Ray McGovern

Later on Thursday, RT International asked Ray to comment:

November 17, 2016, (6 minutes)

Background: At his press briefing on Nov. 16, retired Navy admiral John Kirby had a very bad-hair day; he ended up creating an international incident by his bully behavior toward RT journalist Gayane Chichakyan. She had had the temerity to ask Kirby to provide the sources behind his charge that the Russians and/or Syrians had bombed at least five hospitals in Syria. Kirby was unable to produce the sources.

Instead of routinely promising to seek out and provide the sources to Chichakyan, Kirby simply lost it, blurting out from the podium, “I’m sorry, but I’m not going to put Russia Today on the same level with the rest of you who are representing independent media outlets.” (Emphasis added)

The following day, his opposite number, Russian foreign ministry spokesperson Maria Zakarova, decried Kirby’s unprofessional behavior and threatened to retaliate by segregating American journalists who attend her own briefings.

For those wishing to get a feel for the level to which State Department briefings have descended, we include below a partial transcript. Chichakyan’s part in the Q&A questioning is highlighted in bold.

After Kirby tried to put her in her place, a few of her colleagues defended her. That short section is also included below, together with a summary of Zakharova’s remarks on Nov. 17.

True to form, President Obama the following day added to U.S. embarrassment in trying to explain away Kirby’s indefensible behavior as “overzealousness.” The upshot is further proof that neither a tired, tongue-tied President nor an unprepared, bumbling former admiral do particularly well thinking on their feet – sans teleprompter.

Additional background and partial transcript: At the daily State Department press briefing on November 16, Kirby became extraordinarily flustered, flubbing – inter alia – a series of questions on the International Criminal Court, about which he appeared to know little to nothing. Then came the obligatory blame-the-Russians segment of his briefing. Watching the briefing is even more embarrassing than reading it. But, for those who prefer to read, here’s a partial text —

QUESTION: Okay. First of all, can you clarify what is going on in terms of where the Russians are bombing? I mean, some say in Aleppo, but there is no evidence that there is any bombardment of eastern Aleppo by the Russians. There is bombardments of Idlib and Homs and so on, and the countryside of Homs. So first of all, if you have information on where they are bombing and what is going on there.

MR KIRBY: Well, I don’t have – as you know, Said, I don’t have specific tactical information about Russian military operations … . We – I would say, though, that we have seen additional airstrikes now in Syria by Russia and by the regime, to include what has been reported to be – and we have no reason to doubt this because of the sourcing that we’re getting – that five hospitals and at least one mobile clinic in Syria were struck by —

QUESTION: Can say which city the hospitals were in?

MR KIRBY: What’s that?

QUESTION: Which city were the hospitals in?

MR KIRBY: I don’t have the exact location. But – so five hospitals and one mobile clinic. And by all counts, it looks like they were deliberately targeted, all in the span of just the last day or so. It’s also worth noting that despite Russian claims that it halted airstrikes in the past month or so —

QUESTION: Twenty-eight days.

MR KIRBY: — yeah – they’ve allowed no food or humanitarian assistance into east Aleppo. And the regime and Russia have now let Aleppo’s residents starve, all while seeking praise from the international community for halting indiscriminate strikes for three weeks. Again, five hospitals and at least one – maybe more – mobile clinic. That doesn’t sound to me like a halt in indiscriminate attacks.

QUESTION: Can you give us a specific —

QUESTION: Now the Russians are – excuse me, just let me —

QUESTION: Sorry.

QUESTION: — follow up with a couple of things. The Russian defense ministry claims that it is actually the rebels who are – or the terror groups who are holding back the aid, they are disallowing the public from reaching that humanitarian aid. And in fact, they’re saying that there was some sort of demonstration by the public and that was crushed brutally by the different militant groups and so on. And so I want – how do you sort out after all this kind of conflicting information and so on – how do you get your information on this case?

MR KIRBY: No, look, it’s a very fluid situation and our knowledge is imperfect. That’s why we say I have seen – we’ve seen reports of these things. And I don’t have specifics for you. I don’t have specific locations —

QUESTION: But don’t you think it’s —

MR KIRBY: Hang on a second, I’m answering Said.

QUESTION: Don’t you think it is important —

MR KIRBY: We don’t have that. I’m saying we’ve seen these reports.

QUESTION: Right.

MR KIRBY: And they fly in the face of everything Russia says it’s doing in Syria, and specifically in Aleppo. So I don’t have – I don’t have (inaudible) on this and it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to get into that anyway.

QUESTION: But don’t you think it is important —

QUESTION: So you would refute —

MR KIRBY: But, but —

QUESTION: — the claim by the Russians that they have stopped or they had a moratorium on striking Aleppo, eastern Aleppo, for the past 28 days? In fact, all the while were – the militant groups were striking western Aleppo.

MR KIRBY: So we’ve seen – well, you’ve also seen reports that – about opposition groups that were limiting or trying to be an obstacle to humanitarian aid and assistance. And we’ve made it clear to the opposition groups that we communicate with and certainly to nations who have influence over other opposition groups that these reports are troubling and concerning and obviously to the degree they’re true, that that obstruction should not occur. That said, it’s without question that it is the regime and its Russian backers that have had the – by far, the most responsibility for stopping the violence, for stopping the strikes, and for allowing the aid to get in, which they haven’t done. I mean, I don’t know how many times now I’ve been to this podium talking about the fact that no humanitarian aid is getting into Aleppo and that hasn’t changed.

Question from RT’s Gayane Chichakyan:

QUESTION: Don’t you think it is —

MR KIRBY: It hasn’t changed one bit.

QUESTION: Sorry, don’t you think it is important to give a specific list of hospitals that you’re accusing Russia of hitting? Those are grave accusations.

MR KIRBY: I’m not making those accusations. I’m telling you we’ve seen reports from credible aid organizations that five hospitals and a clinic —

QUESTION: Which hospital —

MR KIRBY: At least one clinic —

QUESTION: In what cities at least?

MR KIRBY: You can go look at the information that many of the Syrian relief agencies are putting out there publicly. We’re getting our information from them too. These reports —

QUESTION: But you are citing those reports without giving any specifics.

MR KIRBY: Because we believe these agencies are credible and because we have other sources of information that back up what we’re seeing from some of these reports. And you know what? Why don’t ask —

QUESTION: If you – exactly.

MR KIRBY: Here’s a good question.

QUESTION: That’s what I —

MR KIRBY: Why don’t you ask your defense ministry —

QUESTION: That’s what I was —

MR KIRBY: — what they’re doing and see if you can get —

QUESTION: If you give a specific list —

MR KIRBY: No, no, no, no, no, no, no.

QUESTION: If you give a specific list of hospitals —

MR KIRBY: No, no, no.

QUESTION: My colleagues who are listening —

MR KIRBY: I’m supposed to —

QUESTION: — hopefully would be able to go and ask Russian officials about a specific list of hospitals that you’re accusing Russia of —

MR KIRBY: You work for Russia Today, right? Isn’t that your agency?

QUESTION: That is correct. Yes.

MR KIRBY: And so why shouldn’t you ask your government the same kinds of questions that you’re standing here asking me?

QUESTION: When you level —

MR KIRBY: Ask them about their military activities. Get them to tell you what they’re – or to deny what they’re doing.

QUESTION: When I ask for specifics, it seems your response is why are you here? Well, you are leveling that accusation.

MR KIRBY: No, ma’am.

QUESTION: And if you give specifics —

MR KIRBY: No, ma’am.

QUESTION: — my colleagues would be able to ask —

MR KIRBY: No, ma’am.

QUESTION: — Russian officials.

MR KIRBY: Once again, you’re just wrong. I’m not leveling those accusations. Relief agencies that we find credible are leveling those accusations.

QUESTION: But you repeat them.

MR KIRBY: So why don’t you question them about their information and where they’re getting it? And why don’t you question your own defense ministry?

QUESTION: Which organizations then? Which ones? Where should I look?

MR KIRBY: We’ll get you – we will get you a list of them after the briefing. I don’t have it right here in front of me, but I’m happy to provide to you some of the relief agencies that are telling us what they’re seeing on the ground.

QUESTION: And specifically on blocking aid within the 28 days that Russia and Syria had stopped the airstrikes in eastern Aleppo, and I understand they resumed by the – they were resumed by the Syrian military yesterday. Do you – can you give any specific information on when Russia or the Syrian Government blocked the UN from delivering aid? Just any specific information.

MR KIRBY: There hasn’t been any aid delivered in the last month.

QUESTION: And you believe it was blocked exclusively by Russia and the Syrian Government.

MR KIRBY: There’s no question in our mind that the obstruction is coming from the regime and from Russia. No question at all.

Ma’am.

QUESTION: I just have —

QUESTION: John, can I just —

QUESTION: Yeah. Well —

QUESTION: Let me – hold on, just let me say: Please be careful about saying “your defense minister” and things like that. I mean, she’s a journalist just like the rest of are, so it’s – she’s asking pointed questions, but they’re not —

MR KIRBY: From a state-owned – from a state-owned —

QUESTION: But they’re not —

MR KIRBY: From a state-owned outlet, Matt.

QUESTION: But they’re not —

MR KIRBY: From a state-owned outlet that’s not independent.

QUESTION: The questions that she’s asking are not out of line.

QUESTION: The outlet is (inaudible) —

MR KIRBY: I didn’t say the questions were out of line.

QUESTION: Okay. I mean —

MR KIRBY: I didn’t say the questions were out of line.

QUESTION: All right. Okay.

MR KIRBY: Okay? But I’m not —

QUESTION: But I mean – oh no, I understand. But asking —

MR KIRBY: I’m sorry, but I’m not going to put Russia Today on the same level with the rest of you who are representing independent media outlets. (Emphasis added)

QUESTION: Well —

QUESTION: Do you have an issue with my question?

QUESTION: Well, hold on, but just —

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

QUESTION: Look, there – well, we’ll talk about – we can talk about this later offline —

QUESTION: Maybe I could ask my Iraq question.

QUESTION: — but just – the question is not an inappropriate question to ask.

MR KIRBY: Didn’t say that it was.

QUESTION: All right.

MR KIRBY: But I also think it should be asked of their own defense ministry —

QUESTION: Okay.

MR KIRBY: — which they don’t do, which Russia Today doesn’t do.

Response From Kirby’s Russian Counterpart

The following day (Nov. 17), Maria Zakharova, spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry, began her daily briefing calling attention to the “unpleasant things” that took place at the Kirby briefing the day before. She decried Kirby’s attempt to put Russia Today (RT) in a separate category from “reputable media,” and used an old Russian expression meaning “we will not leave this unanswered,” warning that there could be retaliation in kind against American journalists who regularly attend her briefings. Zakharova said she would ask Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to raise the matter directly with Secretary of State John Kerry when they met later today (Friday) on the margins of the APEC summit in Peru.

https://sputniknews.com/us/201611161047509538-court-report-us-torture/

In an annual report on Preliminary Examination Activities, released on Monday, Mrs. Bensouda said the possible crimes included torture, cruel treatment, outrages upon personal dignity and even rape. Furthermore, the alleged war crimes extended also to secret detention facilities in Eastern Europe. Mrs. Bensouda stressed that the possible offences may be the result of – quote – “approved interrogation techniques”, rather than isolated incidents.

She did not indicate, however, whether the International Criminal Court would launch a full investigation into the matter. US troops entered Afghanistan in 2001 following 9/11 attacks. The White House originally planned to withdraw all the troops in 2014, but many are still there.

 “This House believes the US Presidential race reveals a broken two-party system.”

This was the third such Oxford Union debate in which Ray has been invited to take part over the past five years.  On the two earlier occasions, he could not bring himself to argue against the side of the proposition critical of the U.S.  But this time he decided to take the side that the two-party system is indeed broken.  Ray’s small team lost badly.

Two of the opposition speakers were former New York Times Executive Editor, Jill Abramson, and outgoing U.S. Congressman Jim McDermott (who, for many years, has represented the Seattle area of Washington).

It became crystal clear that most Oxford folks were strongly in favor of a candidate named Hillary Clinton; fully expected her to win just five days later; and were thankful that the U.S. two-party system – broken or not – ended up nominating Mrs. Clinton to be president.

November 3, 2016, (14 minutes)

Ray speaking today (November 10, 2016) at a demonstration in front of the Reichstag; he will be the last of four speakers urging members of the Bundestag to vote against the proposed deepening of Germany’ military involvement in the Syrian. Below is an English translation of his 3-minute speech – and of the German student song that seemed most appropriate. (The melody is posted on Google. Like most songs, DIE GEDANKEN is better with the music.)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Statement by Ray McGovern, peace activist and former CIA analysts, November 10, 2016

Ladies and gentlemen,

In view of the surprising election victory of Donald Trump, today’s vote in the Bundestag has assumed even greater importance.

There are very passionate warmongers in the United States. Thank goodness, President Obama is not one of them. I believe that Donald Trump, like Obama, would like to find a way to end the armed chaos in Syria.

I believe it is quite possible that both – Obama and Trump – would prefer that the German government avoid taking steps that would encourage the “hawks” in Washington. The widening of the Syrian war into a NATO war would be such a step.

In my opinion, a peaceful solution to the disaster in Syria is not possible without cooperation with the Russians. This cooperation would be more likely with a President Trump than it would have been with a President Hillary Clinton.

Let’s take the time for a DENKPAUSE – time to think this through.

(I myself voted for Dr. Jill Stein. She was the presidential candidate of the US Green Party, a small electoral party committed to peace and protecting the environment.)

Yesterday, I was part of a group that, in our parlance, belongs to the “one percent” (the elite). In this group was a former US ambassador to NATO.

The former ambassador was asked whether it would not be better to talk with the Russians, and to negotiate. He answered the question in a very condescending way: “You are obviously a Trump supporter. But Hillary Clinton will surely win.” The ambassador added that in this case it would be nonsense and unrealistic to expect early negotiations with the Russians.

Now I admit, “Donald Trump is no Jack Kennedy.”

BUT, to make a long story short: I believe that next year with Trump could make possible a more sensible Ostpolitik – policy toward countries to the East of Germany. There could be a relaxation of tension, instead of the escalation that causes more and more of it.

I believe we should consider the Russians as partners and NOT as enemies.

And to quote Winston Churchill, “It’s better to be jaw-jaw than to war-war;” it’s better to talk to each other than to go to war.

Most important, we should take seriously the opportunity for genuine detente. We must now take a DENKPAUSE. The Bundestag should also do some serious rethinking. Let us think of something new – beyond images of the enemy and military solutions.

For, as we all know so well, DIE GEDANKEN SIND FREI.

(TEXT OF SONG FOLLOWS THE SPEECH’S ORIGINAL GERMAN VERSION, BELOW)

+++++++++++++++++++++

Statement von Ray McGovern, dem Friedensaktivisten und ehemaligen CIA- Analysten am 10. November 2016

Meine Damen und Herren,

In Anbetracht des überraschenden Wahlsiegs von Donald Trump gewinnt die heutige Abstimmung im Bundestag eine außerordentliche Bedeutung.

Es gibt bei uns in den Vereinigten Staaten sehr leidenschaftliche Kriegstreiber. Gott sei Dank ist Präsident Obama keiner davon. Meiner Meinung nach möchte auch Donald Trump, wie Obama, das bewaffnete Chaos in Syrien beenden.

Ich glaube, es ist durchaus möglich, dass beide –- Obama und Trump — es lieber hätten, wenn die Bundesregierung Schritte zur Ermutigung der “Hawks” (Falken) in Washington vermeiden würde. Eine Ausweitung des Syrienkrieges zu einem NATO-Krieg wäre ein solcher Schritt.

Meiner Meinung nach ist eine friedliche Lösung der Katastrophe in Syrien ohne die Kooperation mit den Russen gar nicht möglich. Diese Kooperation wird mit einem Präsidenten Trump wahrscheinlicher als mit einer Präsidentin Hillary Clinton.

Nehmen wir uns die Zeit für eine DENKPAUSE.

Ich selbst habe für Dr. Jill Stein gestimmt. Sie war die Präsidentschaftskandidatin der US-Grünen Partei, einer kleinen Wahlpartei, die sich für Frieden und die Umwelt einsetzt

Gestern war ich mit einer Gruppe zusammen, die in unserem Sprachgebrauch zum “one percent” (dem “ein Prozent” – der Elite) gehört. In dieser Gruppe befand sich ein ehemaliger US-Botschafter bei der NATO.

Er wurde gefragt, ob es nicht besser wäre, mit den Russen zu sprechen bzw. zu verhandeln?

Der Botschafter antwortete auf diese Frage in einer sehr erniedrigenden Weise: “Sie sind offensichtlich ein Trump-Unterstützer. Aber Hillary Clinton wird sicherlich gewinnen.” Er meinte, in diesem Fall wäre es Unsinn und unrealistisch, baldige Verhandlungen mit den Russen zu erwarten.

Ich gebe zu: “Donald Trump is no John Kennedy.” – Trump ist kein Kennedy.

ABER langer Rede kurzer Sinn: Zumindest wird nach meiner Einschätzung nächstes Jahr mit Trump vielleicht eine vernünftigere Ostpolitik möglich. Es könnte zu Entspannung statt immer mehr und mehr Spannung.

Meines Erachtens, muss man die Russen als Partner und NICHT als Feinde betrachten.

Um Winston Churchill zu zitieren, “It is better to jaw-jaw than to war-war.” “Es ist besser miteinander zu sprechen, als Krieg zu treiben.

Und am Allerwichtigsten: Wir sollen die Möglichkeit einer echten Entspannung ERNST nehmen. Wir müssen jetzt eine Denkpause einlegen. Auch der Bundestag soll umdenken. Lasst uns Neues denken, weg von Feindbildern und militärischen Lösungen, denn wie wir alle wissen: Die Gedanken sind frei.

DIE GEDANKEN SIND FREI

1. Die Gedanken sind frei, wer kann sie erraten,

sie fliegen vorbei wie nächtliche Schatten.

Kein Mensch kann sie wissen, kein Jäger erschießen

mit Pulver und Blei: Die Gedanken sind frei!

1. Thoughts are free, who can guess them?

They fly by, like nocturnal shadows.

No one can know them, no hunter can shoot them

with powder and lead: Thoughts are free!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

2. Ich denke was ich will und was mich beglücket,

doch alles in der Still’, und wie es sich schicket.

Mein Wunsch und Begehren kann niemand verwehren,

es bleibet dabei: Die Gedanken sind frei!

2. I think what I want, and what delights me,

But always in the quiet, and how it is suitable.

My wish and desire, no one can deny me,

and so it will always be: Thoughts are free!

++++++++++++++++++++++

3. Und sperrt man mich ein im finsteren Kerker,

das alles sind rein vergebliche Werke.

Denn meine Gedanken zerreißen die Schranken

und Mauern entzwei: Die Gedanken sind frei!

3. And if I am thrown into the darkest dungeon,

all such actions are futile,

because my thoughts tear all gates

and walls apart: Thoughts are free!

Ray’s remarks run from 1:55 to 9:55.

CIA, Syria, Ukraine, Reason Behind the Imperative to Protest

October 31, 2016 (35 minutes)

Ray was interviewed in Dublin by Chris Donoghue of “Newstalk” (Irish National Radio) radio at driving-home-time Wednesday.

Focus is Russia in context of the clownish U.S. election campaign.

November 1, 2016, (11 minutes)

Op-ed by Ray in Baltimore Sun

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-putin-obama-20161030-story.html

Turkey’s role in Syria and Iraq was also discussed, including realities virtually hidden in the Western corporate press – like the unwelcome presence of Turkish troops in Iraq near Mosul and Turkey’s invasion of Syria on August 24.

(See below* for what Ray wrote at the time.)

https://sputniknews.com/politics/201610271046780450-ankara-washington-relations/

(The linked “Loud and Clear” interview runs for 17 minutes.)

*August 26, 2016:  Anyone see anything out of the ordinary with Turkey, a NATO ally, invading another country (Syria)?  What obligations do Turkey’s allies incur if/when Syria aircraft fly off with Russian support from Russian constructed Syrian in-country airfields to attack Turkey?  Will Turkey try to activate Article 5 of the NATO Treaty, obligating Turkey’s allies to come to its aid?

No allusion to any of these key factors in the convoluted lead editorial by the New York Times Editorial Board today (August 26).

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/26/opinion/a-complicated-alliance-with-turkey.html?em_pos=small&emc=edit_ty_20160826&nl=opinion-today&nl_art=1&nlid=69540701&ref=headline&te=1&_r=0

To refresh memories on mutual defense treaty obligations:

NATO Treaty: Article 5

“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”

Strange: How did Turkey wind up in the “North Atlantic area?”