Dennis Small från Schillerinstitutet och delstatssenator Richard Black välkomnar Syriens FN-ambassadör Bashar al-Ja´afari på Manhattankonferensen inför minnesdagen 15 år efter 11 september 2001.
Schillerinstitutets konferens inför minnesdagen av 11 september blev en mycket stark manifestation på tre och en halv timme för att svänga om den amerikanska utrikespolitiken i grunden. Delstatssenatorn från Virginia Richard Black höll det mest förödande tal mot den amerikanska utrikespolitiken gentemot Syrien och Irak. Med sin djupgående genomgång avslöjande han den bottenlösa katastrof som det nuvarande amerikanska "kriget mot terrorismen" utgör. Hans tal "Bakgrunden till kriget i Syrien" byggde på information han som hög amerikansk militär hade kunnat tillgodogöra sig, och också hans egna erfarenheter och bilder från sitt besök i Syrien nyligen. Hans explosiva anförande rev upp massor av de myter och lögner som använts för att fortsätta det blodiga kriget.
Black följdes av Syriens FN:ambassadör Bashar al-Ja´afari som gav en historisk bakgrund tillbaka till 1700-talet till den Wahabitiska terrorideologin som nu hemsöker Syrien igen. Med stor kraft avslöjade ambassadören många av de myter och lögner som fortfarande sprids för att hålla igång kriget mot hans land.
Schillerinstitutets konferens hade rubriken "Säkra världsfreden genom kampen för mänsklighetens gemensamma mål" och samlade många medlemmar av FN:s diplomatiska kår och politiska aktivister i församlingshemmet till kyrkan S:t Bartolomeus på Manhattan lördagen 10 september 2016. Schillerinstitutets Dennis Speed ledde konferensen som tydligt visade att USA står inför ett historiskt vägskäl att antingen ansluta till till de gemensamma mål för mänsklighetens fredliga utveckling som formulerats under det nyligen avslutade G20-mötet, eller fortsätta dölja sanningen om det fullständigt omoraliska s.k. kriget mot terrorismen.
Schillerinstitutets grundare Helga Zepp-LaRouche inledde med ett förinspelat budskap på video med en generalattack på geopolitiken som fört världen in i det nuvarande kaoset och terrorismen. Jeffrey Steinberg från EIR, pekade på de mirakulösa segrar som LaRoucherörelsen hade bidragit till, såsom det enhälliga antagandet i kongressen den på fredagen den 9 september av den s.k. JASTA-lagen, som möjliggör för amerikaner att att åtala Saudiarabien för stöd till terrordåd. Steinberg pekade också på hur presidenten i juli i år tvingades offentliggöra de 28 hemlighållna sidorna ur kongressens rapport om Saudiarabiens roll i 11septemberdåden. Detta ger nu möjligheten att riva upp hela den anglo-saudisk-amerikanska apparaten bakom terrorismen och börja avsätta de skyldiga för mörkläggningen. Han manade deltagarna att skapa fler sådana mirakler, såsom att återinföra bankdelningslagen Glass-Steagall.
Den förre amerikanska justitieministern Ramsey Clark möttes av en mycket stark applåd, när han därefter tog till orda. Han talade om hur USA skulle kunna skapa fred och pekade på den stora möjligheten som skapats av det rysk-amerikanska avtalet för vapenstillestånd i Syrien, vilket blev känt mindre än 24 timmar innan.
Konferensens avslutades med en videohälsning från kongressmannen Walter Jones, som spelade en avgörande roll att pressa fram offentliggörandet av de 28 sidoerna och för kongressens beslut att anta JASTA-lagen. Han är också en av de ledande motionärerna för att lägga fram bankdelningslagen Glass-Steagall i kongressen. Jones tackade LaRoucherörelsen för dess ledande roll att få fram sanningen till det amerikanska folket. Han lovade att han när kongressen återsamlas senare i september, återigen skall försöka få till stånd fullständiga förhör för att fram hela sanningen bakom de 28 sidorna om Saudiarabiens inblandning i terrordåden den 11 september, liksom om dem som tillåtit mörkläggningen.
Nedan följer de explosiva talen på engelska av Virginias delstatssenator Richard Black och Syriens FN-ambassadör Bashar al-Ja´afari.
Video med Richard Blacks tal finns på: https://youtu.be/0FNtEWfay_8
Video med Bashar al-Jaáfaris tal finns på: https://youtu.be/U3LTTbOYVfU
Helga Zepp LaRouches inledningstal finns översatt till danska här: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/2016/09/vi-kan-sikre-verdensfreden-ved-omf...
Här finns Jeffrey Steinbergs tal översatt till danska: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/2016/09/ingen-foraeldelsesfrist-sandheden-...
Videor och tal från hela konferensen finns på:
YORK SCHILLER INSTITUTE CONFERENCE: STATE SEN. RICHARD BLACK
`THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE BETTER THAN THIS, AND WE NEED TO CHANGE THE
DIRECTION OUR GOVERNMENT HAS TAKEN' -RICHARD
Thank you very much. Thank you. I appreciate it very much. I'm going to talk to you about the background of the Syrian war, particularly on the issues of the moderate rebels and American involvement in this. First of all, I want to let you know I'm a little bit different than Ramsey Clark. I am a conservative Republican and I have very extensive combat experience. I have been wounded in action, had my radio man killed right beside me in battle, flew 269 combat missions, and then, later, I served in the Pentagon on the general staff; I was a JAG officer advising Senate Armed Service Committee, executive orders for the President, testifying before committees in Congress. I come at this from a little different perspective than some people do. I just wanted to give that as background.
First of all, let me go back in time, and I'd like you to know a little bit about Syria and what Syria was like before the war began. Before the war, Syria was the safest of all Arab countries. There weren't any kidnappings, you could walk freely anywhere; tremendously friendly place. There had been 40 years of peace with Israel, and interestingly, they had the greatest women's rights of any Arab country. There was total religious freedom in Syria, and you heard Ramsey Clark allude to this, I think Syria is unique in the entire world, in terms of religious harmony. Not tolerance, where you are putting up with something you dislike, but a certain love among people of the Muslim faith, the Christians, the Alawites, really truly an amazing atmosphere. I visited with President Bashar al-Assad for a couple of hours during a trip I took to Syria this year. Interesting individual, he is a very thoughtful, very brilliant man, soft spoken, almost a touch shy in a sense. His wife, Asma al-Assad, is just a joyous woman, extremely bright. She was an investment banker, raised in London. And when the two of them took over in Syria, they came in with this zeal. They are young people, idealistic people, and they had a zeal for transforming Syria, rooting out corruption, improving the economy and so forth. Little did they know there were things under way that were going to prevent that.
I want to get one thing out of the way right up front. All of you have heard, probably a thousand times, that President Assad gassed his own people, he used sarin gas in Damascus, he crossed the red line. Well, this is totally incorrect, and this particular time line will show you, this is in 2013, all of this occurs in a three-month period. You go to March 30th. In Turkey there was a series of raids. Thirteen al-Qaeda homes were raided by Turkish border authorities within Turkey. They did the raids based on probable cause that resulted from extensive wire taps in which they recorded the fact that the al-Qaeda operatives were moving major supplies of sarin gas into Syria from Turkey. The precursor chemicals came from Western Europe, I'm not sure which country, but it came out of the West, so Western Europe, NATO was complicit in this. Anyway, these people were all arrested; and then President Erdogan ensured that there was a new prosecutor assigned, case was dismissed, individuals crossed the border into Syria.
Okay, that was on May 30th. On June the 20th, the Defense Intelligence Agency, which is probably one of the most respectable agencies of the United States government, it comes under the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, they issued a report and they said Al Nusra has major sarin production units in operation. This is coming out of the Pentagon at a very high level.
You go to August 13th. This is a very, very odd day. The rebels, the terrorists, whatever you want to call them, called together a very important meeting that included the CIA, MI6, various representatives from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and all of those who have been so deeply involved in this war. They announced that there would be a war-changing development, and that the United States would bomb Syria.
Now think about this. Rebels announced - here is the Ghouta gas attack [of Aug. 21]. Rebels announced eight days before the Ghouta gas attack that there would be an important event that would cause the United States to bomb Damascus and enter the war openly. I have difficulty believing there were not representatives of the United States government who were in the know, because we held enormous supplies of weapons in Turkey, in warehouses, the keys held by CIA. Based on that meeting, we immediately began transferring immense quantities of our most advanced weapons to the terrorists across the border in Syria.
Now you look. August 21st, the Ghouta gas attack which all of you heard about. Of all things, Syria, which was engaged in probably five multiple battle fronts where there was a desperate struggle going on, somehow chose to cross the red line by firing sarin gas at civilian targets. That's irrational. I'm going to tell you President Assad is not an irrational person. If he had been willing to have the United States enter the war, if he was willing to risk that, he certainly would not have wasted the chemicals. He certainly would have used it on the battle front where he could have at least turned the tide of battle.
The weapons all arrived somewhere between Aug. 21st and 23rd. As you can imagine it takes a tremendous logistic effort to get these things there. So that leaves us: How did the rebels know the U.S. was going to bomb Syria? A very disturbing question, I think.
The answer to this - Turkey and al-Qaeda executed the gas attack. We have significant evidence of this. First, we know that the 2.2 kilograms were seized. This was widely reported. This occurred three months before the red line gas attack. Also, if you really want to become educated, read the writings of Pulitzer Prize winning author Seymour Hersh. He is the guy that broke the story on the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War, and he analyzes in great depth how Turkey and al-Qaeda executed the sarin gas attack, blaming it on Bashar al-Assad for the purpose of pulling the United States openly into the war.
Now, this is sort of the icing on the cake. The other things you can say, these are coincidental or circumstantial. However, in December of 2015, Turkish members of Parliament, two individuals, incredibly heroic, at great risk to their lives, held an extensive press conference in which they laid out all of the evidence that had been seized by Turkish authorities, the wiretap information; and they disclosed how Turkey had sent the sarin gas, and the rockets to deliver them, into Syria for the purposes of provoking the U.S. attack. Those people were immediately charged with treason for revealing state secrets. And I'm going to tell you what, in Turkey, if you cross the government, in such a significant way, your life is not worth a plug nickel. So I've got to hand it to these people. Anybody who thinks that that is not proof beyond reasonable doubt, I 'm going to tell you, those guys are likely to die for what they did. God bless them; they are true heroes.
Now, we have all heard that the Syrian war began with the Arab Spring in 2011. That's when it occurred, in 2011. The fact is, the Syrian war countdown begins immediately after 9/11. Gen. Wesley Clark, the former Supreme Allied Commander Europe, has stated very unequivocally on videos, that he was in the Pentagon and he was informed that there was a top-secret document that had come down, and that the Pentagon had been instructed to draft plans to overthrow seven Arab governments within the next five years. This is not some remote source; this is the Supreme Allied Commander of Europe saying that, this is the senior four-star general outside of the Pentagon.
Five years pass. WikiLeaks, God bless them. I'll tell you what, at first I was a little reluctant, but now the more I read the documents and I see the onion peeled away, the happier I am to see the information. In 2006, the U.S. Embassy drafted detailed plans on how to destabilize and overthrow Syria. Now, remember, there were no demonstrations; this was a stable country. It really was sort of the ideal in the Arab world of what we would hope they would have, in terms of freedom, and women's rights, and things of that sort. But we had decided they were going to go down, and the plans were drafted.
One of the most sinister and unpleasant things about it, was that part of the plan involved creating religious divisions and hatred, where they did not exist; because as you have heard before and you will hear again, Syria had this atmosphere of religious harmony, unique in all of the world - honestly.
Okay, 2011, by then Hillary Clinton is the Secretary of State. Now most people think that the Department of Defense starts wars. The DOD does not start wars. They are the executive agency; they carry out the orders given. It is the State Department/CIA which are really one and the same. They are the ones who concoct the wars, draft the propaganda, and so forth. So, 2011, this is when I got involved. Because we launched an unprovoked attack on Libya. We had had our problems with them, but we resolved them some six or eight years earlier. Colonel Qaddafi was our number-one ally in the war on terror in North Africa. Libya was the most prosperous of all North African countries, on a per-capita basis.
We launched an attack that utterly destroyed Libya. Libya does not have a government. There are various groups we recognize from time to time. Last year, the Libyan government had to meet in a ship offshore, because they could not control a ten acre plot of the country of Libya. That is not a government. So there is no government; the place has been utterly crushed and destroyed. Why did we do it? I thought it was perhaps oil, began to look into it. Came to discover the reason was Qaddafi had a very large store of advanced weapons. We needed them to overturn Syria.
A month later, after the Libyan uprising, the Syrian uprising and the Syrian war begins. One month apart. Let's look at the causes of the war in Syria. Okay, some people have said, "oh it's a domestic uprising." I'll tell you, I have spoken to people who were demonstrators and they said, "initially" - you know, all of us have probably been involved in a demonstration of some sort. Pro this or anti that, or whatever. That's the kind of demonstrations; they weren't trying to bring down the government.
But what happened is very shortly al-Qaeda flags began to show up at the demonstrations. They said, we don't want al-Qaeda flags. Then, automatic military weapons showed up, and they said "get rid of those, we don't want that." They don't have a Second Amendment in Syria. You don't go down to the corner drug store and buy a Kalashnikov. It doesn't happen. They come from somewhere. They come from covert intelligence agencies.
The third thing that happened is that they began to proselytize religious hatred. They began to exploit these little fractions, and there are always religious differences among people. And I spoke with one fellow, he said, "my uncle was the head of the demonstrators," he said "he kept trying to push these elements out. In the seventh month al-Qaeda murdered him." So it was not a domestic uprising.
However, Saudi Arabia for many years had wanted to run an oil pipeline across Syria, and they had been unsuccessful in getting Syria's agreement to allow them to do this. Then, as the war approaches, Qatar, which, their only product is natural gas, it is a country that is basically sand dunes and gas wells. There is nothing else there. My wife Barbara and I have been there and seen it. So they asked for a gas pipeline; Syria refused the gas pipeline, and this immediately caused a flood of wealth starting to move from Qatar to the rebels in Syria.
The other thing I would say was an element of this was the weaponization of religion. This is something that the United States, unfortunately, began triggering during the conflict in Afghanistan with the Soviet Union. We began to create this mujahideen movement, and we armed it, and when we found out that it was not big enough to overthrow the Soviet Union, we then worked with Saudi Arabia, CIA, and to some extent Pakistani Intelligence, and they set up these madrassas, and they taught, not the mainstream Islam, but Wahhabism. And it was extremely violent, and we had, at that point, opened Pandora's box.
And we have continued - you would think we would have learned our lesson and said, "Hey this is really dangerous. Put the top on the box." But instead we said, "Gosh, this is kind of neat. We can create hatreds between this group and that group and fissures, and we can use it in Iraq and we can use it everywhere." It is one of the most terrible things that has ever been done. And ironically it wasn't done by Osama bin Laden, it wasn't done by some terrorist, it was done by planners at the Central Intelligence Agency, who looked at the possibilities that were available, if we could create these religions divisions. And now, of course, they have gotten well out of hand.
Here are the competing oil and gas pipelines. Those are the ones favored by Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Iran had a plan to do one, also. Neither of those have been built as a result of the war.
If you read the works of Seymour Hersh, he wrote "The Red Line and The Rat Line," a magnificent article and if you are interested in this, you have got to look it up: "The Red Line and the Rat Line." [http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/ the-red-line-and-the-rat-line] The Red Line was Obama's threat to enter the war if poison gas was used. Very convenient. And it tied right in with what the Turks were doing. The other thing was the Rat Line. The Rat Line was the movement of Libyan weapons into Syria. This is the way it went. Qatar had a major air fleet. They sent transports into Libya. They were loaded with weapons. The weapons were transported to Turkey, and Turkey then funneled them across the border into Syria, where they supplied all sorts of terrorist groups.
Now, this became a major concern for the Pentagon. And the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff directed the Defense Intelligence Agency to do a very extensive, highly classified, project to determine where we stood in Syria. The concern was that if Syria fell, the Pentagon believed it had major strategic implications for the entire Middle East, and perhaps beyond. The DIA rendered findings in the middle of 2013. Here is what they found: They said, first of all President Assad must remain in power or Syria will collapse in chaos, just as Libya has done. Next, they said that if Assad falls, he will be replaced by extremists.
Now, the CIA had ostensibly formed this rat line to supply moderate rebels. The Defense Intelligence Agency determined that by 2013 the Central Intelligence Agency was giving full support to all rebels, including, al-Qaeda and ISIS. The entire spectrum. Importantly, DIA determined that there are no moderate rebels. They do not exist. That is not to say there is not some fellow out there on the battle field, but for any practical purposes, the moderate rebels do not exist. As a consequence, the U.S. was arming extremists.
Now, this is the Defense Intelligence Agency, this is not my speculation or some particular group. The DIA warned of dire consequences from toppling Assad, and they repeatedly warned the White House of the dramatic strategic danger we faced if this were done. Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn was the commander of DIA, he was their director, during the relevant time, and here is a quote from him: "The Administration's policy was contradictory. They wanted Assad to go, but the opposition was dominated by extremists. We knew this, the White House knew it, and we forged on."
Here is where we are today. We've got a question, who will win the war in Syria? Well, first of all, we know it is not going to be the moderate rebels. We have a Defense Intelligence Agency finding that the moderate rebels do not exist. So it is not going to be them! Have I made that point? [Laughter.] All right.
There are two alternatives. President Assad, who is heavily supported by the army, who is heavily supported by the people of Syria, either they will win; or al-Qaeda and associated groups, there is a whole panoply of groups - they all take different names - I can't help but believe that the use of these names is designed to make things so complex that ordinary people can't comprehend it, and they give up and say, OK, whatever the government says. But the fact is, that the moderate rebels are no different from al-Qaeda.
Those are our two choices: al-Qaeda or the government that is in power in Syria today. So you have to ask the question: Are we prepared for al-Qaeda to take over Syria? We have experience with al-Qaeda. We are about to celebrate the 15th anniversary of al-Qaeda bringing down the Twin Towers and turning the Pentagon into a fireball. What awaits the Christians, the Alawites, the moderate Sunnis, the Shi'ites, the Druze? We know what will happen if al-Qaeda takes over, because we have seen what happens when al-Qaeda takes over, and this is the fate that awaits the good people, the decent people of Syria, what you see right here.
I have to go back to go back to this idea: Syria has this magnificent tradition of religious harmony. This is in 2013; the war had been going on for two years. They erected a magnificent statue of Jesus Christ that overlooks Israel, Lebanon, and Syria. Can you imagine the difficulty we would have in this country, if we did it? [laughter] You can't do that in America! You have to do it in Syria! I had to go to Syria to experience the religious freedom, that I knew when I was a child!
I spoke with the Grand Mufti. He's the leader of all of the Sunnis and I think to a good extent to the Shi'ites as well. Magnificent, wonderful man! He made the comment, - now there are 23 million Syrians - he said, "We Syrians are 23 million Christians." He said, "My mother's name was Myriam, like Mary, mother of Jesus. ""
Then I went and spoke with the Patriarch, the Christian Patriarch of Syria and the East, and he made the comment, he said, "We Syrians are 23 million Muslims." And when he said that I said, "That's interesting you say that, it's the reflection of what the Mufti said." And he stroked his beard, and he said, "Well, some people say I have a Muslim beard."
This is a reflection of the love and the affection, - it is genuine - between people of different faiths.
I went to a choral presentation one evening, and I was stunned. This is in a 70% Muslim city, the city of Homs, and all of a sudden, I'm watching and I couldn't tell what they were singing about, they were singing in Arabic, but they were singing about Christ's crucifixion, death, resurrection, ascension. It was the Christian Easter, and here they were, and I leaned over to the wife of the governor of Homs province, who is a Muslim, and said, "this is kind of surprising to me." She said, "Oh, many of the members of the choir and many of the members of the audience are Muslim as well."
Where else? Where else, but in Syria? This is on the final day of my visit. I gave an extensive interview to SANA, which is sort of like the Fox News of Syria, and as I was walking out I looked over, and here's a Christmas tree in the press pit, and I said "What is this?" And they said "This is the martyrs' Christmas tree."
You'll see the photographs there. There are seven people. All of them have been killed reporting on the Syrian war, which has been horrific. I mean this was like the American Civil War with the percentage of people slaughtered. And it occurred to me, I said here's a Christmas tree, there is a star on the top of it, it's even got the Christmas Grinch on there somewhere. And most of the pictures there are Muslims. It's sort of like, the Christians' way of honoring the Muslims for what they have done. So, it is unique in Syria.
Now, I went out to Palmyra. Palmyra is very interesting. It is one of the architectural gems of the entire world. And ISIS had captured it and the generals were showing me how they had managed to recapture, it once the Russians came in with an expeditionary force that provided some additional air support. Tremendously heroic people. And they had captured it.
However, ISIS had been allowed to capture Palmyra, and you can see the devastation. This was truly one of the architectural wonders of the world. It wasn't just a possession of Syria; it was a possession of all mankind. And it was allowed to be destroyed by ISIS. It just angered me, and I think you can see that when I'm talking to the press. Because we had a coalition of 67 nations, with aircraft that were supposedly working against ISIS, and ISIS was able to assemble a huge army - now let me just back up a second.
ISIS had to travel 100 miles across open desert, with hundreds and hundreds of vehicles-tanks, artillery pieces, trucks, all of these things. I cannot imagine that that coalition did not have the ability to spot everything that was going on, and I have confirmed they did not drop one single bomb to stop ISIS from taking Palmyra. Why? Because Palmyra is mid-way between the areas controlled by ISIS, and Damascus itself.
And I believe that we were so intent on toppling the government of Syria that we were willing to have ISIS, after all of the viciousness and horrors they had inflicted, we were willing to inflict that on Damascus, Syria, and to empower them with a far greater Caliphate than they had ever had. And it just infuriated me, and I think you can tell from the look on my face, my emotions there.
Now this will just give you some idea of where the war stands. If you look, the Syrian government-the government-controlled areas are shown in the reddish-orange there-they control 75 to 80% of the population of Syria. Much of Syria is desert. The white area is simply desert; it had very little population. The gray area is the area that was controlled by ISIS. It's gradually shrinking. You can see where Palmyra is, right in the center, right here. So you can see-they had to travel with a huge army across the desert to Palmyra, and we allowed them to do it deliberately, so that they could capture Palmyra, hoping that they would drive on to Damascus.
Now, just to bring you very current, the biggest battle that is taking place in Syria today is the battle for Aleppo. Aleppo is the industrial heartland of Syria. The rebels have held about 20% of the city for years. The government has held the vast majority of the city, but al-Qaeda controls it-it's called al-Nusra over there, but it's al-Qaeda. Even the White House has said they're al-Qaeda. And they had a supply route that went into the pocket and supplied it. And the Syrian army had tried for many years to try to seal that off. They finally attacked and they were able to do that, and they cut the supply line, and they created the Aleppo pocket.
Now, if you listen to the American mainstream media, you would think that all that's happening with Aleppo is that some civilians are in there, and they're just being bombed for no purpose whatsoever, and this kind of thing. The fact of the matter is, we really should be rejoicing, because there is a major al-Qaeda army that is trapped in there, and particularly on 9/11, we should say-Rah, here we go! We've trapped al-Qaeda! We're going to get even with these people that brought down the Twin Towers, and sent people leaping from the flaming buildings, and leaping to their death a quarter of a mile below.
But anyway, the next thing is that al-Qaeda assembled an army of 40,000 people. Now you won't know this from the mainstream media! 40,000 troops! That's two heavy American divisions, - and al-Qaeda, they've done real well. They started with 19 people on 9/11; now they're up to two, full armored, mechanized divisions, and what they did is, they attacked. The forces inside attacked, and the forces outside attacked. Now, let me tell you. If you think for a moment that the Aleppo pocket is simply civilians, they attacked with thousands of terrorists, supported by 95 main battle tanks. 95 tanks! This is one of the biggest armored battles in our lifetimes-not a word of it in the media. You've got to really dig and find it out. That's a lot of tanks.
But anyway, they managed to briefly breach the barrier, but the Syrian Army very, very skillfully drove them back, and have driven both of those arrows back, and they now have resealed the Aleppo pocket. And because they can't obtain new weapons and supplies inside, they're withering very quickly. The Syrian army is moving very quickly, and it appears that, absent something extraordinary, they have lost the battle of Aleppo.
I just want to let you know who these people we're supporting, the ones we call moderates,-who are these moderates?
One of the groups which we support is called Jaesh al-Islam. This is taken in the area of Damascus, and Jaesh al-Islam despise the Alawites. The Alawites are considered friends of Christians. They're much more moderate. And they [jaesh] captured Alawite women, and they put them in steel cages-no privacy, no facilities, and they parade them around town in cages. This is one of the groups that the United States supports, and the U.S. State Department refuses to call them extremist. I would call that pretty extreme.
But if you don't think that's extreme, here's another example. Russia and Syria insisted that Ansar al-Sham be labeled as terrorist. Secretary Kerry refused to do it, and on the 13th of May of this year, they committed the massacre at Al Zahra. This is a photograph that they have admitted is valid, but they said that the housewives that you see on the floor, they were fighters. Look for some weapons. What fighters go into battle barefooted? What kind of fighters go into battle wearing housedresses? What kind of fighters have world geographic maps on the wall, so that they can teach their children geography?
After they murdered these women, they captured-now, the children watched as they murdered their mothers. These are American allies! These are the moderates we support. After the children had to watch their mothers slaughtered, they were doused with gasoline, lit on fire, and burned to death.
What's happened to our country? What has happened to our country?
Here's a very recent one. The United States backs a group called al-Zinki-it's Nour al-din al-Zinki. They give them all these crazy names to make it hard to keep up. The United States pays the entire al-Zinki force; it's about a thousand terrorists. This group of five, paid for out of your pocket, and yours and yours, went into a hospital. They captured this little Palestinian refugee boy, terrified-if you look closely, you'll see that there's still an IV hanging out of his arm. They took him out to a town square in a pickup truck, and you can see one of them has him by the hair. And that individual who had him by the hair took him, slammed him down, sliced his head off with a knife, waved it to the crowd-"Allah Akbar! Allah Akbar!" A little boy who was so terrified, so frightened, so frail, suffering from a blood disease. The United States supports these people. We pay his salary! Your tax money pays his salary! Your tax money pays the salary of that man whose hand is on the head of that boy, and then severed it seconds later!
You won't hear about this in the mainstream media, but we also funnel TOW anti-tank missiles through these so-called moderate groups, knowing that they're going to al-Qaeda, knowing that they're going to ISIS.
The UN Ambassador from Syria, Bashar Ja'afari, a magnificent, heroic man, who - [laughter] Mr. Ambassador. [applause] I have to tell you a small story about him. One of the things that we do when we're toppling nations, is we try to buy off ambassadors, and get them to turn on their nations. Ambassador Ja'afari was approached; he was given a blank check-I think, do you still have that check? But, in any event, he's a great man of honor and courage, and he said, no, I will not betray my people; I will not slaughter my people for money. [applause] And I am very proud to know the Ambassador.
Now, people ask me, they say, why are you so passionate about this? You don't have any Syrian relatives. You don't have any Middle Eastern relatives. Well, you know, I was a Marine, and I started at Parris Island as a private. We used to stand at night, and we'd sing the Marine Corps hymn, and we said that "I will fight for right and freedom, and to keep our honor clean. I'm proud to claim the title of United States Marine." Our honor is disgraced. Our honor has been laden with filth in Syria. There is nothing more vile than what we have done to the people of Syria that's resulted in 400,000 deaths, and I want to change, I want to bring peace there. I want the people to have self-determination. I don't want a bunch of foreign nations coming down and saying, this is the puppet government we want to install. The people of Syria want Bashar al-Assad. They should have the person that they want.
Now finally, I'll tell you, this is a group of Christian school children. We took a picture with the Patriarch, and if you look at the faces, it'll help to explain the passion that I have. If the United States continues on its present course, if the United States succeeds in toppling the government of Syria, it will be replaced by al-Qaeda. And within two years, all of those joyous, smiling young children that you see, will be dead. That's why I'm very deeply concerned, and I am determined that we will turn around American policy in Syria.
Finally, just a last photo of what happens when people like al-Qaeda take over. Now this is ISIS. They both are progeny of al-Qaeda. They captured these 19 Yazidi women, and they tried to force themselves on them, and the women refused have multiple sex with strangers. And they took them out, and seconds after this photo was taken, they took them one at a time, and they burned them to death publicly for refusing to have sex with these people. What has America done? What have we become?
We're better than this. I know the American people are better than this. But the American federal government is not. And we need to make sure that somehow we change the direction that we've taken. Thank you very much.
Syrian Ambassador to the UN Bashar Ja'afari
Moderator: Our final speaker, to the surprise of many of you, is Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari, Permanent Representative of the Syrian Arab Republic to the United Nations.
The UN Ambassador from Syria, Bashar Ja'afari:
Ladies and gentlemen thank you so much for coming on this Saturday; a hot Saturday, humid Saturday, to listen to us. I know that sometimes politics are boring, would bore the listeners. However, the issue is very important. It's not only about Syria, but it is about all of us. It's about U.S.A., it's about Syria, Iraq, the Middle East, the whole Middle East - the whole world! And we will try to elaborate a little bit by adding to what my distinguished colleague, the Hon. Sen. Richard Black has just pointed out. And to what Mr. Ramsey Clark, also my distinguished friend said before my arrival.
History has shown to us that lies are not and could not be eternal. We know for sure, nowadays, that many tragic episodes in history were based on lies, meaning they were baseless and without any foundation. I could share with you, hundreds of examples about what I'm saying, derived all of them from the UN itself, from the United Nations, where I represent my country. I think that Senator Black and Mr. Ramsey Clark have not left too much for me to say. However, we have indeed too much information to share with you. We could speak about what's going on in the world in general, but in Syria, in particular, for hours, if not for days, and you would be surprised, because you have never heard anything of this information I'm going to share with you.
It is a great honor for me to have the opportunity to address this august audience from this podium in St. Bartholomew's Church in Manhattan. I convey to you my sincere salutes, and best wishes, and I thank the Schiller Institute, and thank you all, for offering this great honor to me and to my colleagues.
We meet today while we all are recalling the tragedy of Sept. 11. It was one of the most sad and grievous days in the whole history of the United States. It also was a harsh and difficult lesson to learn for all nations and governments, that terrorism recognizes no boundaries or identities, and therefore should not be justified, protected, or concealed. I'm saying this, because Senator Black somehow gave some hints about the Saudi links to the events of 9/11. And I will elaborate a little bit on this issue, later on. Fifteen of the 19 terrorists who did the 9/11 attacks, were Saudis. They were not Syrians; they were not Iraqis; they were not Algerians. They were Saudis.
These same Saudis, formed by what is called commonly speaking Wahhabism, which derives from the name of the founder of this school of thought, Mohammad Abdul Wahhab; Wahhabism derives from Abdul Wahhab, who appeared all of a sudden, in the Hijaz, the old name of Saudi Arabia, which is a fake name actually. Saudi Arabia is a fake name of the country, because "Saudi" means al-Saudi, the family of Saud; so as if you are changing the name of your own country to be the United States of Obama. [laughter] So this family stole the name of the country and transformed this country to fit to their radical agenda. That happened in the late 18th century. The funny part of the story is that this school of thought was facilitated, created, and endorsed by the British intelligence of that time. So the British intelligence facilitated the creation of this radical movement in Islam, on purpose of course, you know the British how they act. Nothing is for free. [laughter]
Immediately, in 1815, this crazy guy, moved toward Damascus and Karbala in Iraq. In Karbala, he attacked the shrines of the Shi'a Muslims, and in Damascus he tried to invade the city, but the Syrians stopped him and defeated him at the walls of Damascus. Then he retreated and went back to where he came from.
I'm giving you this background to show you that this crazy movement is not a newcomer. It has been there for centuries, a couple of times protected by the British, then by the Americans. It is not because they like them, but it is because their craziness fits to their agenda.
Islam is not about Saudi Arabia. In Damascus, and the greatest mosque in Damascus, called the Umayyad Mosque, in the middle, in the heart of the mosque, which is the biggest and great mosque in Syria, we have the shrine of St. John the Baptist, inside the mosque. The grave of St. John the Baptist is in the middle of the mosque, where Muslims as well as Christians visit the grave, and say their prayers. Senator Black told you about the Mufti of Syria, this wonderful man. Could you believe that his main political advisor is a Christian? The Mufti's political advisor is Christian. Only in Syria - only in Syria. This is why we are extremely proud of our secularism, our secularity. We are proud of what we are, whether we are Muslims or Christians, but we are not ready to become as crazy as the Saudis are. And we don't share, at all, their concepts of religion.
By the way, what ISIS is doing, and all these fanatic groups operating in Syria and Iraq, those who are beheading the boys, and women and girls, they have inherited beheading people by sword from the Wahhabis! Till now, ladies and gentlemen, in Saudi Arabia, after the Friday prayers, they behead people in the public square! Till now! It is not only ISIL! In Saudi Arabia itself, every Friday after the prayer, they behead the people, publicly, in the public square, but using swords! So the story is not new, it is not ISIL. ISIL is not a newcomer; ISIL has been there for centuries, represented by the Saudis. And this is why they are protecting them and defending them and sending them weapons and money.
Most of us in this world believed after that black day of 9/11, that there will be a united international stand against terrorism. We were all optimistic at that time, if you remember, that finally, we will get together to fight terrorists. And that all nations will fight together against terrorists, and their supporters, funders and their inspirational leaders as well. Unfortunately, what happened next, was the invasion of Iraq. So if the Saudis attacked New York, the Twin Towers, why go after Iraq? If the main reason was to avenge what happened in 9/11, and we all know, and we all knew at that time that it was a Saudi conspiracy. Then why attack in Iraq? Iraq is a secular country, like Syria. Syria, and Iraq and Algeria are only the three secular governments in the Arab world! Iraq is out the picture now; Iraq has become a hub of international terrorism, after the spreading of George Bush freedom over there. [laughter]
Algeria you know. Algeria was tested before us, in the early '90s. They sent to them an early Arab spring, but it was defeated - thank God. So, only Syria remains.. Only Syria remains; and Egypt, recently. And Egypt recently after the eviction of Morsi, who belongs to the same family of the radical movement of Islam. It is not about Islam; it is about radical movements, pretending, claiming, alleging that they are representing Islam, but they are not.
Islam has become a good business for manipulation. Very good business for manipulation, very good business. Everybody makes business out of Islam very cheaply, and we will try to explain why. It's not about politics. You are fed up with politics; I am also fed up with politics. It is about geo-political dimensions, rivalries, competition, dominance.
Then we said, what happened next unfortunately was the invasion of Iraq, under the very same pretext of fighting terrorism. That was a funny part of the story: when George Bush invaded Iraq, he said that he was doing that to combat terrorism; and getting rid of the wrongly alleged weapons of mass destruction - again, another lie. You know it. You know it, I mean, and let me tell you this story. I'm an eyewitness: I work at the UN and I know what I'm talking about, because I was there. A story that none of you have heard in the mainstream media, as Senator Black said.
After the invasion of Iraq, the United Nations, under the pressure of Tony Blair and George Bush at that time, sent what we call an investigation commission, called UNSCOM, headed by a Swedish guy, a scientist, to find the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The purpose was, to show to the so-called international community that the invasion of Iraq was based on facts! There are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and we've got to find them and show them to the international community! So they formed this commission of investigation and sent it to Iraq. Of course, when I say "commission," it's about hundreds of people all paid off by the Iraqi government, the Iraqi assets frozen by the United Nations. Billions of dollars were spent by the activities of this commission, at the expense of the Iraqi people. This commission spent - how long? - from 2003 and even before, up to 2008; 2008 it was about to close the file, because the lie has become too big to swallow.
So they gathered the Security Council and asked the commission to submit its final report. But the funny part of this story is that this final report doesn't include any hint that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, so the commission wouldn't be able to say that "Sorry Gentlemen, members of the Security Council, we haven't found anything in Iraq." That would run against the mainstream propaganda spread by George Bush and Tony Blair at that time.
So everybody was cornered in the Security Council: They need to shut down the file! Because it has become costly and Iraq has become another Iraq, and it is time to put an end to all this story. What to do?
They gathered a meeting of the Security Council - at midnight. Midnight. There were nobody, except the 15 members of the Security Council. In a few minutes, the president hammered the meeting and said, "We endorse the report of the commission" without saying anything, whether they found something or didn't find something. The issue is dead.
Now: What to do with the archives of the commission? The archives, a big scandal. The Council decided - ladies and gentlemen, listen to me carefully - to put the whole archives, in iron cages, fire resistant, with locks, digital locks that only the Security General knows the code. Number 1. Number 2: These locked cages, will not be reopened before 60 years from now. [collective groan] I'm sure you haven't heard about this story. Nobody will tell you this story. This is what happened. This is how they killed the investigation about why Iraq was invaded! And now, none of us in this room would be able to wait 60 years to disclose that a big lie took place at that time. It will be too late, to bring the responsible, accountable to justice. There will be no George Bush; there will be no Tony Blair.
There will be 3 million Iraqis killed; 1 million Iraqi widows; millions of Iraqis without fathers; millions of Iraqi refugees in the world. And the whole of Iraq is destroyed!
Plus, hundreds of billions of dollars which are the Iraqi assets overseas have gone. Evaporated. Like the $800 million of Libya. Nobody knows where this money is. $800 million, this is Libya, alone.
The result of the invasion of Iraq, was killing millions of civilians, as I said, destroying the infrastructure and having a failed state there. And more importantly, transforming Iraq into a hub of international jihadist terrorism. I'm saying this because all the so-called ISIL, all of them, grew up in the American jails in Iraq. All of them. They were taken care of by the American soldiers in Iraq: So they knew them, how dangerous they are, and they didn't deal with them accordingly. Why? Because Mr. Bremer was insisting on dividing Iraq on a confessional, sectarian, religious basis. The Iraqis lived side by side for thousands of years, until Mr. Bremer came and found out that, they shouldn't continue like this. We've got to divide the country, we've got to give a part to the Sunni, then a part to the Shi'a, then a part to the Kurds, another part to the Assyrians, and then etc., etc. Would that amount to say the Iraqis were duped and stupid for living side by side for thousands of years before Bremer came?
Today, and after six years, my country, Syria, is still suffering from the fiercest terrorist war in the modern history of humanity. This unprecedented barbarian war reflects the bitter fact that terrorism is still privileging from safe havens, money resources, some well-known government support, and the growing of terrorist ideologies and shelters around the world. Why do I say this? Because it wouldn't be that easy for a terrorist to leave Sydney, Australia, to take the flight to, to change the flight three times, get five visas - Thailand visa, Indonesian visas, a Cambodian visa, whatever, and then find himself out of Istanbul airport in Turkey. Then, a group of people would come to welcome him upon his arrival, and escort him to the Turkish border with Syria. Then somebody would give him money and weapons, and facilitate his entry into Syria.
This is not a tourist! This is not a tourist: This is a terrorist known in advance by the Australian intelligence services, before he left!
The people in the Western world, unfortunately, some government who are betting on the fact that, you know what, we have this garbage in our societies. Let us export them to Syria. Let us get rid of this garbage by sending them to Syria and Iraq, where they will kill Syrians, and, probably, they might be killed by the Syrians also. But finally, we will get rid of them, because they are a burden on our societies.
The problem started when these terrorists killed Syrians and Iraqis, but some of them changed their mind, and wanted to get back to Australia, Belgium, Paris, London, Germany, U.S.A., Canada, and that was a big problem, because the scenario was totally different. These garbage shouldn't get back, initially speaking. But started to get back. And the Western democracy wouldn't be able to prevent them from doing so. So what was the solution? The solution is, the British prime minister, the Australian prime minister, the Belgian prime minister, the French President, decided to withdraw citizenship from these terrorists if they dare to come back.
What would that mean? That means, you know guys, continue killing the Syrians until they are killed. But don't ever think about getting back. And this is what's going on now in Syria. These garbage cannot go back to where they came from, because they lost their rights to citizenship.
Figure out that these prime ministers I have enumerated did not say that if these terrorists get back, we will take them to court; they didn't say that. We will hold them responsible, they didn't say that. We will holding them accountable, they didn't say that. So they didn't say that these people are terrorists. They said, "If you get back we will withdraw citizenship from you," meaning, "you are a good terrorist. As long as you continue to kill the Syrians, you are a good terrorist. But if you think about getting back to Paris, Brussels, whatever - Sydney, - then you will become a bad terrorist."
Yesterday, while I was reading your invitation to this great event, many noble ideas stopped me, especially those about a better future to our nations, away from wars and conflict, particularly the words of Friedrich Schiller, the founder of Schiller Institute; and I quote him: "Born for that which is better."
Unfortunately, again, what is happening up to today in my country, Syria, goes totally against these great human principles. Syrian people suffer, until this moment, from terrorism which is supported from regime of well-known countries, such as Qatar, Turkey, France, and Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi family. Needless to remind you here of the basic role of the Saudi family in supporting and funding the terrorists who committed the brutal crime of 9/11, as I said at the beginning. Without forgetting the dangerous role of their pre-historic religious clerics who still inspire terrorists by ideas of jihad and hatred of other religions and ethnicities, all around the world.
Another story - I'm a storyteller, I apologize. I was ambassador of my country to Indonesia, the biggest Islamic country in the world; 235 million Muslims in one country. But this country is composed of 17,000 islands; this is why we call it the Malay Archipelago. It's not an island, it's an archipelago, a huge amount of islands.
The story is the following, and I told Senator Black this story in one of our meetings, actually: Up until my arrival in Jakarta, I was surprised that every Friday, after the prayer, thousands of young girls and young women, gathered in front of the Saudi Embassy in Jakarta. I asked the Saudi Ambassador, what's going on Ambassador? Why are these people gathered, in front of your embassy?"
He said, "You know, Ambassador, these people are giving me a serious headache every Friday. They gather all these women are carrying with them a baby, old, and chanting slogans, asking for their rights in their local language," something that I couldn't understand at that time. So all these women happen to fall victim of the following story: Saudi businesspeople or Saudi religious clerics who come to Indonesia for business, or in a short period of time, they spend 20 days, up to one month maximum over there. So because they are so religious, they need to have sex with women, in Indonesia. How can they do it? They go to the small villages in Indonesia, very poor people - extremely poor people, but real, honest people; and marry young girls, 12 years old, 13 years old, and their dowry is only $100. So they give the father $100 and the father gives them his daughter, thinking that by giving his daughter to somebody coming from the Holy Land of Islam, is a treasure.
The guy takes the girl for 20 days, two weeks, three weeks, whatever and then he divorces her before leaving, because he doesn't need her any more!
The girl finds herself pregnant. After nine months, she has a baby, but the baby doesn't have any father, so no papers, no identity, and she cannot register the baby! Thousands of young Indonesian women find themselves in this situation every year, every month, every week!
When I ask the ambassador, I said, "You should do something. This bad for your image, I mean, you cannot go ahead with this." He told me, "you know, Bashar, I have at the embassy a person called a religious attaché," meaning a guy in charge of the religious matters, like the economic attaché, cultural attaché, military attaché, they have this specific position called the "religious attaché." "And this religious attaché is stronger than me!" This is what he said. "I cannot do anything. I am the ambassador, but I cannot do anything, to stop this hemorrhage." That was 1999.
And at that time, the Saudi regime used to spend $3 billion on forming Wahhabi Indonesian imams: $3 billion per year, to form Wahhabi Indonesian imams in the small villages. This is why, unfortunately nowadays, in Southeast Asia we now have the same ISIL we have in the Middle East, they have it over there. They did the Bali explosion if you remember, and the series of explosions of the five-star hotels in Jakarta. This is what the Saudis are.
I am Muslim myself, I am proud to be a Muslim, but I have nothing to do with this garbage. Nothing to do.
We hope that the legislation which passed yesterday in the House of Representatives and has already passed in the Senate before, allowing the families of 9/11 victims to sue the Royal family - Royal, of Saudi Arabia. [laughter] Of Saudi Arabia in the U.S. Courts. You know this Royal family what they are doing in the hotels in California, and New York.
We hope that will pose a new course in the U.S. foreign policy regarding fighting international terrorism and holding responsibilities. Moreover, this terrorist war against Syria is accompanied with policies of Western states, led by the United States administration, and Britain, And based on violating international law and the Charter of the United Nations, disrespecting the sovereign of the country, and acting against the pure will and interests of the Syrian people.
Senator Black elaborated enough on this issue, but I would like to add the following: That since the beginning of the Syrian crisis, in 2011, the Security Council endorsed and adopted 16 resolutions on Syria. Now we have 16 resolutions adopted by the Security Council on Syria. All these resolutions start with the following in the Preamble paragraph: "The Security Council reiterates the confirmation of the Syrian sovereignty, the territorial integrity of Syria, the political independence of Syria, the principle of non-interference into the domestic affairs of Syria..." all these beautiful Tom and Jerry expressions are in the first paragraph of each resolution! And who violates these principles, sacrosanct principles, the same guys who endorse the resolutions! The same influential people in the Security Council, are the ones who are violating these beautiful wordings.
Another story. I tell always the stories in my meetings, so that one day in Geneva when I was heading the Syria delegation to the intra-Syrian talks with De Mistura, the [UN Secretary General's] special envoy, he was the one who called me a storyteller. So the story is the following, and this is a very, very important one:
I will tell you this story chronologically so you will understand the message. In October 2012, meaning five months before any use of toxic chemical gas in Syria, because the first attack by using toxic gas took place in Khan al-Assal , a small town in the suburbs of Aleppo, that was in 2013. Five months later in March 2013; I'm talking about September 2012, meaning five months before the first chemical attack took place in Khan al-Assal, Aleppo, some, what is called common speaking, "Syrian opposition activists," - "Syrian opposition activists" - formed and established, in Turkey, an office they called "Office of Documentation the Use of Chemical Weapons in Syria." They formed and established this office five months before any thing related to the issue of chemical weapons in Syria. And all of a sudden, the OPCW, the Organization of the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, which is based in The Hague, in the Netherlands, gave this nongovernmental center, a consultative status to the OPCW; meaning they endorsed the center, which is a non-governmental office; and as a consultative body of the OPCW on chemical issues.
We didn't understand why did they did that, because we didn't expect that something would happen five months later. Five months after, they attacked Khan al-Assal in Aleppo, using chemical gas, and they killed 18 Syrian soldiers. Of course, CNN wouldn't speak about it. But 18 Syrian soldiers got suffocated by virtue of this attack.
Immediately Al Jazeera Qatari channel started spreading the rumors that the Syrian army used chemical weapons. So the Syrian army used chemical weapons against itself. And the Syrian army killed 18 officers and soldiers of its own staffers.
Simultaneously, a series of similar attacks took place in Syria. I have the names; you are not familiar with the names, so I will not get into these details. Carla da Ponte, the Italian lady who was a member of the independent investigation committee of the United Nations on Syria, Carla da Ponte said, that the armed groups of the opposition were the ones who used the chemical weapons in the attack against the town of Khan al-Assal in Aleppo. An Italian lady said that; she was immediately fired.
Then we come to the story of the Red Line, President Obama's Red Line. Because again, after this attack on Khan al-Assal in Aleppo I got instructions the same day the attack on Khal al-Assal took place, the same day, eight hours after the incident took place, I went myself to the office of the United Nations Secretary General Bank Ki-Moon. I asked him to help the Syrian government in a) verification of whether chemical weapons were used or not in Khan al-Assal; b) identifying the perpetrators. This is what I myself asked Bank Ki-Moon that day, Aug. 21, 2013.
The guy was very nice, as you know. He asked me to give him some time to consult with the good guys on the Security Council. So he consulted with the good guys, and he came back, two or three hours later, to tell me the following: "Mr. Ambassador, tell your government that I will assist your country with a verification to prove whether chemicals weapons were used or not in Aleppo. But I'm sorry, I cannot assist you in identifying the perpetrators."
From the day 1, they knew who did it! But they didn't want to reveal the identity of perpetrators.
We said, "Yes, you know what, Mr. Secretary General, help us in verifying if chemical weapons were used or not." It took him four months and 11 days, to send to us an investigation team, headed by a Swedish scientist, well known, called Dr. Sellstrom. It took him and the Security Council four months and 11 days, to send a team to investigate whether chemical weapons were used in Aleppo. You know that this kind of weapon, they evaporate. You cannot trace them after a couple of days, they are not there.
More importantly, after four months and 11 days, Dr. Sellstrom was in Damascus and President Obama made his speech and drew the "Red Line" that was Obama did his speech on the 20th of August. Dr. Sellstrom was in Damascus at that time, on his way to Aleppo to investigate what happened in Khan al-Assal. He was still at the door of the hotel in Damascus, getting into his car. Out of a sudden, we hear that another chemical attack took place in the suburbs of Damascus. Out of a sudden, incidentally, another attack took place in the suburbs of Damascus! That was done, to shift the attention from Khan al-Assal to another place, because they didn't want, initially speaking, they didn't want anybody to investigate what happened in Khan al-Assal. So the best way to do it, was to shift, to create another spot of attention somewhere else!
And who did it? According to the very important French anchors, Georges Malbrunot and Christian Chesnot, who wrote an important book on this matter, called On the Roads to Damascus: How the Elysée Manipulated Chemical Weapons Reports, like St. Paul did. In this book, they said that the French Minister for Foreign Affairs Laurent Fabius was behind this attack. It is a French book - but CNN will never speak about it, will never say anything about it. You will never hear anything about these issues, in the mainstream media, because that would corroborate the accuracy of our statements.
Then, isn't it paradoxical that Obama makes his warning, and drawing his Red Line on the 20th of August and then, incidentally, the chemical attacks in the suburbs of Damascus took place, one day after on the 21st? As if somebody is trying to "You know, Mr. President, they crossed the line. Go and punish them. Go and kill President Assad! The way your predecessor killed Saddam Hussein, or Qaddafi or whatever." Isn't it funny? Would the Syrian government use chemical weapons, while Dr. Sellstrom is Damascus? I mean....
I know that I'm sorry, maybe I have spoken too long. OK, I will finalize: I told you I could speak for hours about ... [laughter, applause]. I'm really grateful to all of you for giving me this opportunity to share with you some insights, from inside something that you have never heard about. I try my best as ambassador of my country, to share this information with the media, accredited to the United Nations. But you know what? Every time I take the floor next to the Security Council, where there are usually between 50 up to 100 reporters accredited from all over the world to the UN as reporters and journalists; when I take the floor, 50 of them disappear instantly! [laughter] Because they don't want to hear, because they know what I would say; they don't want to report. The point for them, by listening they would be somehow obligated to report, so the best way to avoid reporting is by boycotting, by not being there.
I'm saying this, because too many people, too many ambassadors of the United Nations, they come to me and they say, "You know, Bashar, you are right. Your government is right. We know the truth, but we cannot say it. You can - God bless you - but we cannot say it." So the mask has fallen. The truth is there. If you dig a little bit, you will find scandals that take place at this United Nations - scandals. It's not a place to maintain peace and security, it is a place where to demolish peace and security, where to destabilize societies. It's very easy, very easy at the United Nations, to destroy a country. [microphone disruption] It's very easy. I know - this is a signal for me to stop. [laughter]
I thank you very much. I still have too many things to say, but out of respect for the audience I thank you very much. [applause]
One more, allow me to thank the LaRouche foundation also, my old friends in New York. They are doing great, actually. And the Schiller Institute, of course, and this beautiful audience. I'm grateful to you. Sorry for being too long. God bless you!