Syria’s U.N. Envoy Issues Searing Attack On U.S., U.K., France Narrative.

by Jerry Alatalo

United States U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley – after Syria’s Dr. Bashar al-Jaafari delivered a searing oratorical attack on the U.S., U.K. and France. (Security Council Meeting – September 6, 2018)

ersons who have followed tragic events in Syria over the course of over seven (7) years since warring began in March 2011 can understand the frustration felt by Syria’s United Nations Ambassador Dr. Bashar al-Jaafari. His nation and its people have been victim to a historic criminal, covert, organized war of aggression using terrorist mercenaries leading to the deaths of an estimated 500,000 human beings.

One who has observed events unfolding across the span of years might wonder what spiritual, emotional or moral reserves Dr. al-Jaafari has turned to for maintaining his sanity and continuing to fight the diplomatic battles inside the increasingly hostile United Nations Security Council.

If the leaders of the United States, United Kingdom and France can somehow come to their moral senses and choose not to order another false flag chemical weapons event in Syria, in the process opting not to attempt an illegal military strike meant to overthrow the Syrian government, – then perhaps the Syrian people can finally experience a long-awaited peace.

If only … Bashar al-Jaafari’s blistering oratory at the September 6, 2018 meeting of the U.N. Security Council will most certainly not become reported or shown on Western corporate media, continuing the total blackout on his U.N. activities since March 2011.

If only … Should civilization rise to the occasion, manage to avert the unspeakable, and future generations experience the opportunity of discovering transcripts of U.N. Security Council meetings from 2011-2018, among those who will stand out more than others, recognized and honored by people years from now, will be Syrian Dr. Bashar al-Jaafari.


(Partial transcript)  

“As I’m sure you’re aware, President, Syria and its allies are engaged in a ferocious battle against terrorist organizations such as Daesh and Al-Qaeda, Jabhat Al-Nusra, the Al Nusra front, and others. And I’m pleased to say that we are winning that ferocious war – against terrorists, may I repeat. We do not need to use the prohibited chemical weapons to stamp out terrorism, nor would we.

“As I’m sure you’re aware, those who have waged war against international terrorism, and you have all done so in your way, you all know that we cannot give ground to political blackmail and to the threats posed by terrorist organizations. Nor can we give way to political blackmail by governments including the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, of France, who have engaged in prohibited acts in Syria, to witt: support for terrorists and terrorist attacks.

“They have given orders to Al Nusra front, to a terrorist group and to its affiliated groups, in particular the White Helmets. Given them orders to use chemical weapons to target civilians in Syria, and then to turn around and accuse the Syrian government of having behind these chemical attacks, and use that as a pretext for their own ends in Syria. The war is in Syria. It’s not in New York, Washington, London or Paris, and we have no beef, as it were, with New York, London, Washington, Paris. We certainly didn’t.

“Our war is against Al Qaeda, which has been responsible for aggression; which carried out an aggressive attack in September 2001 in New York. It has been responsible for attacks in Paris, in London, in other capitals. That is our enemy – a deserved enemy Al Qaeda. And you, – you support and back Al Qaeda against us. And the reward for all of that is that we are forced to wage this war alone. Ask yourselves, ladies and gentlemen, you who are supposed to be responsible for upholding the Charter and international peace and security.

“What would cause Syria to use a prohibited weapon – prohibited internationally, – a weapon that we don’t possess and that will bear no fruit? That will gain us no ground; that will lead to nothing?

“Why would we do that?”

“This is simply being wielded as a pretext by the three countries before-mentioned to carry out aggression.

“Why are people claiming that chemical weapons are being used … and why is the outlandish claim being made that these chemical weapons are only impacting women and children? For what Earthly reason would the Syrian government attack women and children? If we were to use chemical weapons, why wouldn’t we use them against the terrorists? Can you give us the times and the sites when these chemical weapons were used in Syria?

“Why do these governments and terrorist groups … Why are they all able to predict what will happen in terms of chemical weapons? We’ve heard claims here, aired here again today, that chemical weapons attacks are forthcoming. How can you make that claim? How do you know … how do you know that? How do you and the terrorist organizations know that that is likely to happen?

“Fifty-six (56) official letters have gone between ourselves and the OPCW. I beg your pardon …one hundred and fifty-six (156) letters, including some letters addressed to you the Security Council in the OPCW explaining the facts of Syria’s government action, of what we’re doing. But nobody reads these letters.

“Nobody wishes to cooperate with the Syrian government to combat and stamp out terrorism and to prevent the use of chemical weapons. That’s what we’re seeking to do. And why not? …Because certain countries don’t actually wish to resolve the problems in Syria.

“Certain nations are invested in terrorism.

“Why are the Security Council and the OPCW still incapable of handling information provided by Syria in one hundred and fifty-six (156) official letters, most of them provided last year, on a handling of chemical elements, and also reporting the use of toxic chemical substances by terrorist organizations targeting civilians? And the terrorist organizations were allowed to get off scot-free, and the army of the Syrian Arab Republic is accused instead.

“We have many questions. We have detailed them in these letters and we have no answers thereto.  I leave you to draw your own conclusions.

“Over the last eight years the governments of these three countries, – the U.S., the U.K. and France – have supported terrorists. And that is why these three governments in their actions, often indirect but often flagrant, are engaged in behind-the-scenes military action against our country. They illegally deploy military forces in parts of the Syrian territory. These countries impede the political process; they have done so in Astana and Geneva and Sochi, and in so doing they hinder the eradication of terrorism in Idlib.

“They intend to impose a suffocating economic embargo on the Syrian people, and they seek to strangle the financing of the reconstruction, rehabilitation and reconciliation of Syria. These countries will hamper the return of refugees through their actions, and the return of Syrian migrants as well, who wish to return to live in a dignified safe and secure and peaceful way in their country Syria.

“I would like to say to you all that after the destruction of the two last installations, which was reported by Izumi Nakamitsu, and after the dispatch by the OPCW of a mission to verify the destruction of those remaining chemical weapon production facilities, the last two. All of those are facts.

“My country has therefore lived up to all of its obligations. Returning to these chemical weapons production facilities, I repeat: the last two have been destroyed and that has been verified.

“Two days ago we submitted an official letter to the members of the Security Council with specific, accurate and credible information about the preparations underway by terrorist groups in Idlib and in the suburbs of Aleppo, planning the use of toxic chemical substances as part of an attack against civilians.

“We underscored the fact that this is intended to turn around the territorial gains being made by the Syrian army in these regions. It is very clear, President, by way of conclusion … It is very clear.

“It is very sad that certain permanent members, including the current presidency of this Security Council, have mixed up the actual purpose of this meeting and the purpose of tomorrow’s meeting, and confuse the two issues.” 


(Thank you to The Syrian Mission to the United Nations at YouTube)

10 thoughts on “Syria’s U.N. Envoy Issues Searing Attack On U.S., U.K., France Narrative.

  1. Heartbreaking, and I continue to be amazed at so many intelligent people believing that the white helmets are the good guys. They are, aren’t they, just like the CIA’s contras…


    1. Sha’Tara,

      People might be interested in Roger Waters’ recent interview with Ms. Sheverdnadze on RT about the White helmets, Palestine/BDS and related issues. It was surprising to learn he just turned 75. Ah yes … the contras, or (in the words of Reagan) the equivalent to the “freedom fighter” founding fathers of America!

      Perhaps people will just be straight and call the contras, the so-called “moderate Syrian terrorists” and White Helmets what they are: “criminals and murderers”? Thankfully these disgusting criminal war tactics are being exposed and face imminent extinction. Peace.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. Frankly, I am ashamed to be British. The ongoing regime-change mentality of the UK and US is not only turning much of the world into hell-hole wasteland, but thus also a key instigator of the refugee crisis which appears to be fuelling so much fascist-racist fervour across Europe and the US. The constant consent-engineering by the mainstream (deemed respectable) media is sickening. It further makes one wonder what our leaders actually have in store for us, the people who ostensibly voted them into power, the people who they lie to day after day. What kind of world are they making for us? (Oh, silly me. It’s not about us is it, but about them and their backers).

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Tish Farrell,

      How are you. We noticed the United Kingdom has joined the United States and Canada in passage of “Magnitsky Act” legislation. Point #1: Bill Browder, the man leading the charge for adoption of Magnitsky laws (including “Global Magnitsky Act” financial weaponry), is a liar and a fraud. The basis of Magnitsky Act legislation, to reiterate financial weaponry of war – or “lawfare”, is the massive deception in Browder’s narrative of what actually happened to Magnitsky.

      People can research Andrei Nekrasov, whose explosive, blacklisted film exposing Bill Browder, “The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes”, was just taken down by Vimeo management after legal threats from Browder’s attorneys. People can research Alex Krainer, whose book “Grand Deception” essentially “chews up and spits out Browder”, while the book was taken down by Amazon management – again, following threats from Browder’s legal team.

      We believe the Browder-Magnitsky scandal is the most important story of the 21st century, and feel immeasurable frustration that the scandal hasn’t broken worldwide.

      Thank you for commenting.
      (“Fault Lines Radio” YouTube channel is a prime research source, co-hosted by Garland Nixon and Lee Stranahan, which has been one of the few media organizations covering this massive story / scandal)

      Liked by 1 person

        1. Tish,

          The Browder-Magnitsky scandal is far larger than just your average run-of-the-mill tax cheat billionaire. Full exposure of the scandal will lead to corruption at the pinnacles of global power and wealth, in effect literally changing history and establishing a new civilization-wide paradigm. It is impossible to overstate how important it is to uncover the scandal.

          Investigative journalist Lucy Komisar has written extensively on Browder-Magnitsky, and is arguably the premier expert on the issue in the Western world. Here is her website, valuable for any man or woman wishing to learn the truth on this historic scandal:


            1. Tish,

              Browder was an associate of the late banker Edmund Safra. Safra was associated with the owners of the Federal Reserve, and had a hand in the attempted “dollarization” of Russia, arranging for the insertion of tens of billions of freshly-printed dollar denominations ($1s, $5s, $10s, $20s, $50s, $100s) into Russia for dispersion, with the intention of making dollars the sole currency used by the Russian people. People might remember the insertion of billions of (freshly-printed)dollars into Iraq not long after the Bush-Cheney-Blair criminal invasion of Iraq starting in 2003. The now well-known phrase “All wars are bankers’ wars” is absolutely true.

              Liked by 3 people

Comments are closed.