Archive | September 20th, 2013

US Missile Threats Make Any Syria Treaty Illegal


By Bill Simpich, Reader Supported News

uring this momentary lull of US threats on Syria, this is the time for Americans to call on Obama to stop our country from acting as a rogue state. When you have momentum, use it. If not now, when?

The citizens of the world must make it clear that the USA has no right to make threats of force against nations that have not threatened the United States. Any treaty that results from a threat is unenforceable. Do we really want an agreement with Syria that is null and void?

Article 2, Section 4 of the UN Charter makes it plain. “All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purpose of the United Nations.”

This rule is so strong that it explains why Obama recently announced that he will not seek a Security Council authorization of the threat of the use of force in Syria. Under international law, the necessary conditions do not exist for the Security Council to take any such action in this setting.

Article 53 of the UN Charter mandates that a nation cannot use force against another in a situation other than individual self-defense unless it is necessary to maintain collective peace and security, and unless said force is approved by the Security Council. The Obama administration cannot use threats of force to back up its credibility or to punish Syria for past acts. Neither one of those acts maintain collective peace and security, which is what is needed to even request Security Council approval.

It is common for people to argue that threats are what bring people to the bargaining table. It is one thing to promise to protect your interests – it’s another thing to threaten to fire missiles at the other side. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties makes it clear that if threats of using force are made during diplomatic negotiations, then any resulting treaty is invalid: “A treaty is void if its conclusion has been procured by the threat or use of force in violation of the principles of international law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations.” Although the US Senate has not ratified the Vienna convention, many of its provisions are considered to be customary international law.

The US itself has argued to the World Court that the prohibition of the threat of use of force is a principle of customary international law. The World Court has held on several occasions that Article 2(4) of the UN Charter retains its full force and effect as applicable international law.

Under the law of state responsibility, the state that has unlawfully made threats of force has the duty to halt the conduct, and provide appropriate assurances and guarantees of non-repetition. If economic damage has resulted, the state responsible for making threats of force must make full reparations.

This is the moment to ensure that Obama takes missile strikes off the table. Otherwise, he could wind up with a chemical weapons agreement with Syria that is unenforceable. Threats of war have been condemned by the entire world community. What we need now is some dogged follow-up.

Constitutional law professors and their students might consider circulating a petition directed to the nation’s most powerful constitutional law professor to halt this pattern and practice of illegal threats to wage war. Any world leader who is serious about peace should call for a halt to any and all threats of preemptive missile attacks. The Friends Committee on National Legislation has all the information you need to contact your member of Congress. Any peace groups that focus on being effective will take this issue head-on.

Instead of threatening war, why not threaten to begin an international arms embargo?


Posted in USA, SyriaComments Off on US Missile Threats Make Any Syria Treaty Illegal

MJ Rosenberg on Anti Zionist Zionists



Introduction by Gilad Atzmon

In The Wandering Who I dealt primarily with those I define as the ‘3rd category Jews’ – those who put their Jewishness over and above all of their other traits. I also referred  to Chaim Weizmann’s famous  observation that “there are no English, French, German or American Jews, but only Jews living in England, France, Germany or America.” I obviously argue that Jews who fall into the 3rd category are primarily Zionists. In most cases they support Zionism but even when they oppose it, and in spite being ‘progressive’ and ‘secular’, they, for some reason, prefer to operate politically ‘as Jews’. I guess that they must attribute a certain kind of specialness to their ethnic origin – they are ‘Judeo centric.’

In the following piece, MJ Rosenberg courageously reports on a recent encounter with a bright American Jewish boy.

“You may not realize it,” the boy tells Rosenberg,  “but your premise is Zionist. You think Jews are, by definition, connected to Israel and have to care about it. But that isn’t who I am.  I’m an American kid whose religion is Jewish.”

It took more than a century for a Jewish boy to answer Weizmann; I am not a ‘Jew who lives in America’. I am actually an American Jew.

But what about the progressive Jews who care so much for Palestine? The boy answers, “the Jewish kids who are deeply involved with Israel or Palestinians are sort of the same kids. They accept your premise that they are connected to that place.” Strictly Speaking, they are Weizmannian Jews!

“You, MJ, are a Zionist,” he continues,  “You think I have an obligation to try to stop the occupation because of my religion. To me, that is no different than telling me I have to support Netanyahu because of my religion.”

I actually admire Rosenberg for sharing this fascinating conversation with the rest of us. I guess that more and more people within the anti-war and the Palestinian solidarity movement know it by now: we are dealing here with liberal Zionists who more than often operate as controlled opposition but most of the time are merely AZZ (anti-Zionist Zionists).

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on MJ Rosenberg on Anti Zionist Zionists

More Than 20 Greenpeace Activists Held at Gunpoint by Russian FSB


In what turned out to be the Arctic oil drilling protest from hell, activists are now being held in international waters at gunpoint against their will by 15 Russian FSB agents.

MV Arctic Sunrise (Photo:

MV Arctic Sunrise (Photo:

Watch the official video report here

By Shepard Ambellas

ARCTIC — Russian FSB agents have boarded and seized the Greenpeace marine vessel “Arctic Sunrise”, holding at least 20 Greenpeace activists at gunpoint.

This took place this Wednesday after the activists tried to board a Russian oil platform in protest of drilling in the region.

According to reports, warning shots were fired. The reported, “Border guards fired a warning shot from an automatic rifle by the ship that ferried the protesters to the oil rig in the Pechora Sea in Russia’s Arctic waters, the Federal Security Service said in a statement.”[1]

According to reports, the FSB agents boarded the activists vessel in “international waters”, illegally.[2]

The crew is said to be held in the galley of the vessel under gunpoint. The captain of the ship has been reported to have been taken to the ships bridge against his will.

A statement has been released by Greenpeace and was emailed to The statement reads as follows:

Fifteen armed Russian Coast Guard officers have illegally boarded the Greenpeace ship Arctic Sunrise via helicopter, stopped almost all outside communication and are currently holding more than twenty Greenpeace activists on board at gunpoint.

These Greenpeace activists urgently need your help.

Please sign our petition to Russia’s US Ambassador demanding Russia release the activists, immediately withdraw the Coast Guard from the Greenpeace ship, and put an end to offshore oil drilling in the Arctic for good.

On the morning of September 18th, Greenpeace activists attempted to peacefully occupy an off-shore oil platform owned by Russian oil giant Gazprom.

But when they arrived, the Russian Coast Guard fired warning shots and threatened the activists’ lives – ultimately taking two protesters with them against their will and providing no legal representation.

Then, just hours ago, Russian special forces returned and took control of the ship. That’s why we’re mounting an international effort to get the activists back to us safely along with the release of the Greenpeace ship. And it starts with having people around the world putting pressure on the Russian government.

The activists onboard the Arctic Sunrise need your support now more than ever. Please take action today. Our goal is to get 75,000 signatures in the next two days.

For the Arctic and for the right to peaceful protest,

Nicky Davies
Greenpeace USA Campaign Director[3]


[1] Russia: Greenpeace Members Held at Arctic Oil Rig –

[2] FSB Russia –

[3] Tell Russia to Release Greenpeace Activists – Greenpeace

Posted in RussiaComments Off on More Than 20 Greenpeace Activists Held at Gunpoint by Russian FSB

Amerika – from Freedom to Fascism in Just a Decade


Following Navy Yard shooting tyrants in America immediately attack gun rights and free speech

WASHINGTON, DC - SEPTEMBER 06: U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) (C) talks to members of the media after a members-only closed briefing on Syria for the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives September 6, 2013 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. U.S. President Barack Obama will address the American people on Syria from the White House on Tuesday. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON, DC – SEPTEMBER 06: U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) (C) talks to members of the media after a members-only closed briefing on Syria for the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives September 6, 2013 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. U.S. President Barack Obama will address the American people on Syria from the White House on Tuesday. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images).

By Sergey Baranov

When I heard first about theWashington Navy Yard shooting which happened on Monday, I registered two thoughts in my head in a blink of an eye. First, of course, was the question of whether that was another false flag attack, intended to strip the American people of their second amendment while blaming gun violence on their constitutional right to keep and bear arms, and second I thought; how long will it take before Senator Feinstein will make an attempt to revive the gun law debate.

Just as I thought, it wasn’t too long before her words on the matter were publicly heard: “Congress must stop shirking its responsibility and resume a thoughtful debate on gun violence in this country,” she said. “We must do more to stop this endless loss of life.”

Pondering over her statements, I was thinking about countless lives loss in illegal, fraudulent wars like Iraq. It was just weeks ago when Senator Feinstein showed her support for another invasion in Syria to support Al Qaida terrorists to overthrow Assad’s regime. She claimed that the American people are against the war on Syria because they don’t know what she does (1). Well, regardless of her claim to know more, the American people knows just enough to vote against the war, while being well informed by the alternative media which played a major role in putting WW3 on  hold.

Who else would support war on Syria, knowingly supporting coldblooded extremists whose horrendous atrocities goes beyond the definition of violence? I got sick to my stomach while choosing a few of those scenes for my article written last week. Use your discretion for viewing. It is extremely graphic and sickening (2)

So I wonder why senator Feinstein didn’t express concern over the loss of American lives in the war zones, areas designated as such by the corporate interest, using  patriotism as a motive to send young people to die for cheap oil and arm sales, while forcing an independent nation into the central banking system. (3)

Why during the gun debate have we never hear an expression of reason and logic, let alone mention about the Law of the Land, which is the Constitution?

A question is rising  as to how disarming law-abiding citizens will prevent gun violence in America if the gun violence is not committed by law-abiding citizens to begin with? It is usually done by the criminals who don’t buy a gun in the gun shop in the first place. Criminals buy guns on the black market, which allows them to commit gun crimes without being tracked. Any shot made from a legally purchased firearm is easily tracked to its owner. So what good will it do to disarm those who would not do harm to others, unless it would be a matter of self-defense, while giving criminals a green light to commit more crimes, knowing that law-abiding citizens are now defenseless?  It is tragic and yet not surprising that this simple and logical argument is not a part of judicial hearings.

It is erroneous to think that stripping the population of legally purchased firearms will decrease the level of violent crimes. For example, let’s look at Chicago, a city with the toughest gun laws in the nation, is three times as deadly as NYC and twice as violent as Los Angeles. (4) Does it not show that those gun free zones, generously designated for the convenience of the criminals, are the most dangerous places to be and the most open for violence?

But here I would like to address something else which has struck me even more. I find it very disturbing to see an open attack on the First Amendment right which clearly states that: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.’’

You see, if the gun debate can be twisted and spun in order to push for the gun ban, building the case on the lethality of the firearms, it would be immeasurably harder to ban words, using same argument. Nevertheless an attempt to silence free speech is made once again.

In her speech Senator Feinstein gives thanks to senator Schumer, who previously voted YES on the illegal NDAA Act, ( 5) signed by president Obama on December 31, 2011, which allows the Government to indefinitely detain Americans without the right to due process, violating both the 5th and 6th amendment to the Constitution:

“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation’’

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense’’( 6)

Following her speech, senator Feinstein made an attempt to redefine journalism, freedom of speech and freedom of the press, while referring to first amendment RIGHT as to a privilege.

By definition a privilege is a special entitlement granted by the state on a conditional basis. It can be revoked in certain circumstances as opposed to the RIGHT, which is not granted by a government body but rather inherent by birth. Thus no one can legally suppress our right to free speech, unless done by force, in which case it would be considered criminal action.

Furthermore, these natural birth rights are not limited to one nation. Rather they are Universal and applicable to all people on Earth. And as the people begin to wake up and question what it means to be human, those rights will be claimed and tyranny overthrown.

One doesn’t need to be a constitutional lawyer to realize that an attempt to exercise the authority over the people in order to suppress their constitutional rights simply mean disregard to the Law, disrespect to the people and a move toward totalitarianism. This is why the Founding Fathers embedded these rights into the U.S. Constitution in order to protect the people from government tyranny. When crafted, they were ratified as the Bill of Rights, not as a list of privileges.


[1 ]  Dianne Feinstein: American people against attacking Syria because they don’t know what I know – Headline Clicker

[2] October surprise and the looming Obamagedon – Intellihub

[3] All wars are bankers wars – What Really Happened

[4] Chicago is three times as deadly as NYC and twice as violent as LA – Chicago Muckrackers

[5] Senator Chuck Schumer Says Questioning NDAA is “Biased” – Youtube

[6] Bill of Rights Transcript – Archive


Posted in USAComments Off on Amerika – from Freedom to Fascism in Just a Decade

European red tape for energy policy deeply disappoints Moscow.


Map of the major existing and proposed russian natural gas transportation pipelines to europe. (Wikimedia Commons)

Map of the major existing and proposed russian natural gas transportation pipelines to europe. (Wikimedia Commons)

By Igor Alexeev

Real alternative to EU exports is born during recent talks in Moscow. Representatives of Chinese National Petroleum Company and Russia’s oil & gas giants Gazprom and Novatek have inked the agreement to sell abundant Siberian resources to the fast-growing Eastern market. The Chinese are investing billions to Russia’s fuel energy complex diversification program. Positive Fitch report on the historic deal indicates that both parties are planning to reach synergies and profit from cooperation.

Since the adoption of “third energy package” in 2009 Moscow has been deeply disappointed by European red tape in the sphere of energy policy. Step by step Brussels introduced bureaucratic hurdles for Russian energy companies on the EU market in order to revise downwards existing contracts on natural gas supply with fixed delivery volume. These purely political measures have nothing in common with market economy and resembled something from Russia’s recent past, namely the heavy-handed style of government regulation during Soviet era. At the same time leaders of some EU member states are daydreaming of mythic “shale opportunities” on the densely populated continent with limited drinking water resources.

Nearly dead projects like “Southern Gas Corridor” lacking both resource base and political will are advertised as something economically feasible, despite the fact that its  participants, for example, Romania are calling for return of investments. Money back demands from smaller investors have always been a correct sign of a dead project. European authorities used all available “soft power” mechanisms but couldn’t convince sovereign states to wait about a decade for first return on investment. Today “Southern Gas Corridor” remains a catchy political slogan with little or none business background.

Russia remains the only stable energy source. “Nord Stream” and “South Stream” projects are making impressive progress in Serbia and Bulgaria. EU and Russia have agreed a deal on the use of Germany’s OPAL link to Gazprom’s Nord Stream gas pipeline, a Russian energy ministry spokeswoman confirmed on September 16. However, attempts of EU Directorate-General for Energy to create non-competitive advantage haven’t gone unnoticed in Moscow.

Russia’s fuel energy complex diversification program has begun to take shape in Siberia strengthening credit profiles of Gazprom and Novatek. Last Thursday, September 5, Russia’s top producer Gazprom and Chinese National Petroleum Company came closer to a deal to ship natural gas to China. Corporations agreed on basic terms but not on price that has been a cornerstone issue for years. Much debated price problem is going to be solved soon given the unprecedented level of intergovernmental cooperation on the highest level. Final agreement is expected by the end of 2013, Gazprom Chief Executive Alexey Miller said last week in St Petersburg.

An oil-linked benchmark, the Japanese Crude Cocktail, for Chinese or other Asian gas deliveries could be used as the point of reference for future price talks. The basic agreement signed by heads of Gazprom and CNPC in the presence of presidents Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping “defines the volumes, start of deliveries, payments, “take-or-pay” amendment” and other issues, Gazprom announced in a statement.

High degree of readiness attracted Chinese investors to another Russia’s LNG endeavor aimed at the Eastern market. China National Petroleum Corporation and a consortium of Chinese financial institutions also concluded a memorandum on project financing for Novatek’s $20 billion Yamal LNG project in Russia’s Arctic buying 20% stake in it. Novatek envisages the construction of a LNG plant with annual capacity of 16.5 million tons per annum based on the feedstock resources of the South-Tambeyskoye field (Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug). “CNPC’s entrance in Yamal LNG is an important milestone for the project,” Chief Executive Officer Leonid Mikhelson said in an e-mailed statement. “We are pleased to welcome a new, strong partner who will contribute its capabilities and resources to the successful implementation.” China, on its part, seriously considers increasing LNG imports to balance the use of coal in its fuel mix.

Fitch rating agency experts believe these deals indicate China’s growing willingness of to invest directly in Russian natural gas industry. Gazprom (BBB, outlook Stable) will enter a fast-growing market and mitigate non-transparent regulatory risks in Europe. After closing the deal Novatek may improve its “BBB-“ credit rating and raise funds for the challenging project in the High North.

Posted in EuropeComments Off on European red tape for energy policy deeply disappoints Moscow.



WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a sharply critical op-ed piece for the Russian Web site Pravda, Sen. John McCain (R-Arizona) called Russian President Vladimir Putin “a brutal, freedom-hating tyrant” and challenged Mr. Putin to tear down the Berlin Wall.

“The Wall stands as a symbol of your failed, repressive system,” Sen. McCain said. “Until you tear it down, the world will see you and your Soviet goons for what you are: relics destined for the dustbin of history.”

“Mr. Putin, tear down that wall,” Sen. McCain’s editorial pointedly concluded.

Several hours after the article was published, the Russian Federation issued a terse statement, indicating that the Berlin Wall had been torn down.

Responding to the Russian statement, Sen. McCain told reporters, “This shows what you can achieve when you talk tough with Putin. If only President Obama realized that.”

Sen. McCain added that he was “delighted” by the response to his Pravda editorial and was already writing a new one, urging Mr. Putin to remove his missiles from Cuba.

Photograph by Samantha Sais/Reuters.


Brazilian Government Doesn’t Want to Meet With US Officials Because of Being Spied On


The president of Brazil recently canceled a visit to Washington DC, because the NSA had spied on her and the Brazilian government.

President of Brazil (photo: Wiki Commons)


By Cassius Methyl

Many governments appear to be upset with the US government at this moment, yet it is noteworthy to point out that one more government became so upset with the US government that they refused to communicate.

President of Brazil, Dilma Rousseff, called off the elaborate meeting (complete with fancy dinner) that was planned for October 23.

The White House said that Obama and Rousseff had agreed that the state visit would go better when ‘relations between the two nations were less tense.’[1]

The Brazilian government basically said they would not meet with US officials because the US government has made no attempt to stop spying on Brazilian officials, and rightfully so. People can not apologize for things sincerely, and continue to do them.

“The illegal interception of communications data belonging to citizens, companies and members of the Brazilian government are a grave matter, an assault on national sovereignty and individual rights, and are incompatible with relations between friendly nations,” said the statement from the Brazilian government.

Another reason this is noteworthy, is that the US government is being directly called criminal, as they are, and surely we will see more and more of this, as the other governments of the world get more and more fed up with the exceedingly ridiculous government of the United States.

A classified document leaked by Edward Snowden revealed that the NSA had intercepted communications between President Rousseff and other members of government, along with communications of other members of the Brazilian government.

Hopefully more foreign people in positions of power will take a stand to the criminal monstrosity that is the US government, and the people with influence over the US government.

For now, occurrences like this can be observed, and possibly used to gauge the level at which foreign governments are opposed to the US government.

However, keep in mind that we are seeing exactly what we are allowed to see, by these powerful people. Often the most important issues and things of concern are blacked out of the focus of these people, and the mainstream media especially.



[1] Brazil’s president, angry about spying, cancels state visit to U.S. – 

Posted in South AmericaComments Off on Brazilian Government Doesn’t Want to Meet With US Officials Because of Being Spied On

BREAKING: Pentagon Plan to Arm and Train ‘Moderate’ Syrian Rebels


The Pentagon plans to train and equip Syrian Rebels, despite conflicting evidence as to who even launched the August 21st chemical weapons attack.

The Pentagon (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Chuck Hagel, The Pentagon (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

By Andrew Pontbriand

In what can only be explained as unprecedented, it was just announced that the pentagon has finalized plans to equip and train “Moderate” Syrian Rebels. This comes following news that Obama has waived the law that prevents the United States from arming Terrorists.

Information regarding the plan to arm and train the Syrian rebels was given to CNN by two Obama Administration officials.[1] 

The idea to arm and train the rebels, emerged following the first evidence of a chemical weapons attack had taken place in Syria, which the U.S. continues to blame on the Assad Regime despite conflicting evidence. This is the first time the U.S. Military will be having direct contact with the Syrian Rebels.

More to follow.



[1] Pentagon proposes plan to equip and train ‘moderate’ Syrian rebels


Posted in USAComments Off on BREAKING: Pentagon Plan to Arm and Train ‘Moderate’ Syrian Rebels

Syria Hands Russia Evidence Blaming Rebels for Chemical Attack


Rebel forces likely responsible for chemical attacks on Syrian citizens, new evidence shows. 

Syria: Marjeh Square (also known as Martyrs Square), and the Telegraph Monument standing in its center, on top of which lies the Yıldız Mosque Statue. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

Syria: Marjeh Square (also known as Martyrs Square), and the Telegraph Monument standing in its center, on top of which lies the Yıldız Mosque Statue. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

By Joe Jankowski

The Syrian government has handed over fresh evidence to Russia that implicates rebel forces were behind the August 21, chemical attacks in Damascus.

“The corresponding materials were handed to the Russian side. We were told that they were evidence that the rebels are implicated in the chemical attack,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov was quoted by reporters during talks in Damascus on Tuesday.[1]

Ryabkov described the recently released UN Chemical weapons inspection report as “politicize”, “Biased” and “one-sided”. He said the report only dove into the most recently attack and not the three previous incidents, reports the BBC.

The UN report released on Monday confirmed that a chemical arms attack was indeed the cause behind the mass killing in Syria last month.[2] The 41 page report provided forensic detail that implied the Syrian government as a likely culprit, but did not apportion utter blame on Assad.[3]

The Syrian provided evidence will be pasted on to the UN security counsel for further examination.



[1] Syria gives Russia ‘evidence’ rebels behind chem attack

[2] Forensic Details in U.N. Report Point to Assad’s Use of Gas

[3] Report on the Alleged Use of Chemical Weapons in the Ghouta Area of Damascus on 21 August 2013

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Syria Hands Russia Evidence Blaming Rebels for Chemical Attack

Russians Not Buying U.N. Report on Syria


Information possessed by the Russians indicates rebels carried out the chemical attacks killing over 1400 people last month, not the Syrian Government.

Russian President Vladimir Putin (Photo: Wiki Commons)

Russian President Vladimir Putin (Photo: Wiki Commons)


By Shepard Ambellas

The Russians have grown skeptical of the Obama Administration’s agenda claiming the United Nations report implicating the Syrian Government for carrying out chemical attacks on their own people last month was predetermined.

This is of interest to many in the world as the Russian’s stance will likely make Obama check his manhood before giving the ‘all clear’ to strike.

The Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, stated in a meeting with Russian press Wednesday, ”We are disappointed, to put it mildly, about the approach taken by the U.N. secretariat and the U.N. inspectors, who prepared the report selectively and incompletely”.[1]

According to reports, the Russians have their own intelligence information on the matter showing over 1400 civilians were killed last month by the gas attacks, likely sponsored by U.S. interests as reported earlier on by staff.[2]

Other reports say the Russian Government possesses damming evidence that rouge (U.S. backed) Syrian rebels carried out the attacks on August 23, 2013 near Damascus. This falls lockstep with actual evidence and makes sense as the Syrian’s can’t trust the U.S. or most of the U.N. Security Council for that matter as they have both been overran by criminal factions.

According to CNN, “Russia has been a strong ally of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, and Russian defense contracts with Syria have probably exceeded $4 billion.”[3] This solidifies why the Russian’s have been so careful as to see a proper investigation into the matter is conducted. Just another reason Americans should be up in arms, watching the Obama Administration’s swift and “predetermined” actions lead us into another senseless conflict for oil money.



[1] Russia says U.N. report on Syria attack preconceived, political –

[2] Syrian ‘Oil Positions’ – Murdoch & Rothschild Possess Crystal Ball –

[3] U.N. chemical weapons inspectors to return to Syria –



Posted in RussiaComments Off on Russians Not Buying U.N. Report on Syria

Shoah’s pages


September 2013
« Aug   Oct »