eople who watch the DECEMBER 20, 2018 United Nations meeting, which presented evidence of horrific crimes committed inside Syria by the so-called “rescue” organization and Academy Award-winning “White Helmets”, will come to a full understanding of the true reason U.S. President Donald Trump went on Twitter (Date: DECEMBER 19, 2018).
President Trump announced a major, surprise change in his administration’s foreign policy 24 hours before the U.N. meeting exposing the White Helmets international scandal – and wrote that, essentially: “We (U.S. military forces) are leaving Syria … immediately!”. Is it possible, or even probable, that Mr. Trump was aware of the U.N. meeting scheduled for the 20th of December, and that his no-cost Twitter foreign policy statement was delivered to place a global media roadblock in front of the White Helmets bombshell, set to explode the next day?
We sense the answer is “yes”. However, the only way of knowing for certain is hearing from Donald Trump himself for his opinion of the “extremely inconvenient, taboo…” details presented at the December 20 event. Trump’s 12/19/2018 action, a military psychological operation if the described theory becomes proved true, was put forward to soak up all global media attention, which indeed was the result. In other words, – Mr. Trump took a calculated public relations action to protect the diminishing reputation of the White Helmets, or to bury any chance of any appreciable amount of people worldwide learning details of the White Helmets criminal scandal revealed on 12/20/2018.
Developments in the near (3) weeks since Trump’s announcement seem to confirm the theory. Donald Trump and members of his administration have not said anything about the White Helmets in those (3) weeks, – most especially relaying nothing publicly whatsoever about, or since, the damning December 20 U.N. meeting.
Trump’s Twitter action could be described using Trump terminology as “fantastic, and very successful”; very few people worldwide heard news of the White Helmets scandal revealed at the December 20 United Nations meeting; Trump’s National Security Adviser John Bolton has issued, as more than once in the past, a warning to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad about potential use of chemical weapons, and, once more, threatening the severest of military responses.
With the already-suffering reputation of the White Helmets terrorist group effectively “saved” thanks to Donald Trump’s Twitter psychological operation and public relations fix, the rising odds for another false flag chemical attack in Syria (possibly Israel due to growing Neocon desperation) becomes more plausible as a predictive. This creates legitimate worries that another deception-based military response from the United States (Trump), United Kingdom (May) and France (Macron) will bring much more unnecessary death,injury and harm than previous illegal bombing operations.
What public responses, if any, have the United Kingdom’s Prime Minister Theresa May and French President Emmanuel Macron issued on this very serious matter?
Who will become the first courageous U.S. journalist submitting to the president of the United States of America the following question?
“With respect to extremely troubling revelations made on December 20 at the United Nations, President Trump, could you please share with Americans and people of the world your honest assessment of the White Helmets?”
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.
“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)
OF THE UNIVERSAL RIGHT OF SELF-DETERMINATION OF PEOPLES
Introduction: The “right of self-determination of peoples”, hereinafter the “right of self-determination”, is a fundamental right protected at the highest level by the international legal order. It is enshrined in the first article of the Charter of the United Nations, the founding treaty of the Organization, and in other international legal instruments, including the UN Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. It is considered “jus cogens”, that is, fundamental norm of superior hierarchical rank, standing above any contradictory legal provision which would become automatically null, in accordance with the Charter and with Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
It is therefore a direct and legally binding right applicable to all United Nations Member States…
“Truth is a torch, but a terrific one; therefore we all try to grasp it with closed eyes, fearing to be blinded.”
– JOHANN WOLFGANG VON GOETHE (1749-1832) German philosopher
ussian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov spoke in Moscow on Saturday April 14, the day after the U.S., U.K. and France launched over 100 missiles on Syria, discussing and sharing important facts regarding the attack, the Skripal event in the U.K., last year’s Khan Sheikhoun incident, and the alleged April 7 chemical incident in Douma.
Chances are likely zero that any of the relevant factual information Sergey Lavrov presented will become acknowledged, analyzed, responded to, nor otherwise mentioned by the administrations of President Donald Trump in America, Prime Minister Theresa May in Britain, President Emmanuel Macron of France, or western corporate media. …Until it becomes impossible to ignore.
The most crucial aspect of Mr. Lavrov’s statement is the stark contrast presented between his version or narrative of what occurred in the ultimately consequential events, and the narratives of Trump, May and Macron presented to justify their previous decisions along with their most recent, coordinated, arguably illegal military action.
As demonstrated for years at United Nations Security Council meetings focused on warring in Syria where often-heated discussions have featured the same widely contrasting narratives, it seems the building intensity of the Syrian crisis has reached the point of profound revealing – the culmination in a certain, decisive and historic moment – and the inevitable, world-altering identification of those speaking truth and those speaking lies.
Some might refer to or recall the phrase “separating the wheat from the chaff” to describe what is now surely and unavoidably occurring on Earth. Due to the extraordinary nature of discussions held at the 8,233rd meeting of the United Nations Security Council on April 14, 2018, it will become recorded in history books as a world milestone event.
There is no doubt conditions on Earth have developed sufficient for predicting an imminent, immense, paradigm-shifting and truly historic collision of truth and lies. For the well-being of humanity, now and for the sake of future generations – may that profoundest of collisions be a peaceful one.
Palestinians are at the heart of the conflict in the M.E Palestinians uprooted by force of arms.. Yet faced immense difficulties have survived, kept alive their history and culture, passed keys of family homes in occupied Palestine from one generation to the next.
This blog is devoted to legal, historical and human rights matters, in which issues of general concern are addressed freely and spontaneously. It is intended to further an informal exchange of views in the democratic spirit of freedom of opinion and respect for the opinions of others, in an effort to understand rather than condemn, to propose constructive solutions rather than grandstand. The perspective is both from inside and outside the box and the added value lies more in the questions than in the answers.