By Mathew Schofield: Russia gave UN 100-page report in July blaming Syrian rebels for Aleppo sarin attack!

Russia says a deadly March sarin attack in an Aleppo suburb was carried out by Syrian rebels, not forces loyal to President Bashar Assad, and it has delivered a 100-page report laying out its evidence to the United Nations. A statement posted on the Foreign Ministry website late Wednesday said the report included detailed scientific analysis of samples that Russian technicians collected at the site of the alleged attack, Khan al Asal in northern Syria. The attack killed 26 people. A U.N. spokesman, Farhan Haq, confirmed that Russia delivered the report in July. The report itself was not released. But the statement drew a pointed comparison between what it said was the scientific detail of the report and the far shorter intelligence summaries that the United States, Britain and France have released to justify their assertion that the Syrian government launched chemical weapons against Damascus suburbs on Aug. 21. The longest of those summaries, by the French, ran nine pages. Each relies primarily on circumstantial evidence to make its case, and they disagree with one another on some details, including the number of people who died in the attack. The Russian statement warned the United States and its allies not to conduct a military strike against Syria until the United Nations had completed a similarly detailed scientific study into the Aug. 21 attack. It charged that what it called the current "hysteria" about a possible military strike in the West was similar to the false claims and poor intelligence that preceded the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003. Russia said its investigation of the March 19 incident was conducted under strict protocols established by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the international agency that governs adherence to treaties prohibiting the use of chemical weapons. It said samples that Russian technicians had collected had been sent to OPCW-certified laboratories in Russia. "The Russian report is specific," the ministry statement said. "It is a scientific and technical document." The Russian statement said Russian officials had broken the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons' code of silence on such probes only because Western nations appear to be "preparing the ground for military action" in retaliation for the Aug. 21 incident. A U.N. team spent four days late last month investigating the Aug. 21 incident. the samples it collected from the site and alleged victims of the attack are currently being examined at the chemical weapons organization's labs in Europe. U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has urged the United States to delay any strike until after the results of that investigation are known. But U.S. officials have dismissed the U.N. probe, saying it won't tell them anything they don't already know. White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said U.S. officials were unmoved by the Russian report and held the Assad government responsible for both the Khan al Asal attack in March and the Aug. 21 attack outside Damascus. "We have studied the Russian report but found no reason to change our assessment," she said.

By Matthew Schonfield: Russia gave UN 100-page report in July blaming Syrian rebels

for Aleppo sarin attack. Russia says a deadly March sarin attack in an Aleppo suburb was carried out by Syrian rebels, not forces loyal to President Bashar Assad, and it has delivered a 100-page report laying out its evidence to the United Nations. A statement posted on the Russian Foreign Ministry website late Wednesday said the report included detailed scientific analysis of samples that Russian Foreign Ministry website late Wednesday said the report included scientific analysis of samples that Russian technicians collected at the site of the alleged attack, Khan al Asal in northern Syria. The attack killed 26 people. A U.N. spokesman, Farhan Haq, confirmed that Russia delivered the report in July. The report was not released. But the statement drew a pointed comparison between what it said was the scientific detail of the report and the fat shorter intelligence summaries that the United States, Britain and France have released to justify their assertion that the Syrian government launched chemical weapons against Damascus suburbs on Aug. 21. The longest of those summaries, by the French, ran nine pages. Each relies primarily on circumstantial evidence to make its case, and they disagree with one another on some details, including the number of people who died in the attack. The Russian statement warned the United States and its allies not to conduct a military strike against Syria until the United Nations had completed a similarly detailed scientific study into the Aug. 21 attack. It charged that what it called the current "hysteria" about a possible military strike in the West was similar to the false claims and poor intelligence that preceded the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003. Russia said its investigation of the March 19 incident was conducted under strict protocols established by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the international agency that governs adherence to treaties prohibiting the use of chemical weapons. It said samples that the Russian technicians had collected had been sent to OPCW-certified laboratories in Russia. "The Russian report is specific," the ministry statement said. "It is a scientific and technical document."The Russian statement said Russian officials had broken the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons' code of silence on such probes only because Western nations appear to be "preparing the ground for military action" in retaliation for the Aug. 21 incident. A U.N. team spent four days late last month investigating the Aug. 21 incident. The samples it collected from the site and alleged victims of the attack are currently being examined at the chemical weapons organizations' labs in Europe. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has urged the United States to delay any strike until after the results of that investigation are known. But U.S. officials have dismissed the U.N. probe, saying it won't tell them anything they don't already know. White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said U.S. officials were unmoved by the Russian report and held the Assad government responsible for both the Khan al Asal attack in March and the Aug. 21 attack outside Damascus. "We have studied the Russian report but have found no reason to change our assessment," she said.   

By Peter Fairley: How the Fukushima Ice Barrier Will Block Radioactive Groundwater!

Japanese officials desperate to contain an ever-growing crisis at the Fukushima with an underground wall of ice. Here's how it how it would works. Japanese officials desperate to contain an ever-growing crisis at the Fukushima nuclear power station are looking to use artificial permafrost to stop radioactive water from leaking. The idea is to build a mile-long wall of frozen earth around Fukushima's toxic reactor buildings to stem the groundwater contamination, the most experienced specialists in the field say the plan should work. The Japanese firms involved appear to be taking a go-it-alone approach. Two weeks ago, a top official at Tokyo Electric Power (TEPCO) signaled that the utility behind the Fukushima disaster would seek international assistance with the Fukushima disaster would seek international assistance with the Fukushima water contamination crisis. But experts at the U.S.-based firms and national labs behind the world's largest freeze-wall systems, and the only one proven in containing engineering and construction firms and national labs behind the world's largest freeze-wall systems, and the only one proven in containing nuclear contamination -have not been contacted by either Tepco or its contractor, Japanese engineering and construction firm Kajima Corp. One of these experts is Elizabeth Phillips, who managed the installation of a 300-foot-long, 80-foot deep freeze wall to isolate radioactive waste at the U.S. Department of Energy's Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee in 1996 and 1997. While freeze walls are commonly used to hold back groundwater to facilitate evacuations at constructing sites and mines, this case calls for specialized expertise, she says. "You should go with someone who has done it before." Every day roughly 400 tons of groundwater flowing down from the nearby mountain enters cracks in the reactor buildings damaged by the meltdowns and explosions at Fukushima in 2011, according to an April 2013 Tepco briefing document. Water that escapes from the buildings pollutes the groundwater downstream and ultimately spills into the sea. The contaminant levels are dangerously high. Last month were orders of magnitude higher than the levels deemed safe by the Japanese Nuclear Regulation Authority. Tepco's efforts to prevent that spread so far have been ineffective, risky, and ultimately unsustainable. It's primary response has been to pump contaminated groundwater into holding tanks, adding to the more than 300,000 tons of radioactive water already stored at Fukushima in hastily assembled tanks that are vulnerable to future earthquakes. Some have already leaked. Last week Japan's Nuclear Authority recorded one recent 300-ton leak as a level-3 incident, the first incident at Fukushima that it has rated on the international nuclear event scale since 2011. The freeze wall would be a more definitive approach to managing groundwater. As proposed by Kajima in April and endorsed in May by a Nuclear Regulation Authority expert panel, it would run 1.4 kilometers and encircle the site's four destroyed reactors. Vertical pipes are to be drilled or driven into the ground at one-meter intervals, creating what looks like an array of sub-soil fence posts. Fourteen 400-kilowatt refrigeration plants would pump -20-C coolant down each pipe to absorb heat from the ground, producing an expanding cylinder of frozen earth.

by Mike Adams: Bombshell: Syria's 'chemical weapons' turn out to be sodium flouride, used

used in the U.S. water supply? Natural News can now reveal that the Syria chemical weapons narrative being pushed by the White House is an outlandish hoax. To understand why, you have to start with the story published in The Independent entitled Revealed: Government led British company export gas chemicals to Syria. Sounds scary, right? As the Independent reports: The Government was accused of "breathtaking laxity" in its arms controls last night after it emerged that officials authorised the export to Syria of two chemicals capable of being used to make a nerve agent such as sarin a year ago. What, exactly, are those two dangerous chemicals that need to be controlled via "arms control" regulations? You won't believe me when I tell you. They are: sodium flouride, potassium flouride. You can see this yourself in the screen capture of The Independent breaking news story. Note the headline and the subhead. The headline describes "nerve gas chemicals" and the subhead explains them as "sodium flouride" and "potassium flouride." You'll also notice that the label includes instructions for using this sodium flouride baby water: "ready to mix with formula and cereal, dilute juice or drink, just open and pour!" Yep. you read it: the same "chemical weapon" that's about to start World War III is part of your baby's formula recipe. when sodium flouride is in the hands of Syria's Assad, it's called a "chemical weapon," but when it's part of your baby's diet, it's called "nutrition." How's that for Orwellian doublespeak? Syria's "chemical weapon" to baby water isn't enough for you, it's also a key ingredient in Colgate toothpaste. Yep, according to dentists, chemical weapons also "fight tooth decay," so they should be added to toothpaste and see for yourself: Keep this in mind the next time you carry toothpaste with you when you attempt to travel by air. The TSA can pull you aside and legitimately accuse you of working for the Assad regime as a chemical weapons terrorist while charging you with the federal crime of "transporting chemical weapons." Mainstream media admits U.S. food companies use chemical weapons against their own customers. Unless the mainstream media retracts all its thousands of stories about sodium flouride being a "chemical weapon" sold to Syria, it must come to terms with the fact that it is also accusing the U.S. food industry of using chemical weapons on consumers. Sodium flouride, after all, is added to countless consumer products, from toothpaste and mouthwash to drinking water. Sodium flouride does not magically change from a "chemical weapon" in Syria to a "nutritive mineral" by crossing the ocean. Sodium fluoride is sodium flouride, and it's dangerous no matter who consumes it. Keep this in mind the next time you hear a dentist recommending dumping sodium flouride into the local water supply. You can correctly counter their absurd request by threatening to call Homeland Security to report them as a terrorist for engaging in the indiscriminate deployment of a chemical weapon in the water supply, a favorite target for terrorists worldwide.

Infowars.com: President Bashar al-Assad's interview with Le Figaro!

Note: English translation of the Le Figaro interview reposted from SANA, the Syrian state government news agency. President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to Le Figaro. Following is the full text: Le Figaro: Mr. President, the Americans and the French have accused you of perpetrating a chemical attack on the 21st of August in Ghouta, which led to the death of hundreds. Do you have evidence suggest that your army did not launch the attack? President al-Assad: First of all, anyone making such an accusation is also responsible for providing the evidence to substantiate the allegation. We have challenged them to present a shred of legitimate evidence, which they have not been able to do. Since their foreign policy should be tailored to suit the interests of their own people, we have challenged them to present legitimate evidence to their own public opinion to substantiate their claims, again they have not done so. Secondly, where is the logic in us carrying out an attack of this nature: two years into the crisis I can confidentially state that the situation on the ground is much better now than it was a year ago, how is it conceivable then that an army making significant advancements on the ground through conventional armament would resort to using weapons of mass destruction. I am neither confirming nor denying that we possess such weapons, this is not a matter for discussion. For the sake of argument, if the army had such weapons and decided to use them, is it conceivable that it would use them in areas where its own troops are deployed? Where is the logic in that? Additionally is it really plausible that the use of these weapons in a heavily populated area in the suburbs of the capital did not kill tens of thousands, these substances of the capital did not kill tens of thousands, these substances travel in the air. Le Figaro: Were soldiers from the Syrian Army injured by these weapons? President al-Assad: Yes, in the 'Baharia' area, in the suburbs of Damascus, the inspectors from the UN team met with them in the hospital. Le Figaro: Some do acknowledge that there has been some advancement by the army on the ground, however in other areas the rebels have also advanced and you are looking to wipe them out. President al-Assad: Again, the areas in question are residential areas. The use of chemical weapons in these areas would result in the deaths of tens of thousands. All the accusations are based on unsubstantiated claims made by the terrorists and random
pictures and videos posted on the Internet. Le Figaro: The Americans have stated that they have intercepted a telephone conversation between an executive in your inner circle and officers in the Army giving the order to use these weapons. President al-Assad: If the Americans, the French or the British had a single shred of evidence they would have disclosed it from day one. We will not contest rumours and dubious allegations, we will only discuss substantiated truths, if they have any, they should present them. Le Figaro: Is it possible that someone from your inner circle or officers in the Syrian Army took the decision without your knowledge? President al-Assad: Again, regardless of whether we do so or do not possess such weapons, in any country that does possess these weapons, the decision to deploy is usually centralized. Either way, this is classified military information.

By Timothy Heritage: World leaders pressure Obama over Syria at G20 summit!

St. Petersburg, Russia, U.S. President Barack Obama faced growing pressure from Russia's Vladimir Putin and other world leaders on Thursday to decide against launching military strikes in Syria, which many of them fear would hurt the global economy and push up oil prices. At a summit of the Group of 20 (G20) and developing economies in St. Petersburg, Putin greeted Obama with a thin smile and a businesslike handshake, a clear sign of the strains between them over how to respond to a chemical weapons attack in Syria. Obama also wore a stiff smile before talks began over dinner on the world economy and then on Syria, and there was none of the arm clutching or hugs between the two presidents that is typical of such occasions. The rift over Syria overshadowed the discussions on how to revive growth but not before splits emerged within the group over a U.S. plan to wind down an economic stimulus program. The G20 accounts for two thirds of the world's population and 90 percent of its output. The first round at the summit went to Putin, as China, the European Union, the BRICS emerging economies and a letter from Pope Francis all warned of the dangers of military intervention in Syria without the approval of the U.N. Security Council. "Military action would have a negative impact on the global economy, especially on the oil price, it will cause a hike in the oil price," Chinese Vice Finance Minister Zhu Guangyao said. United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon later told the leaders over the dinner in a tsarist-era seafront palace that any military action must have the Security Council's backing. "Let us remember: every day that we lose is a day when scores of innocent civilians die," his office quoted him as saying. "There is no military solution." Obama blames forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for the August 21 poison gas attack in the Damascus suburbs that killed up to 1,400 people. Moscow says Obama has not proven that claim and says rebel forces may have carried it out. In New York, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power left no doubt that Washington had given up trying to work with the U.N. Security Council" and accused Russia of holding it hostage. Moscow has signaled it would veto any resolution on the use of force unless Washington produced stronger proof. Obama has asked the U.S. Congress to approve military action and France has said it is ready to support U.S. intervention. Showing he was undeterred by the criticism, Obama said before talks with Japan's prime minister on the sidelines of the summit that using chemical arms was "not only a tragedy but also a violation of international law that must be addressed." Aides said he would set out his views at the leader's dinner and hoped to build support for military action, although they acknowledged a concensus might be hard to find.Long after midnight, there was still no word from officials on how the dinner discussion had gone. Putin was isolated on Syria at a Group of Eight meeting in June, the last big summit of world powers, but could now turn the tables on Obama, who recently likened him to a "bored kid in the classroom" who slouched at meetings.

by Reuters: Russia warns of catastrophe if Syria reactor hit by U.S. strike!

St Petersburg, Russia. Russia said on Wednesday that a military strike on Syria could have catastrophic effects if a missile hit a small reactor near Damascus that contains radioactive uranium. The Foreign Ministry called on the U.N. nuclear agency to urgently assess the risk as the United States considers military action to punish Syria's government for an alleged gas attack. "If a warhead, by design or by chance, were to hit the Miniature Neutron Source Reactor (MNSR) near Damascus, the consequences could be catastrophic," a ministry statement said. It said nearby areas could be contaminated by highly enriched uranium and that it would be impossible to account for the nuclear material after such a strike, suggesting it could fall into the hands of people who might use it as a weapon. Russia urged the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency secretariat to "react swiftly" and present IAEA members "an analysis of the risks linked to possible American strikes on the MNSR and other facilities in Syria". Moscow has been the most powerful ally of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, shielding him from tougher U.N. resolutions and warning that a Western military attack on Syria would raise tensions and undermine efforts to end the country's civil war. "The IAEA is aware of the statement but has not received a formal request from the Russian Federation, an IAEA spokesperson said. "We will consider the questions raised if we receive such a request." The IAEA is aware of the statement but has not received a formal request from the Russian Federation, an IAEA spokesperson said. "We will consider the questions raised if we receive such a request." The IAEA said in a report to member states last week that Syria had declared there was a "small amount of nuclear material" at the MNSR, a type of research reactor usually fuelled by highly enriched uranium. Nuclear expert Mark Hibbs, of the Carnegie Endowment think-tank, said the MNSR was a very small reactor and their would not be a lot of nuclear material there. But he said there could be "a serious local radiation hazard"if there was irradiated nuclear material in the reactor and it was dispersed by a weapon strike. Olli Heinonen, a former IAEA chief inspector, said the core of such a reactor typically has 1kg of highly-enriched uranium, much less than the 25 kg that would be sufficient to build an atomic bomb. "Thus for nuclear explosive purposes it is of a limited value," he said in an e-mail comment. Any radioactive contamination, he added, "would be a local problem". In 2007, Israel bombed a desert site in Syria that U.S. intelligence reports said was a nascent, North Korean-designed reactor geared to producing plutonium for nuclear weapons. Syria said the site, at Deir al-Zor, was a conventional military facility. Additionally reporting by Fredrik Dahl in Vienna, writing by Steve Gutterman, editing by Tom Pheiffer and Ralph Boulton.