Tag Archives: chemical weapon

Bits and Pieces – 20170409, Sunday

Commentary: I go away for three days and they start the war without me. I’ve reformulated this short piece several times as I read more and more. Buried in the links below is a reference to the previous chemical attack that Obama chose not to respond to for lack of evidence of the source.

Here are a few links of many that show what arguments thinking people (the MSM exclude themselves almost by definition) are pondering: Ex-UK Ambassador To Syria Questions Chemical Attack; “It Doesn’t Make Sense, Assad Is Not Mad”. Also this: CNN Anchor Speechless After Congressman Questions Syria Chemical Attack Narrative and this: Ron Paul: “Zero Chance” Assad Behind Chemical Weapons Attack In Syria; Likely A False Flag, and this from Howard Kunstler answering the key question: “Why?”: Bombs Away! Scott Adams also had similar thoughts.

Mike Shedlock polled his readers on for possible sources of the attack: Syria Whodunit and Brainwashed Puppets: Readers Respond on Most Likely and Least Likely Perpetrators. Two thirds believe some actor other than the Syrian government is the perpetrator. A false flag attack engineered by the Saudis or another Gulf state is the most likely as was the case last time

In other words, a false flag chemical attack to draw Trump in. He’s certainly being managed well by the Deep State. And some context: Syrian Warplanes From US-Hit Air Base Said To Resume Air Strikes. But Trump does have his supporters for this: ISIS, Al-Qaeda Praise Trump’s Attack. Also, he received praise from most of his opponents including CNN. That they haven’t even put their knives away will be noticed soon enough. The cost has been loss of his support base.

For a different perspective on Trump’s action, listen to this 24 minute interview: Larry Lindsey – What The World Is Now Witnessing Is Unprecedented. When Trump states that the action is to protect the national interest, if you are trying to figure out what those interests are, it has been long established that the primary interest is in pipelines that must cross Syria: Syria – Pipeline – How The Press Will Not Tell the Truth about Syria. Also see the discussion of pipelines under the WWII section below. The idea that the US is waging war on Syria to remove a brutal dictator is a load of crap served up for the media and the public. There is no shortage of brutal dictators, past and present, that they could remove but choose not to. Nor do they hesitate to support and even create repressive regimes that serve American “national interest”.

And a couple more discussing the wider significance of the attack on Syria: Luring Trump into Mideast Wars and The Media’s Missing the Point: Syria, Empire and the Power of Signaling. The latter article by Charles Hugh-Smith suggests that a much deeper strategy of “signalling” is in play, one that seems unlikely to be Trump’s.

Syria: Keeping the Debate Honest

The report of the UN Mission to Investigate Allegations of the Use of Chemical Weapons in the Syrian Arab Republic has been out now for a few days. The report concludes:

  • That chemical weapons have been used … on a relatively large scale. Based on the small number of samples taken, not all of which tested positive for a CW agent, and the small number of sites – five – an assessment of “large scale” is unwarranted let alone supported in any way.
  • It also identifies the agent used – sarin – and the delivery system 140mm and 330mm rockets. It further says that trajectories for two of the five examined sights are calculable. We will show this is in fact not possible.

It does not attempt to assign blame for the attacks (up to five munitions were involved). However, the US, Great  Britain and France immediately claimed the report indicates the regime carried out the attacks. In fact it does no such thing. We have given the report a cursory read, and have read several sections many times to extract precise detail and nuance. Our read and comments from others (included at the end) suggest a more thoughtful analysis is required.

Something Is Bothering Us …

In discussions with friends, one of the points we have been making very clearly for the last week is that although there is widespread belief that Assad used chemical weapons, no sources that we have read and no persons we have talked to have been able to show any knowledge of such an assertion. ABC News sums it up very nicely in the article: Doubts Linger Over Syria Gas Attack Responsibility. Emphasis is ours.

The U.S. government insists it has the intelligence to prove it, but the public has yet to see a single piece of concrete evidence produced by U.S. intelligence — no satellite imagery, no transcripts of Syrian military communications — connecting the government of President Bashar Assad to the alleged chemical weapons attack last month that killed hundreds of people.

One specific issue in particular is the 3-day preparation for the attack based on satelite imagery. As the ABC article states:

The Obama administration … says its own assessment is based mainly on satellite and signals intelligence, including intercepted communications and satellite images indicating that in the three days prior to the attack that the regime was preparing to use poisonous gas.

We have no doubt that US satellite imagery is top notch. What bothers us is contained in these questions:

  • What preparations are the US talking about? This is an urban battlefield. Chemical agents are delivered by rocket, mortar or artillery shell. It doesn’t take long to set these things up.
  • Why does it take 3 days to prepare to fire a rocket or an artillery shell?
  • How do you tell what the munition is? How do you distinguish that a munition is chemical and not high explosive?
  • The reported time of the attack was at 0245 (local time) in Ein Tarma and again at 0247 in Zamalka (source: BBC). What kind of satellite imagery would exist at this time of day? Presumably they might have infra red but that isn’t going to reveal much detail.
  • And on the last point, why would you launch a chemical attack in the middle of the night when everyone is indoors sleeping instead of when they are going to work or at noon when everyone is breaking for lunch?

In short:

Both Sides Now

Today, the Senate Foreign relations Committee essentially drafted a declaration of war against Syria. The text is here: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/09/03/full-text-senate-foreign-relations-committee-resolution-on-syria/.The slogan “where’s the beef” should be liberally applied when reading it.

Ever since August 21st’s chemical weapon incident, Obama and his administration have been building a posture for starting the war. You may recall that in the first days, the justification for preparing an attack was a simply a claim of confidence in some intelligence report that appears to have originated with an Israel intelligence unit’s intercept of a communication between a local commander and a shocked superior asking what happened. This of course has been embroidered into a vast array of other supporting sources and claims not a single one of which has been revealed in any detail whatsoever. Obama and his teleprompter have given no other proof other than a ‘we know – trust us’.

Powered by WordPress | Designed by: photography charlottesville va | Thanks to ppc software, penny auction and larry goins