Pennsylvania Gov. Shapiro autographs bombs to kill Russians during Zelensky visit to Pennsylvania factory, signs deal to make weapons to kill Russians in Ukraine near Russia border-9/23/2024

 Sept. 23, 2024, “There’s Gov Josh Shapiro with Zelensky signing artillery shells at a weapons plant in Scranton, PA“

Above, Sept. 23, 2024, Max Blumenthal twitter

………………………………………………………

Added: “Zelenskyy was flown to Pennsylvania on an U.S. Air Force C-17. The Biden-Harris admin is using military assets to fly a foreign leader into a battleground state in order to undermine their political opponents. x.com/greg_price11/s”…9/23/24, Dan Caldwell

(Image: “Governor Josh Shapiro welcomes Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy before a visit to the Scranton Army Ammunition Plant in Lackawanna County. Office of the Governor)

…………………………………

Added: “They’re implying their [Ukraine] war creates [Pennsylvania] jobs….Literally funding a foreign leader and using the [US] military to bring him to campaign with them in a battleground state.“...Joe Lonsdale, 9/23/24

………………………….

Added:

9/23/24, “Shapiro welcomes Ukrainian President Zelenskyy to Scranton ammunition plant,” NorthCentralPa.com, Scranton, Pa.

“On Sunday, Governor Josh Shapiro welcomed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during a visit to Scranton munitions plant, where the embattled leader thanked workers.

Zelensky made the special trip to visit the Pennsylvania workers at the Scranton Army Ammunition Plant (SCAAP) in Lackawanna County — one of two major munitions plants in Northeastern Pennsylvania. The ammunition plays a vital role in Ukraine’s defense.

During the visit, President Zelenskyy spoke with workers at SCAAP — a U.S. Army Joint Munitions Command (JMC) facility that manufactures large-caliber metal projectiles and mortar projectiles for the U.S. Department of Defense —

and thanked them for their efforts.

SCAAP specifically builds 155-millimeter howitzer rounds, some of the most vital equipment for Ukraine’s defense against Russia.  

“Pennsylvania is the birthplace of American freedom — and our Commonwealth proudly stands with the people of Ukraine as they fight for their freedom against naked aggression,” Shapiro said. “I’m proud to welcome President Zelenskyy and his delegation to Scranton — to visit with

the women and men who are fueling his country’s fight for freedom —

[Image: Pennsylvania values? May 2024, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Kensington area. USA!!! USA!!!]

and sign an agreement with Zaporizhzhia that will strengthen both states and foster collaboration for years to come. Pennsylvania looks forward to building a close relationship with Zaporizhzhia as we continue to stand on the side of freedom.”

During Zelenskyy’s visit, Shapiro also signed an agreement with the Zaporizhzhia Regional State (Military) Administration,

a province in Southeast Ukraine,

that aims to leverage the strengths of both regions and support the region’s efforts to rebuild after the war while providing Pennsylvania businesses an opportunity to participate in the reconstruction through its Department of Community & Economic Development (DCED). As part of the agreement, Pennsylvania will work with the economic leaders in Zaporizhzhia to share best practices across critical industries, including energy, agriculture, digital technologies, workforce development, and defense. The agreement encourages dialogue and cooperation through visits, workshops, and meetings, and allows for the expansion of the scope of cooperation as needed.

“Today is an exciting day for Zaporizhzhia and Pennsylvania,” said DCED Secretary Rick Siger. “This agreement will help support the future economic revitalization of Ukraine,

[Map: Zaporizhzhia is close to Russian territory as of Aug. 2024, BBC]

while boosting our economy and creating jobs for Pennsylvanians.

Five of the sectors included in the agreement mirror those in our Economic Development Strategy, and we look forward to building a strong partnership with Zaporizhzhia in industries such as energy, agriculture, life sciences, robotics, advanced manufacturing, and more.”

Defense cooperation for Ukraine remains essential. This month, more than 150 soldiers from the Pennsylvania National Guard’s (PANG) 56th Stryker Brigade Combat Team

deployed to Germany

supporting the Joint  Multinational Training Group-Ukraine.

The PANG’s Task Force Independence is currently training Ukrainian forces in combined arms and maneuver training for battalion-sized units.

Governor Josh Shapiro, [right], signed an agreement with the Zaporizhzhia Regional State (Military) Administration that support the region’s efforts to rebuild after the war while providing Pennsylvania businesses an opportunity to participate in the reconstruction. Office of the Governor

The U.S. Department of Defense announced in December 2022 that it was expanding U.S.-led training for the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF). The U.S. program will train up to one Ukrainian battalion per month and will help develop the skills of Ukrainian units in specialized equipment.

“Training is key to Ukraine’s continued success on the battlefield,” said Maj. Gen. Mark Schindler, Pennsylvania’s adjutant general and head of the Department of Military and Veterans Affairs (DMVA). “Our Pennsylvania National Guard 

soldiers are in Germany,

away from their families and loved ones

in support of this mission. They, along with more than 

a thousand other PANG members are currently serving overseas in

support of our nation and

its responsibility to operations

around the globe. We are proud of their commitment and thankful for their service.””

Above, Ukraine map

Above: Zaporizhzhia oblast in Southeast Ukraine

…………………………………………….

Added: Pennsylvania’s new business partner, Zaporizhzhia Regional State (Military) Administration is in Southeast Ukraine province of Zaporizhzhia:

“Zaporizhiain Ukraine,” Wikimedia Commons

……………………………..

2nd map: Great idea! Below, Pennsylvania’s new “business partner” is close to area largely controlled by Russia as of August, 2022. Yellow=Ukr, pink=Russia.

Above, Zaporizhzhia Oblast, rough zones of occupation during the southern offensive of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, as of August 2022. Ukraine has maintained control over the north of the oblast, including the areas around the cities of Zaporizhzhia, Huliaipole and Orikhiv. The Russian occupation extends throughout the entire southern part of the oblast, including the major cities of Melitopol, Berdiansk and Enerhodar.”

………………………………………………

Added: Number of Russia foreign military bases: approx. 21

Number of US foreign military bases: approx. 900

“Today, [2018] Russia operates at least 21 significant military facilities overseas, according to the Izvestiya daily newspaper citing Moscow’s Ministry of Defense and U.N. data.”…

Russia: 21 bases. US: More than 900 bases in more than 90 countries and territories. US is obsessively expansionist–exactly what it accuses Russia of being or wishing it could be. proudly says it’s “Their blood, our bullets,” (@ :53-:60). US is a genocide squad, a military dictatorship enabled by enslaved US taxpayers….Even neocon US spokesperson Farkas says

Russia can “compete with us with regard to their qualitative presence.”

[Meaning Russia respects its taxpayers, is willing to do the extra work required to have a “qualitative” presence.]

Newsweek, 2018: “”The U.S. is still the preeminent military power globally,” she [Ellen Farkas, “former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia”] says.

“However that doesn’t mean that the Russians can’t exert undue levels of influence in some part of the world.”

“The Russians can’t afford to have that kind of base infrastructure that we have globally, that is true.“…

[The US “can’t afford” this either, is trillions in debt, but US isn’t a country].

(continuing): “They aren’t the Soviet Union anymore,” she says, noting that financially and logistically, Russia’s military does not match the U.S….

That doesn’t mean they can’t compete with us

with regard to their qualitative presence.”…

“The Kremlin under Putin has generally been very good at the economy of force and generally using as little recourse to achieve their objectives as possible,” Farkas argues. “What they put into Syria, for example, was what they determined they needed to do at the lowest amount of cost. They don’t have to have large installations and notional control (of bases) so long as they can exert control….

“If they had their way and they had the resources, I think they

would still love to have the conventional reach we have and the opportunity that more conventional bases provides,“ Farkas says.

[What “opportunity?” Why would anyone “love to have” that kind of bloat and enormous cost of upkeep unless your #1 goal was to bleed taxpayers to death? Offices/buildings require energy, must be heated, cooled, maintained, plumbing attended to (assuming there’s plumbing at all), clean water, nutritious food, medical services. “Training” equipment eventually gets rusty, breaks down, etc., new weapons needed.]

(continuing): “But at present they are doing what they can with what they have.””…“Russia’s Military Compared to the U.S.: Which Country Has More Military Bases Across the World?” Newsweek, 6/3/2018…“The Biggest Military Base Empire on Earth,” 9/2/24

………………………………………………

Added:

9/2/24, “The Biggest Military Base Empire on Earth,” Greta Zarro, Reprinted from World Beyond War, antiwar.com

“U.S. foreign military bases provoke war, pollute communities, and steal land from Indigenous peoples.”

“The United States of America,

unlike any other nation on Earth,

maintains a massive network of foreign military bases around the world, more than 900 bases in more than 90 countries and territories. If the peace movement is serious about ending the United States’ and its allies’ warmaking, then

this global constellation of bases must be curtailed.

The permanent stationing of more than 220,000 U.S. troops,

weapons arsenals,

and thousands of aircraft, tanks, and ships

in every corner of the globe makes the logistics for U.S. aggression,

and that of its allies, quicker and more efficient. Bases also

facilitate the proliferation of nuclear weapons,

with the United States keeping nuclear bombs

in five NATO member countries,

and nuclear-capable planes, ships, and missile launchers in many others. Because the

U.S. is continually creating plans for military actions around the world,

and because the U.S. military always has some troops “on the ready,” the

initiation of combat operations is simpler.

Not to mention the fact that

these bases act as a provocation to surrounding countries.

Their presence is a permanent reminder of the military capacity of the U.S.

Rather than deterring potential adversaries,

U.S. bases antagonize other countries into

greater military spending and aggression.

Russia, for example, justifies its interventions in Georgia and Ukraine by pointing to encroaching U.S. bases in Eastern Europe.

China feels encircled by the more than 200 U.S. bases in the Pacific region,

leading to a more assertive policy in the South China Sea. With vastly more foreign military bases than any other country on Earth, the U.S. logically must lead the way in a reverse arms race.

Furthermore, the U.S.’s network of foreign military bases

perpetuates empire —

an ongoing form of colonialism

that robs Indigenous people of their lands. From Guam to Puerto Rico to Okinawa to

dozens of other locations across the world, the

[US] military has taken valuable land from local populations, often pushing out Indigenous people in the process,

without their consent and without reparations.

For example, between 1967 and 1973, the entire population of the Chagos Islands 

was forcibly removed

from the island of Diego Garcia

by the UK

so that it could be leased to the U.S. for an airbase.

The Chagossian people were taken off their island by force and transported in conditions compared to those of slave ships. Despite an overwhelming vote of the UN General Assembly, and an advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice in the Hague that the island should be returned to the Chagossians,

the UK has refused and the U.S. continues operations from Diego Garcia today.

Each base has its own story of injustice and destruction,

impacting the local economy, community, and environment. The U.S. military has a notorious legacy of sexual violence, including kidnapping, rape, and murders of women and girls. Yet U.S. troops abroad are often afforded impunity for their crimes due to Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs) with the so-called “host” country. The lack of respect for the lives and bodies of Indigenous people is another product of unequal power relationships between the U.S. military and the people whose land they occupy.

In essence, the presence of U.S. foreign bases

creates apartheid zones, in which the occupied population, with second-class status,

comes into the base to perform the labor of cooking, cleaning, and landscaping.

Furthermore, the rise in property taxes and inflation in areas surrounding U.S. bases has been known to push locals out.

Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs) also often exempt U.S. foreign military bases from adhering to local environmental regulations. The construction of bases has caused irreparable ecological damage, such as the destruction of coral reefs and the environment for endangered species in Henoko, Okinawa. Furthermore, it is well documented at hundreds of sites around the world that military bases leach toxic so-called “forever chemicals” into local water supplies, which has had devastating health consequences for nearby communities.

Closing bases is a necessary step to right the wrongs of colonialism, to curb the environmental destruction wrought by militarism, and

shift the global security paradigm towards a demilitarized approach that centers common security — no one is safe until all are safe.

This September 20-22 [2024], in honor of the International Day of Peace, World BEYOND War is organizing its annual global #NoWar2024 Conference focused on the theme of the U.S. military base empire — its impacts and the solutions. Throughout three days of sessions held in four locations around the world (Sydney, Australia; Wanfried, Germany; Bogotá, Colombia; and Washington, DC), and streamed on Zoom, speakers will address the social, ecological, economic, and geopolitical impacts of U.S. military bases in their regions, plus the powerful stories of nonviolent resistance to prevent, close, and

convert bases to peacetime uses.

Karina Lester, a Yankunytjatjara Anangu woman from the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands (APY Lands) in the far North West of South Australia, will speak about the impacts of nuclear testing felt by her people. Alejandra Rodríguez Peña, member of the Olga Castillo Collective in Colombia, will discuss the collective’s work for justice and reparations for victims of sexual violence by U.S. military personnel. Laura Benítez, a marine biologist, will detail the campaign opposing the construction of a U.S. base on Colombia’s Gorgona Island, which is home to unique ecosystems and rich wildlife. Ricardo Armando Patiño Aroca, former Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Defense of Ecuador during the government of Rafael Correa, will share how the U.S. base in Manta, Ecuador was effectively shut down. Dr. Cynthia Enloe, renowned for her work on gender and militarism and the author of Bananas, Beaches and Bases, will explain how the presence of U.S. military bases impacts the local economy, shapes race relations within the community, and re-configures the sexual politics of a society.

On September 20-22,  [2024] join us virtually — or in-person in Australia, Germany, Colombia, and the U.S. — for the #NoWar2024 Conference to hear from these and many other speakers about the

impacts of the USA’s military base empire

and how to work towards demilitarization and decolonization.”

“Greta Zarro is the Organizing Director at World BEYOND War.”

…………………………………………………….

Added: Until 1947, the Dept. of Defense was correctly titled the Dept of War:

Image: “Seal of the United States Department of War,” Wikipedia commons

2/20/2019, “The US Military Is Everywhere,“ William Astore, Antiwar.com

“Most Americans would say we have a military for national defense and security. But our military is not a defensive force. Defense is not its ethos, nor is it how our military is structured. Our military is a power-projection force. It is an offensive force. It is designed to take the fight to the [alleged] enemy. To strike first, usually justified as “preemptive” or “preventive” action. It’s a military that believes “the best defense is a good offense,” with leaders who believe in “full-spectrum dominance,” i.e. quick and overwhelming victories, enabled by superior technology and firepower, whether on the ground, on the seas, in the air, or even in space or cyberspace….

We’ve become a one-dimensional country. All military all the time.

………………………………………………….

Comment: Who’s “responsible” for operations at US border?…Who’s leaving “their families and loved ones” to protect this border? Answer: No one. Why is Pennsylvania National Guard currently in Germany “training Ukrainian forces” for battalion-sized units?” When is someone going to be “trained” to create and defend a US southern border? Answer: Never. US needs to be split up into at least 3 separate countries. For example, southwest states could merge with Mexico.

 

 

 .................

The fake, phony, fraud Syria-Sarin gas ‘False Flag’ event in 2013 still being used as weapon in US endless war on US taxpayers-Consortium News, Ray McGovern, Dec. 16, 2016

8/21/2023, “A decade after a sarin gas attack in a Damascus suburb, Syrian survivors lose hope for justice,” AP

11/8/2019, "The Deep State...considers global conflict as the price to pay for maintaining its largesse from the US taxpayer. Continuous warfare is its only business product."...Philip Giraldi

……………………………………..

12/11/2016, “The Syrian-Sarin ‘False Flag’ Lesson,” Consortium News, Ray McGovern

“Exclusive: Amid Official Washington’s desire to censor non-official news on the Internet, it’s worth remembering how the lack of mainstream skepticism almost led the U.S. into a war on Syria, says ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern.”

“A review of events leading to the very edge of full-blown U.S. shock-and-awe on Syria three years ago [2013] provides a case study with important lessons for new policymakers as they begin to arrive in Washington.

It is high time to expose the whys and wherefores of the almost-successful attempt to mousetrap President Barack Obama into an open attack on Syria [in 2013] three years ago. Little-known and still less appreciated is the last-minute intervention of Russian President Vladimir Putin as deus ex machina

rescuing Obama from the corner into which he had let himself be painted.

Image, 9/5/2013, “President Vladimir Putin of Russia welcomed President Barack Obama to the G20 Summit at Konstantinovsky Palace in Saint Petersburg, Russia, Sept. 5, 2013. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)”

Accumulating evidence offers persuasive proof that

Syrian [jihadists] rebels supported by Turkish intelligence – not Syrian Army troops –

bear responsibility for the infamous sarin nerve-gas attack killing

hundreds of people on Aug. 21, 2013 in Ghouta, a suburb of Damascus.

The incident bears all the earmarks of a false-flag attack.

But U.S. and other [jihadist] “rebel-friendly” media outlets

wasted no time in offering “compelling” evidence from “social media” – which Secretary of State John Kerry described as an “extraordinary tool” – to place the onus on the Syrian government.

However, as the war juggernaut started rolling toward war,

enter Putin from stage right with an offer difficult for Obama to refuse –

guaranteed destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons on a U.S. ship outfitted for such purpose. 

This cheated Washington’s neocon mousetrap-setters out of their war on Syria.

They would get back at Putin six months later by orchestrating an anti-Russian coup in Kiev.

But the play-by-play in U.S.-Russian relations in summer 2013 arguably surpasses in importance even the avoidance of an overt U.S. assault on Syria. Thus, it is important to appreciate the lessons drawn by Russian leaders from the entire experience.

Putting Cheese in the Mousetrap

So, let us recall that on Dec. 10, 2015, just over one year ago, Turkish Member of Parliament Eren Erdem testified about how

Turkey’s intelligence service helped deliver sarin precursors to [terrorists] in Syria.

The Official Story blaming Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was already collapsing – largely discredited by reports in independent media and by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh – though it

remained widely accepted in the U.S. mainstream media which repeatedly cited the case as the moment when Assad

crossed Obama’s “red line” against using chemical weapons

and Obama had failed to back up his threat.

But Erdem took the debunking of the “official” tale to a public and official level. Based on government documents from a Turkish court, which he waved before his MP colleagues, Erdem

poured ice water on the West’s long-running

excited belief

that Assad had “gassed his own people.”

But, alas, if you do not understand Turkish,

or if you missed this story in the Belfast Telegraph of Dec. 14

or if you don’t read some independent Web sites

or if you believe that RT publishes only Russian “propaganda,”

this development may still come as a huge surprise,

for Erdem’s revelations

appeared in no other English-language newspaper.

So, those malnourished by “mainstream media” may be clueless about

the scary reality that Obama came within inches of letting himself be

mousetrapped into ordering U.S. armed forces mount a shock-and-awe-type attack on Syria in late summer 2013.

Turkish MP Testimony

Addressing fellow members of the Turkish Parliament, Turkish MP Erdem from the opposition Republican People’s Party directly confronted his government on this key issue. Waving a copy of “Criminal Case Number 2013/120,” Erdem described official Turkish reports and electronic evidence documenting a smuggling operation with Turkish government complicity.

In an interview with RT four days later, Erdem said Turkish authorities

had evidence of sarin gas-related shipments to [US funded terrorist] anti-government rebels in Syria,

and did nothing to stop them.

The General Prosecutor in the Turkish city of Adana opened a criminal case and an indictment stated “chemical weapons components” from Europe “were to be seamlessly shipped via a designated route

through Turkey to militant labs in Syria.”

Erdem cited evidence implicating the Turkish Minister of Justice and the Turkish Mechanical and Chemical Industry Corporation in the smuggling of sarin. Small wonder that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan immediately accused Erdem of “treason.”

Erdem testified that the 13 suspects, who had been arrested in police raids on the plotters, were released just a week after they were indicted. The case was shut down abruptly by higher authority.

Erdem told RT that the sarin attack at Ghouta took place shortly after the criminal case was closed and that the attack probably was carried out by jihadists with sarin gas smuggled through Turkey.

Erdem’s disclosures were not entirely new. More than two years before Erdem’s brave actions, in a Memorandum for the President by the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity of Sept. 6, 2013, we had reported that

coordination meetings had taken place just weeks before the sarin attack

at a Turkish military garrison in Antakya, some

15 miles from the border with Syria.

In Antakya, senior Turkish, Qatari and U.S. intelligence officials

were said to be coordinating plans with Western-sponsored [jihadist] rebels who were told to expect an imminent escalation in the fighting due to “a war-changing development.” This, in turn,

would lead to a U.S.-led bombing of Syria,

and [jihadist] rebel commanders were ordered to prepare their forces quickly to exploit the bombing,

march into Damascus,

and remove the Assad government.

A year earlier, The New York Times reported that the Antakya area had become a “magnet for foreign jihadis, who are flocking into Turkey to fight holy war in Syria.” The Times quoted a Syrian opposition member based in Antakya, saying the Turkish police were patrolling this border area “with their eyes closed.”

Kerry Dancing

It is a safe bet that Secretary of State John Kerry’s aides briefed him in timely fashion on Erdem’s revelations. This may account for why, on a visit to Moscow on Dec. 15, 2015 (four days after Erdem’s testimony), Kerry chose to repeat the meme that Assad “gassed his people; I mean, gas hasn’t been used in warfare formally for years and gas is outlawed, but Assad used it.”

[Below, 2009, John Kerry and his wife dine with Mr. Assad and his wife at a Damascus, Syria restaurant. At the time Kerry was a US Senator.]

 

Three days later, The Washington Post dutifully echoed Kerry, charging

that Assad had killed “his own people with chemical weapons.”

And this charge remains a staple in U.S. corporate media,

where Erdem’s testimony is still nowhere to be found.

Kerry also didn’t want to admit that he had

grossly misled the American people on an issue of war and peace.

Just days after the Aug. 21, 2013 sarin attack at Ghouta, Kerry and his neocon allies displayed their acumen in following George W. Bush’s dictum:

“You got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in,

to kind of catapult the propaganda.”

On Aug. 30, [2013] Kerry solemnly claimed, no fewer than 35 times, “We know” the Assad government was responsible for the sarin deaths,

finally giving Kerry and the neocons their casus belli.

But on Aug. 31, [2013] with U.S. intelligence analysts

expressing their own doubts that Assad’s forces were responsible,

Obama put the brakes on the juggernaut toward war,

saying he would first seek approval from Congress. 

Kerry, undaunted, wasted no time in lobbying Congress for war.

On Sept. 1, [2013] Kerry told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos that

briefings in Congress had already begun

and that “we are not going to lose this vote.”

On Sept. 3, [2013] Kerry was back at it with a bravura performance before the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, whose leaders showed in their own remarks the degree to which

they were lusting for an attack on Syria.

The following offers a taste for Kerry’s “protest-too-much” testimony:

the Assad regime,

and only, undeniably, the Assad regime,

unleashed an outrageous chemical attack against its own citizens. … In their lust to hold on to power, [they] were willing to infect the air of Damascus with a poison that killed innocent mothers and fathers

and hundreds of their children,

their lives all snuffed out by gas in the early morning of August 21st [2013].

“Now, some people here and there,

amazingly,

have questioned the evidence of this assault on conscience.

I repeat here again today that

only the most willful desire to avoid reality can assert

that this did not occur as described or that the regime did not do it. It did happen,

and the Assad regime did it.

“Within minutes of the attack, the social media exploded with horrific images of men and women, the elderly, and children sprawled on a hospital floor with no wounds, no blood, but all dead. Those scenes of human chaos and desperation

were not contrived. They were real.

No one could contrive such a scene. …

“And as we debate, the world wonders, not whether Assad’s regime executed the worst chemical weapons attack of the 21st century — that fact I think is now beyond question —

the world wonders

whether the United States of America will consent

through silence to standing aside

while this kind of brutality is allowed to happen without consequence.”

Kerry added a credulity-stretching

attempt to play down

the role and effectiveness of Al Qaeda in Syria,

[“Idlib province is largest Al Qaeda safe haven since 9/11″ – US official Brett McGurk, July 2017:

“In Idlib province, look, Idlib province is the largest Al Qaeda safe haven since 9/11 tied directly to Ayman Al Zawahiri. This is a huge problem. Its been a problem for some time.…We have been very focused on Al Qaeda in Idlib province, leaders of Al Qaeda that make their way to Idlib province often do not make their way out of there. We have to ask a question – why and how is Ayman Al Zawahiri’s deputy finding his way to Idlib province? Why is this happening? How are they getting there? They are not paratroopers. And the approach – I will not talk about anything the U.S Government has done in certain parts of Syria on this problem – but the approach by some of our partners to send in tens of thousands of tonnes of weapons and looking the other way as these foreign fighters come into Syria may not have been the best approach – and Al Qaeda has taken full advantage of it and Idlib now is a huge problem. It is an Al Qaeda safe haven right on the border with Turkey.“…]

(continuing): “and exaggerated the strength of the “moderate” [US backed terrorist] rebels there. 

This drew unusually prompt and personal criticism from Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Putin: “Kerry Lies”

Rarely does it happen that a president of a major country calls the head diplomat of a rival state a “liar,” but that is the label Russian President Putin chose for Kerry on the day after his congressional testimony. Referring to Kerry during a televised meeting of the Russian Presidential Human Rights Council

on Sept. 4, [2013] Putin addressed the sarin issue in these words:

[Mr. Putin:] “It is simply absurd to imagine that Assad used chemical weapons, given that he is gaining ground. After all, this is a weapon of last resort.” Putin claimed, correctly, that Assad had “encircled his [terrorist] adversaries in some places and was finishing them off.”

Putin continued: “I watched the congressional debates.

A congressman

asked Mr. Kerry, ‘Is Al Qaeda present there? I’ve heard they have gained momentum.’

He replied, ‘No. I can tell you earnestly, they are not.’”

[“Idlib province is largest Al Qaeda safe haven since 9/11″]

Putin continued, “The main combat unit, the so-called Al-Nusra, is an Al-Qaeda subdivision. They [Americans] know about this.

This was very unpleasant and surprising for me. After all … we talk with them,

and we assume they are decent people.

But he is lying, and he knows he is lying. That is sad. …

“We are currently focused on the fact that the U.S. Congress and Senate are discussing authorization for use of force. …

As you know,

Syria is not attacking the U.S.,

so there is no question of self-defense;

and anything else, lacking U.N. authorization, is an act of aggression. …

we are all glued to our televisions, waiting to see if they will get the approval of Congress.”

On the following day, Sept. 5, [2013] Obama arrived in St. Petersburg for a G-20 summit, with ample reason to suspect that Putin was right about Kerry lying about the sarin attack – the President having been warned the previous week by National Intelligence Director James Clapper that

there was no “slam-dunk” evidence against the Assad regime.

So, Obama agreed to Putin’s offer to get Syria to surrender its chemical weapons for destruction,

and the war fever began to abate.

Curiously, Kerry himself was kept in the dark about the Putin-Obama agreement and was still making the case for war on Sept. 9 [2013]. At the very end of a press conference that day in London, Kerry was asked whether there was anything Assad could do to prevent a U.S. attack. Kerry answered that Assad could give up every one of his chemical weapons, but “he isn’t about to do that; it can’t be done.”

Still later on Sept. 9, [2013] Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and his Syrian counterpart announced that Syria had agreed to allow all its chemical weapons to be removed and destroyed. As soon as Kerry arrived back in Washington, he was sent off to Geneva to sign

the deal that Obama had cut directly with Putin. (All Syria’s chemical weapons have now been destroyed.)

Yet, two weeks later, Obama was still reading from the neocon teleprompter. In his formal address to the UN General Assembly

on Sept. 24, 2013, [On Sept. 11, 2013, NY Times had published “A Plea for Caution From Russia,” op-ed By Vladimir V Putin]

he declared, “It’s an insult to human reason and to the legitimacy of this institution

to suggest that anyone other than

the [Syrian] regime carried out this [sarin] attack.”

[Explaining Obama’s whiplash: “But the neocons were apoplectic that they failed to convince Obama to order a massive bombing campaign and escalate his covert proxy war in Syria and at the receding prospect of a war with Iran. Fearing their control of U.S. foreign policy was slipping, the neocons launched a campaign to brand Obama as “weak” on foreign policy and remind him of their power….Obama invited [Robert] Kagan to a private lunch at the White House, and the neocons’ muscle-flexing pressured him to scale back his diplomacy with Russia, even as he quietly pushed ahead on Iran.”…1/19/2021, “Who is Victoria Nuland? A really bad idea as a key player in Biden’s foreign policy team,” salon.com, Medea Benjamin, Nicolas J.S. Davies, Marcy Winograd]

(continuing): “More Candor With Goldberg

Earlier this year [2016], though, Obama was bragging to his informal biographer, Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic, about having thwarted planning for open war on Syria, even though that required disregarding the advice of virtually all his foreign-policy advisers.

One gem fished out by Goldberg was Obama’s admission that DNI Clapper had warned him in late August (a week before he went to St. Petersburg and a month before his U.N. speech) that the evidence pinning blame on Damascus for the sarin attack was hardly airtight.

Goldberg wrote that Clapper interrupted the President’s morning intelligence briefing “to make clear that the intelligence on Syria’s use of sarin gas, while robust, was not a ‘slam dunk.’” Clapper chose his words carefully, echoing the language that CIA Director George Tenet used to falsely assure President George W. Bush that the case could be made to convince the American people that Iraq was hiding WMDs.

Even though Obama continued to dissemble and the mainstream U.S. news media has continued to treat Syria’s “guilt” in the sarin attack as “flat fact,” the neocons did not get their war on Syria.

I describe an unusually up-front-and-personal experience of their chagrin under the subtitle “Morose at CNN” in “How War on Syria Lost Its Way.”

Nor did neocon disappointment subside in subsequent years.

Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tennessee, Chair of the Foreign Relations Committee, has remained among the most outspoken critics of Obama’s decision to cancel the attack on Syria in 2013.

On Dec. 3, 2014, Corker complained that, while the U.S. military was poised to launch a “very targeted, very brief” operation against the Syrian government for [supposedly] using chemical weapons,

Obama called off the attack at the last minute.

Corker’s criticism was scathing: “I think the worst moment in U.S. foreign policy since I’ve been here, as far as signaling to the world where we were as a nation, was August a year ago when

we had a 10-hour operation that was getting ready to take place in Syria but it didn’t happen. …

In essence and – I’m sorry to be slightly rhetorical — we jumped in Putin’s lap.””

………………………………

“Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Savior in inner-city Washington. A CIA analyst for 27 years, he has experience recognizing false-flag attacks when he sees them. Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, which he co-founded, has published several memoranda on the sarin attack.”

******************************

Comment: Always evidence-free US opinions/accusations of “chemical weapons” or “chemical attacks” in Syria have one target: US taxpayers.

******************************

Added: Below, Sept. 2013 Gallup poll, 72% of Americans approve of working with Russia to remove chemical weapons from Syria

………………………………………

Added: 9/11/2013, NY Times op-ed by Vladimir V. Putin in which Pres. Putin describes current Syria problems and his positive experience working with Pres. Obama to solve them:

9/11/2013, “A Plea for Caution From Russia,” By Vladimir V Putin, NY Times op-ed, Moscow. “Op-Ed Contributor”

“RECENT events surrounding Syria have prompted me to speak directly to the American people and their political leaders. It is important to do so

at a time of insufficient communication between our societies.

Relations between us have passed through different stages. We stood against each other during the cold war. But we were also allies once, and defeated the Nazis together. The universal international organization — the United Nations — was then established to prevent such devastation from ever happening again.

The United Nations’ founders understood that decisions affecting war and peace should happen only by consensus, and with America’s consent the veto by Security Council permanent members was enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The profound wisdom of this has underpinned the stability of international relations for decades.

No one wants the United Nations to suffer the fate of the League of Nations, which collapsed because it lacked real leverage. This is possible if influential countries bypass the United Nations and take

military action without Security Council authorization.

The potential strike by the United States against Syria, despite strong opposition from many countries and major political and religious leaders, including the pope, will result in more innocent victims and escalation, potentially spreading the conflict far beyond Syria’s borders. A strike

would increase violence and unleash a new wave of terrorism. It could undermine multilateral efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and further destabilize the Middle East and North Africa.

It could throw the entire

system of international law and order

out of balance.

Syria is not witnessing

a battle for democracy,

but an armed conflict between government and [jihad] opposition

in a multireligious country.

There are few champions of democracy in Syria. But there are

more than enough Qaeda fighters and extremists of all stripes

[Syria’s “Idlib province is largest Al Qaeda safe haven since 9/11″].

battling the government. The United States State Department has designated Al Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, fighting with the opposition, as terrorist organizations. This internal conflict,

fueled by foreign weapons

supplied to the [jihadist] opposition,

is one of the bloodiest in the world.

Mercenaries from Arab countries fighting there, and hundreds of militants from Western countries and even Russia, are an issue of our deep concern. Might they not return to our countries with experience acquired in Syria? After all, after fighting in Libya, extremists moved on to Mali. This threatens us all.

From the outset, Russia has advocated peaceful dialogue enabling Syrians to develop a compromise plan for their own future.

We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law.

We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today’s complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos. The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not.

Under current international law,

force is permitted

only in self-defense or by the decision of the Security Council.

Anything else is unacceptable under the United Nations Charter and would constitute an act of aggression.

No one doubts that poison gas was used in Syria. But there is every reason to believe

it was used not by the Syrian Army, but by opposition forces,

to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons, [eg, US taxpayers]

who would be siding with the [terrorist] fundamentalists. Reports that militants are preparing another attack — this time against Israel — cannot be ignored.

It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries

has become commonplace for the United States.

Is it in America’s long-term interest? [No large “English speaking” population exists there] I doubt it.

Millions around the world increasingly see America

not as a model of democracy but as

relying solely on brute force,

cobbling coalitions together under the slogan “you’re either with us or against us.”

But force has proved ineffective and pointless. Afghanistan is reeling, and no one can say what will happen after international forces withdraw.

Libya is divided into tribes and clans.

In Iraq the civil war continues, with dozens killed each day.

In the United States, many draw an analogy between Iraq and Syria, and ask why their government would want to repeat recent mistakes.

No matter how targeted the strikes or how sophisticated the weapons,

civilian casualties are inevitable, including the elderly and children, whom the strikes are meant to protect.

The world reacts by asking:

if you cannot count on international law,

then you must find other ways to ensure your security. Thus a growing number of countries seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction. This is logical: if you have the bomb, no one will touch you. We are left with talk of the need to strengthen nonproliferation, when in reality this is being eroded.

We must stop using the language of force and return to the path of

civilized diplomatic and political settlement.

A new opportunity to avoid military action has emerged in the past few days. The United States, Russia and all members of the international community must take advantage of the Syrian government’s willingness to place its chemical arsenal under international control for subsequent destruction.

Judging by the statements of President Obama,

the United States sees this as

an alternative to military action.

I welcome the president’s interest in continuing the dialogue with Russia on Syria. We must work together to keep this hope alive,

as we agreed to at the Group of 8 meeting in Lough Erne in Northern Ireland in June [2013],

and steer the discussion back toward negotiations.

If we can avoid force against Syria, this will improve the atmosphere in international affairs and strengthen mutual trust. It will be our shared success

and open the door to cooperation on other critical issues.

My working and personal relationship with President Obama is marked by growing trust. I appreciate this.”…

[“But the neocons were apoplectic that they failed to convince Obama to order a massive bombing campaign and escalate his covert proxy war in Syria and at the receding prospect of a war with Iran. Fearing their control of U.S. foreign policy was slipping, the neocons launched a campaign to brand Obama as “weak” on foreign policy and remind him of their power….Obama invited [Robert] Kagan to a private lunch at the White House, and the neocons’ muscle-flexing pressured him to scale back his diplomacy with Russia, even as he quietly pushed ahead on Iran.”…1/19/2021, “Who is Victoria Nuland? A really bad idea as a key player in Biden’s foreign policy team,” salon.com, Medea Benjamin, Nicolas J.S. Davies, Marcy Winograd]

(continuing): “I carefully studied his [Pres. Obama] address to the nation on Tuesday. And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is “what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.” It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor,

those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way

to democracy. Their policies differ, too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.”

………………………………..

Among comments to Putin’s 2013 NY Times op-ed:

“Ana Campos. Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Sept. 13, 2013:

THANK YOU MR. PUTIN.. I agree with every point made in this article. It is time to use the much wiser, cutting-edge technology of diplomacy, mediation and communication

and stop patting ourselves on the back

for dropping bombs.”

……………………………

Added: US elites are free to commit global genocide:

…………………………….

.............