Saturday, September 7, 2013

More Reports of Obama Setup of Syrian Government

Revision - On 9/10/13, I added this link from a post that was published a few days before.

Main post:

While Obama got little support for an attack while at the G20 Summit-

".....But there was no joint statement on Syria, despite a 20-minute one-on-one talk between Obama and Putin on the sidelines of the summit on Friday, following a tense group discussion on the civil war over dinner late on Thursday.

"We hear one another, and understand the arguments but we don't agree. I don't agree with his arguments, he doesn't agree with mine," Putin told a closing news conference dominated by questions about Syria.......

Chinese President Xi Jinping tried to dissuade Obama from military action during talks on Friday, telling him that Beijing expected countries to think twice before acting. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned against military action that did not have the approval of the U.N. Security Council.

Unable to win Security Council backing because of the opposition by veto-wielding Russia andChina, Obama is seeking the support of the U.S. Congress instead......"

-this situation still has the potential to get ugly, but at least it gives time for cooler heads to prevail:

"European foreign ministers on Saturday endorsed a “clear and strong response” to a chemical weapons attack that strongly points to the Syrian government, but they urged the U.S. to delay possible military action until U.N. inspectors report their findings"

.....The French still seem oddly enthusiastic about a strike:

"Later, at a news conference in Paris with French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, Kerry said “this is not the time to be silent spectators to slaughter” and that “this is not the time to allow a dictator unfettered use of some of the heinous weapons on earth.”......."

"A statement read at the end of the ministers’ meeting by the EU’s foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, said the Aug. 21 attack was a “blatant violation of international law, a war crime and a crime against humanity.”

Information from a wide variety of sources confirmed the chemical attack, according to the statement, and “seems to indicate strong evidence that the Syrian regime is responsible” as it is the only party “that possesses chemical weapons agents and the means of their delivery in a sufficient quantity.”

Meanwhile, the claims that the accusations are being leveled at the wrong party - indeed that the entire chemical weapons attack was either wholly falsified - or true but actually an act of the rebels working in conjunction with the US, keep coming in:

"A nun in Qara, Syria, claims she has “evidence” proving video footage of the deadly chemical attack in Syria was fabricated. Mother Agnes Mariam el-Salib, mother superior of St. James Monastery, told Russia Today that she plans to submit her findings to the United Nations Human Rights Commission......"

[The article then questions the credibility of the source that made the report of the nun's claims]

"Here’s what she considers to be “key evidence” in her research:

The key evidence is that Reuters made these files public at 6.05 in the morning. The chemical attack is said to have been launched between 3 and 5 o’clock in the morning in Guta. How is it even possible to collect a dozen different pieces of footage, get more than 200 kids and 300 young people together in one place, give them first aid and interview them on camera, and all that in less than three hours? Is that realistic at all? As someone who works in the news industry, you know how long all of it would take.

The bodies of children and teenagers we see in that footage – who were they? What happened to them? Were they killed for real? And how could that happen ahead of the gas attack? Or, if they were not killed, where did they come from? Where are their parents? How come we don’t see any female bodies among all those supposedly dead children?

I am not saying that no chemical agent was used in the area – it certainly was. But I insist that the footage that is now being peddled as evidence had been fabricated in advance. I have studied it meticulously, and I will submit my report to the UN Human Rights Commission based in Geneva."

The link below, which is followed by the article it referenced notes that The Blaze was unable to secure an interview with the writer of the Global Research article. This is admittedly disappointing as the article has a tremendous amount of detail - so much in fact that I find it hard to believe that the claims are false. Also, considering the routine nature of the lies dished out by the Obama administration and Obama's win-at-all-costs narcissism,  I am not inclined to dismiss anything outright:

*Here is the bulk of the article:

"There is a growing volume of new evidence from numerous sources in the Middle East — mostly affiliated with the Syrian opposition and its sponsors and supporters — which makes a very strong case, based on solid circumstantial evidence, that the August 21, 2013, chemical strike in the Damascus suburbs was indeed a pre-meditated provocation by the Syrian opposition.........

On August 13-14, 2013, Western-sponsored opposition forces in Turkey started advance preparations for a major and irregular military surge. Initial meetings between senior opposition military commanders and representatives of Qatari, Turkish, and US Intelligence [“Mukhabarat Amriki”] [Note that term for later]  took place at the converted Turkish military garrison in Antakya, Hatay Province, used as the command center and headquarters of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and their foreign sponsors. Very senior opposition commanders who had arrived from Istanbul briefed the regional commanders of an imminent escalation in the fighting due to “a war-changing development” which would, in turn, lead to a US-led bombing of Syria.

The opposition forces had to quickly prepare their forces for exploiting the US-led bombing in order to march on Damascus and topple the Bashar al-Assad Government, the senior commanders explained. The Qatari and Turkish intelligence officials assured the Syrian regional commanders that they would be provided with plenty of weapons for the coming offensive.

Indeed, unprecedented weapons distribution started in all opposition camps in Hatay Province on August 21-23, 2013. In the Reyhanli area alone, opposition forces received well in excess of 400 tons of weapons, mainly anti-aircraft weaponry from shoulder-fired missiles to ammunition for light-guns and machineguns. The weapons were distributed from store-houses controlled by Qatari and Turkish Intelligence under the tight supervision of US Intelligence.

These weapons were loaded on more than 20 trailer-trucks which crossed into northern Syria and distributed the weapons to several depots. Follow-up weapon shipments, also several hundred tons, took place over the weekend of August 24-25, 2013, and included mainly sophisticated anti-tank guided missiles and rockets. Opposition officials in Hatay said that these weapon shipments were “the biggest” they had received “since the beginning of the turmoil more than two years ago”. The deliveries from Hatay went to all the rebel forces operating in the Idlib-to-Aleppo area, including the al-Qaida affiliated jihadists (who constitute the largest rebel forces in the area).

Several senior officials from both the Syrian opposition and sponsoring Arab states stressed that these weapon deliveries were specifically in anticipation for exploiting the impact of imminent bombing of Syria by the US and the Western allies. The latest strategy formulation and coordination meetings took place on August 26, 2013. The political coordination meeting took place in Istanbul and was attended by US Amb. Robert Ford.

More important were the military and operational coordination meetings at the Antakya garrison. Senior Turkish, Qatari, and US Intelligence officials attended in addition to the Syrian senior (opposition) commanders. The Syrians were informed that bombing would start in a few days.

“The opposition was told in clear terms that action to deter further use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime could come as early as in the next few days,” a Syrian participant in the meeting said. Another Syrian participant said that he was convinced US bombing was scheduled to begin on Thursday, August 29, 2013. Several participants — both Syrian and Arab — stressed that the assurances of forthcoming bombing were most explicit even as formally Obama is still undecided.

The descriptions of these meetings raise the question of the extent of foreknowledge of US Intelligence, and therefore, the Obama White House. All the sources consulted — both Syrian and Arab — stressed that officials of the “Mukhabarat Amriki” actively participated in the meetings and briefings in Turkey. Therefore, at the very least, they should have known that the opposition leaders were anticipating “a war-changing development”: that is, a dramatic event which would provoke a US-led military intervention.

The mere fact that weapon storage sites under the tight supervision of US Intelligence were opened up and about a thousand tons of high-quality weapons were distributed to the opposition indicates that US Intelligence anticipated such a provocation and the opportunity for the Syrian opposition to exploit the impact of the ensuing US and allied bombing. Hence, even if the Obama White House did not know in advance of the chemical provocation, they should have concluded, or at the very least suspected, that the chemical attack was most likely the “war-changing development” anticipated by the opposition leaders as provocation of US-led bombing. Under such circumstances, the Obama White House should have refrained from rushing head-on to accuse Assad’s Damascus and threaten retaliation, thus making the Obama White House at the very least complicit after the act.

Meanwhile, additional data from Damascus about the actual chemical attack increases the doubts about Washington’s version of events. Immediately after the attack, three hospitals of Doctors Without Borders (MSF: médecins sans frontières) in the greater Damascus area treated more than 3,600 Syrians affected by the chemical attack, and 355 of them died. MSF performed tests on the vast majority of those treated.

MSF director of operations Bart Janssens summed up the findings: “MSF can neither scientifically confirm the cause of these symptoms nor establish who is responsible for the attack. However, the reported symptoms of the patients, in addition to the epidemiological pattern of the events — characterized by the massive influx of patients in a short period of time, the origin of the patients, and the contamination of medical and first aid workers — strongly indicate mass exposure to a neurotoxic agent.” Simply put, even after testing some 3,600 patients, MSF failed to confirm that sarin was the cause of the injuries. According to MSF, the cause could have been nerve agents like sarin, concentrated riot control gas, or even high-concentration pesticides. Moreover, opposition reports that there was distinct stench during the attack suggest that it could have come from the “kitchen sarin” used by jihadist groups (as distinct from the odorless military-type sarin) or improvised agents like pesticides.

Some of the evidence touted by the Obama White House is questionable at best.

A small incident in Beirut raises big questions. A day after the chemical attack, Lebanese fixers working for the “Mukhabarat Amriki” succeeded to convince a Syrian male who claimed to have been injured in the chemical attack to seek medical aid in Beirut in return for a hefty sum that would effectively settle him for life. The man was put into an ambulance and transferred overnight to the Farhat Hospital in Jib Janine, Beirut. The Obama White House immediately leaked friendly media that “the Lebanese Red Cross announced that test results found traces of sarin gas in his blood.” However, this was news to Lebanese intelligence and Red Cross officials.
According to senior intelligence officials, “Red Cross Operations Director George Kettaneh told [them] that the injured Syrian fled the hospital before doctors were able to test for traces of toxic gas in his blood.” Apparently, the patient declared that he had recovered from his nausea and no longer needed medical treatment
. The Lebanese security forces are still searching for the Syrian patient and his honorarium.

On August 24, 2013, Syrian Commando forces acted on intelligence about the possible perpetrators of the chemical attack and raided a cluster of rebel tunnels in the Damascus suburb of Jobar. Canisters of toxic material were hit in the fierce fire-fight as several Syrian soldiers suffered from suffocation and “some of the injured are in a critical condition”.

The Commando eventually seized an opposition warehouse containing barrels full of chemicals required for mixing “kitchen sarin”, laboratory equipment, as well as a large number of protective masks. The Syrian Commando also captured several improvised explosive devices, RPG rounds, and mortar shells. The same day, at least four HizbAllah fighters operating in Damascus near Ghouta were hit by chemical agents at the very same time the Syrian Commando unit was hit while searching a group of rebel tunnels in Jobar. Both the Syrian and the HizbAllah forces were acting on intelligence information about the real perpetrators of the chemical attack. Damascus told Moscow the Syrian troops were hit by some form of a nerve agent and sent samples (blood, tissues, and soil) and captured equipment to Russia.

Several Syrian leaders, many of whom are not Bashar al-Assad supporters and are even his sworn enemies, are now convinced that the Syrian opposition is responsible for the August 21, 2013, chemical attack in the Damascus area in order to provoke the US and the allies into bombing Assad’s Syria. Most explicit and eloquent is Saleh Muslim, the head of the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) which has been fighting the Syrian Government. Muslim doubts Assad would have used chemical weapons when he was winning the civil war.

“The regime in Syria … has chemical weapons, but they wouldn’t use them around Damascus, five km from the [UN] committee which is investigating chemical weapons. Of course they are not so stupid as to do so,” Muslim told Reuters on August 27, 2013. He believes the attack was “aimed at framing Assad and provoking an international reaction”........"

Now for this one- The Pentagon may possibly be telling the truth that the hacker faked emails that the US was involved in the chemical attack, but our senior military leaders have gained a reputation for saying whatever Obama wants them to say, so I can't make a call either way. As children learn from the fable The Boy who Cried Wolf, once you have told enough lies, people are not likely to believe you even when you do tell the truth. Mind you, even if the hacker did falsify the emails, the statements that he used to create the emails may still have described something that did in fact happen. If the cops have proof, including video, eyewitness recognition, and fingerprints that a particular individual  robbed a bank, and I falsely say that he also robbed the butcher shop next door, what I said does nothing to take away from the evidence about the bank robbery.

"Pentagon officials say a hacker’s claim that he has official military emails proving U.S. intelligence agencies were involved in framing President Bashar Assad’s regime for the Syrian chemical attacks is “totally false.”

And now the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command, known as the CID, is investigating the incident.

The digital thief claims to base his assumptions on revelations made in emails he said he hacked into belonging to U.S. military and Pentagon officials.

Those emails, along with the hackers’ story, were originally posted in the Daily Opinion blog on the British Telegraph on Sept. 1, from the hacker’s post on pastebin. He also claims to have hacked the emails of 18 other Pentagon officials.

“Army is aware of the situation and the hacking incident, and it has been referred to the Army CID for investigation,” Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Damien Pickart told TheBlaze.

“There is no truth to those emails,” he added. “No truth whatsoever. It is totally false.”

Pickart, who speaks on behalf of the Pentagon’s cyber affairs issues, said the email addresses used by the hacker were accurate but the content of the emails was falsified....."

Meanwhile, a US Congressman gets the award for the Understatement of the Year:

"Rep. Michael Grimm said he has withdrawn his support for military action in Syria because he has lost faith in President Barack Obama’s ability to lead.

Grimm (R-N.Y.) first said he supported taking action against President Bashar Assad’s regime, but announced Thursday he had changed his mind.

“What’s changed the most is the president’s leadership has degraded,” Grimm said Friday on Fox News........"

I hope that the People don't accept Obama's snake oil salesman pitch when he speaks on Tuesday in an attempt to drum of public support for his plan to topple the Syrian government and bring in the Islamists to rule a once-stable nation.

No comments:

Post a Comment