After negotiations Kerry hightails it to Jerusalem (1st stop!)
See url below indicating original published headline. Note the original headline, pointing out of this visit as the 1 stop, straight from Geneva to Israel? Partners in crime?
|Are there two bigger war makers on the planet? I don't think so.|
And after Israel Kerry plans to meet with all the other warmongers, but, Israel first...
Mr. Kerry traveled to Jerusalem as the first stop in a series of meetings with allies to assure support for the chemical weapons deal, which was completed on Saturday in Geneva. After conferring with Mr. Netanyahu, Mr. Kerry left for Paris for another meeting with close allies. On Monday, he plans to meet with the foreign ministers of France, Britain, Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
Mr. Netanyahu offered support for the plan, the first official sign of Israel’s approval
“We hope that the understandings reached between the U.S. and Russia on Syrian chemical weapons will yield results,” Mr. Netanyahu said at the ceremony.
“Those understandings will be judged by the results — the total destruction of all the chemical weapon stocks that the Syrian regime used against its own citizens.”
Since there is no proof that Syria used any chemical weapons against Syrians, Netanyahu statement is just another example of the ‘big lie’ .
A false statement of outrageous magnitude used as a propaganda measure.
Repeated distortion of the truth on a grand scale, especially for propaganda purposes:
Both the prime minister and Mr. Kerry said the world’s response to the chemical weapons attack last month near Damascus would serve as a message to Iran.
“Here, too, it is not words that count, but the deeds and results,” Mr. Netanyahu said. “In any case, Israel must be ready and prepared to defend itself with its own forces against any threat, and that capability and readiness is more important now than ever.”
Israel will launch an attack on Iran and the US will step up?
“Mr. Kerry said on Sunday that the agreement reached with Russia was a “framework, not a final agreement,” and still had to be put into effect through a United Nations Security Council resolution.”
A framework, not a final agreement? This is so vague, And out of context.
From my understanding there is an agreement. A framework was prepared and it was agreed to.
The Framework that was AGREED to is available here: Framework for Elimination of Syrian Chemical Weapons I read through it and there is a heck of a lot of ‘AGREEING’
Just some excerpting below
Joint Framework on Destruction of Syrian CW
- The Russian Federation and the United States of America agree on the need to achieve rapid elimination of Syria’s chemical weapons,
-Both parties agree.......
-The two parties agree to utilize ......
-They agree that the elimination of chemical weapons
The parties agree to set the following target dates:
A. Completion of initial OPCW on-site inspections by November.
B. Destruction of production and mixing/filling equipment by November.
C. Complete elimination of all chemical weapons material and equipment in the first half of 2014.
The Russian Federation and the United States will work together closely, including with the OPCW, the UN and Syrian parties to arrange for the security of the monitoring and destruction mission, noting the primary responsibility of the Syrian government in this regard.
In conclusion it looks to me as if there was definitely an AGREEMENT to a framework/timeline and goals contained therein. It would seem Kerry is spinning for failure. Or what he actually stated is being taken out of context ?
Oddly enough Israeli’s military intelligence understands it is an AGREEMENT
“It is a good agreement if it will be implemented as it is written, as it reads,” said Amos Yadlin, a former chief of Israel’s military intelligence who now directs the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University. “I think it is a win-win-win-win for Russia, the United States, Syria and Israel.”
BUT! And there always is a but with Israel. I do find this interesting. And a possible indicator of how this agreement could ‘fail’ even if Syria complies fully. Think, a replay of Israel providing all the intel for the chemical attack at Ghouta?
“The Israeli intelligence community has invested enormous resources since the mid-1980s in an effort to discover how Syria was developing chemical weapons, where it was storing them “
"Conversely, Israeli experts said the intelligence already gathered over the years on Syria meant that the world would quickly be able to tell if President Bashar al-Assad was lying."
In other words, Israel can deliver the necessary "intelligence" yet again. As Israel did with Ghouta.
A fact I mentioned in at least one post here at the blog!
" Oh and guess which nation is providing ‘evidence’ about the chemical attack? Israeli intelligence seen as central to US case against Syria. Yup, Israeli ‘intelligence’ That should say it all.Should we expect a replay?
While Israel would almost certainly take no direct part in a military strike, Israeli intelligence information is widely believed to have played a central role in enabling the US’s adamant conviction that Assad’s regime fired chemical weapons"
UPDATE BEGINS NOW :
UN Report on Syria to Be Released Monday
A United Nations report due for release Monday is expected to confirm chemical weapons have been used in Syria's civil war, but may not finger a perpetrator.Rebels and the regime of President Bashar Assad have each accused the other of orchestrating a chemical attack in town of Ghouta on Aug. 21, which the White House and Russian government both agree occurred.The Obama administration estimates 1,429 were killed in the incident – including hundreds of children -- and has placed the blame squarely on Syrian government use of deadly Sarin gas.But Moscow has bitterly disagreed, maintaining Assad's opposition may be at fault for use of the lethal toxin. It is an accusation Russia has made against the rebels during prior incidents of the war.The UN inspectors' primary task was simply to confirm the attack occurred and if so, identify the agent used -- assigning a perpetrator was not a main goal. However, the paper will reportedly suggest that only Assad's military has the capability to carry out such a wide-scale strike.
If the paper suggests responsibility lies with the military based on 'capability', that is not evidence!
-Capability of Syrian Army is not an indicator of culpability
-NATO mercs are equally capable and have committed previous offences, making them the more likely culprits