality of the trainers was not disclosed, though the officials cautioned against assuming all are American. (CNN, December 09, 2012, emphasis added)

The above report by CNN’s award winning journalist Elise Labott (relegated to the status a CNN blog), refutes CNN’s numerous accusations directed against Bashar Al Assad.

Who is doing the training of terrorists in the use of chemical weapons? From the horse’s mouth: CNN

And these are the same terrorists (trained by the Pentagon) who are the alleged target of Washington’s counter-terrorism bombing campaign initiated by Obama in August 2014:

“The Pentagon scheme established in 2012 consisted in equipping and training Al Qaeda rebels in the use of chemical weapons, with the support of military contractors hired by the Pentagon, and then holding the Syrian government responsible  for using the WMD against the Syrian people.

What is unfolding is a diabolical scenario –which is an integral part of military planning– namely a situation where opposition terrorists advised by Western defense contractors are actually in possession of chemical weapons.

This is not a rebel training exercise in non-proliferation. While president Obama states that “you will be held accountable” if “you” (meaning the Syrian government) use chemical weapons, what is contemplated as part of this covert operation is the possession of chemical weapons by the US-NATO sponsored terrorists, namely “by our” Al Qaeda affiliated operatives, including the Al Nusra Front which constitutes the most effective Western financed and trained fighting group, largely integrated by foreign mercenaries. In a bitter twist, Jabhat al-Nusra, a US sponsored “intelligence asset”, was recently put on the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations.

The West claims that it is coming to the rescue of the Syrian people, whose lives are allegedly threatened by Bashar Al Assad. The truth of the matter is that the Western military alliance is not only supporting the terrorists, including the Al Nusra Front, it is also making chemical weapons available to its proxy “opposition” rebel forces.

The next phase of this diabolical scenario is that the chemical weapons in the hands of Al Qaeda operatives will be used against civilians, which could potentially lead an entire nation into a humanitarian disaster.

The broader issue is: who is a threat to the Syrian people? The Syrian government of Bashar al Assad or the US-NATO-Israel military alliance which is recruiting “opposition” terrorist forces, which are now being trained in the use of chemical weapons.” (Michel Chossudovsky, May 8, 2013, minor edit)

The Bolton Appointment: Conflict Between Trump’s Words And Actions

Standard

No US president who wanted to get along with Russia would have appointed Bolton, an Iran Hawk who is close to pro-Israel groups, to be his National Security Adviser.

President Trump (belatedly) congratulated Russian President Putin on his smashing reelection and said, again, that he favored getting along with Russia.

Yet, how can Trump mean it when he follows up by appointing John Bolton, America’s most notorious warmonger, National Security Adviser? It makes no sense.

If neocons encircle Trump to the extent where his campaign promises are made impossible — then he has the obligation to resign in protest and/or explain the circumstances wherever possible. He has done neither, the situation inside the White House is not known, but what goes on outside the White House, i.e. the policy-making, is clear as day.

Trump is either an outright puppet or a reluctant puppet of the Zionist neocons. Either way, globalist foreign policy continues, while Trump speaks as if it’s not.

Bolton is the third national security adviser in 14 months. To Bolton, getting along with Russia requires Russia to be a US puppet state such as the UK, France, Germany, Canada, Australia, Japan, and all the rest. In other words, accept Washington’s hegemony or we will bomb you into the Stone Age.

John R. Bolton, notorious hawk and pro-Israel advocate.

Russia, desperate for a sign of hope, risks self-delusion by seizing on Trump’s gesture and ignoring Bolton’s appointment. No US president who wanted to get along with Russia would have appointed Bolton to be his National Security Adviser.

The constant drum beat of false allegations against Russia and the demonization of Putin, which has reached down into the British school system where children are being taught that “‘Toxic’ Putin is on mission to poison the West,” indicate that conflict with Russia was on the agenda prior to Bolton’s appointment.

Now that Putin has announced Russia’s new weapon systems, an array that clearly puts the US in an inferior position, hegemonic voices are rising that the US must strike Russia before the new superweapons are all deployed.

Russia would do well to avoid being put off guard by her unrealistic hope for peace and friendly words from Trump’s mouth.


This article was originally published at PaulCraigRoberts.org on March 23, 2018.

Skripal Row: Over 100 Russian Diplomats Now Expelled Across EU & US

Standard
“The largest collective expulsion of Russian intelligence officers in history.”
Theresa May
Following the chemical attack earlier this month, further Western nations’ expulsions now amount to over 100 Russian diplomats:

  • US: 60 diplomats
  • EU countries: France (4); Germany (4); Poland (4); Czech Republic (3); Lithuania (3); Denmark (2); Netherlands (2); Italy (2); Estonia (1); Croatia (1); Finland (1); Latvia (1); Romania (1); Sweden (1)
  • Ukraine: 13
  • Albania: 2
  • Canada: 4

The Kremlin has denied any involvement in the attack and says Britain is orchestrating an anti-Russia campaign.

Gavin Williamson, UK Defense Secretary, stated:

“The Kremlin’s intention is to divide, and what we are seeing is the world uniting behind the British stance and that in itself is a great victory and sends an exceptionally powerful message to the Kremlin and President Putin.”

John Pilger, Australian Journalist, called the attack a “carefully constructed drama”:

Ray McGovern, a veteran CIA officer turned political activist gives his views on the situation:

 

New U.S. National Security Adviser Threatens to Change Iranian Regime by 2019

Standard

Naming Bolton suggests Trump is ready to pull out of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal by May 12, the deadline for Trump to waive sanctions. The deal trades sanctions relief for a rollback of Iran’s nuclear program. Bolton is a staunch opponent of the deal, as is Mike Pompeo, the CIA chief Trump nominated last week to replace Rex Tillerson as secretary of state.

The now likely doomed 2015 nuclear deal lifted sanctions on Iran but placed strict limits on its nuclear programme.

Bolton has multiple times said striking Iran to stop it from going nuclear may be inevitable; “I don’t make any disguise of the idea that ultimately it may take an Israeli strike against Iran’s nuclear program to stop it,” he told the conservative Washington Free Beacon last August.

Tillerson and McMaster both didn’t like the deal but counseled not pulling out of it now that it is in place, because Iran is complying with its narrow strictures, and pulling out would remove whatever leverage the United States has with U.S. allies to pressure Iran outside the deal’s confines. That leaves James Mattis, the defense secretary, as the only Cabinet level official who opposes leaving the deal.

Bolton’s Zionist ties.

Bolton has close relations with the pro-Israel community stemming from his success in 1991 in getting the United Nations to rescind its Zionism is racism resolution. Bolton was at the time the Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs under President George H. W. Bush.

Bush’s son, George W. Bush, nominated Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations in 2005 and named him acting ambassador. Bolton never cleared the Senate nominating process, in part because of his hawkishness on Middle Eastern issues, but also because subordinates at the State Department emerged to describe him as an abusive boss. Bolton had under the younger Bush been the Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs.

Pro-Israel groups, including the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, at the time broke with protocol and endorsed a nominee, but to no avail.

McMaster got along well with his Israeli counterparts but angered some on the right wing of the pro-Israel community because of reports that he blocked Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. Trump ultimately recognized Jerusalem last December.

Bolton’s anti-Iran stance.

Bolton promised members of the Iranian opposition that the Iranian regime will be overthrown by 2019 during a meeting in the French capital of Paris eight months ago, the Intercept reported on March 25.

“Before 2019, we here will celebrate in Tehran!” Bolton told members of the Iranian opposition group, People’s Mujahedin of Iran (MEK), according to the Intercept.

During the meeting, Bolton said that a regime change in Iran is needed because the current regime is not going to change its behavior and vowed to forbid the Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Khomeini from celebrating the 40th anniversary of the Iranian revolution, that’s on February 11, 2019.

The MEK , which has an armed wing, was a part of the 1979 Iranian revolution with Khomeini and even carried out some attacks against US interests in the country back then. However, after failing to gain the power, the group has become the main opponent of the Iranian regime.

According to Iranian sources, more than 16,000 people have been killed in violent attacks conducted by the MEK inside Iran since 1979. The attacks have included a series of assassinations and bombings, which have targeted Iranian officials and civilians.

Despite all of these crimes, the MEK has been spending millions of dollars during the last few years to present itself as a moderate group that’s ready to replace the current regime of Iran if the West decides to support a regime change war there, according to the Intercept.

Bolton’s endorsement of the MEK and his promise to overthrow the Iranian regime were not a surprise to most observers. Killing the nuclear deal with Iran is the least to expect from the new warmonger national security adviser, according to several observers, who also believe that a US war on Iran is steadily becoming more likely.

“The declared policy of the United States of America should be the overthrow of the Mullah’s regime in Tehran. The behavior and the objectives of the regime are not going to change and therefore the only solution is to change the regime itself.”

John Bolton, US National Security Advisor.