The use of chemical weapons on civilians in the Syrian conflict was a crime against humanity. As such it should be the subject of a real criminal investigation, and those responsible should be brought to justice. However, if the U.S. and NATO have their way that's not going to happen. In their book a simple accusation is as good as a conviction and therefore there's no point providing any real evidence. Let's just skip right to missile strikes shall we?
This really isn't surprising to anyone who's been paying attention though.
The United States has had Syria and Iran in their cross hairs for a long time. The plans for these wars have been in the works for over a decade.
There are three primary psychological techniques that the powers that be in any given era use to build up the public support needed to take a country to war:
This can be done by exaggerating the danger posed by an enemy, fabricating an attack and blaming it on the enemy, or by intentionally provoking the enemy into a response.
In our current era the meme of “Spreading Democracy”, “Fighting Terrorism” or "Defending human rights"are the most commonly used.
War is mass murder, therefore presenting the enemy as evil, barbaric, or subhuman is essential unless you want your citizens and your soldiers questioning the morality of their actions. This pattern is often supported and augmented by a sense of cultural or racial superiority. The way Islamophobia is capitalized on to build moral support for this phony war on terror is a perfect example.
The U.S. government has a long illustrious history of using these techniques, and they keep using them because they work.
The United States has been trying to get Iran under its thumb for a long time. In 1953, the CIA and the UK's MI6 organized a coup to topple the democratically elected prime minister of Iran Mohammad Mossadegh. They then installed the Shah as their puppet. The Shah, who also just happened to be brutal dictator, ruled until 1979 when he was overthrown during the Iranian revolution.
The U.S. didn't like that so they tried to take Iran down by arming and funding Saddam Hussein against the Iranians. This was during the Iranian Iraq war, also referred to as the first Persian Gulf War which lasted from 1980 to 1988. The U.S. continued its support for Iraq even though they knew full well that he was using chemical weapons against the Iranians.
This now declassified top secret memo from Nov. 4, 1983 documents chemical weapons use by Iraq, and discusses Iran's likely reactions.
Here's a second memo, written on Feb. 24, 1984 to the director of Central Intelligence predicting that Iraq will use nerve agents against Iran.
Note that the source of these documents is Foreign Policy Magazine which is an extremely pro-establishment publication by any standards.
In spite of this, friendly diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Saddam continued. This video of Donald Rumsfeld, then special envoy of President Ronald Reagan meeting with Saddam, was taken on December 20, 1983, which was after the first memo. This means that those running the U.S. knew Saddam was killing people with poison gas and they didn't care. Taking down Iran was more important to the U.S. government than protecting human rights, and it still is.
Saddam failed to defeat Iran, so the U.S. switched tactics, and for a long time they tried going after Iran directly by accusing them of building nuclear weapons in order to justify military strikes. However, this line of worn out propaganda didn't gain any traction, largely because the U.S. government had lost most of its credibility in their trumped up claims about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. You can only cry wolf so many times before people start rolling their eyes.
Their agenda fell apart completely when elements within the CIA and Mossad came forward stating that there was no evidence that Iran even intended to build such a weapon.
Not to be deterred by little details like the truth, these chicken hawk neo-cons decided to go after Syria to get to Iran. They know that Syria and Iran have a mutual defense agreement and if NATO forces enter Syria Iran will be drawn into the fight, and then these little deranged psychopaths in suits will get their war.
We still have to maintain appearances though, we wouldn't want people to think this was about controlling the world's oil supply and protecting the petrodollar would we? No, no, put those crazy conspiracy theories out of you mind. We're here to spread democracy and freedom with 50 caliber machine guns and drone strikes.
If it were obvious that the U.S. was attacking Syria it would be very difficult to obtain international or domestic support, so rather than attacking Syria directly the U.S. and NATO have been running a proxy war by arming and funding the Syrian rebels. To obscure the source of this support U.S. allies in the region such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia have been used to purchase weapons and then route them to Syria via Turkey.
This pattern of arming and funding dictators or extremist groups to get take down non-cooperative governments has been a key element in America's foreign policy since the creation of the CIA after World War II.
Let's not just talk about this in general sense. Who was running that operation?
Just in case you're thinking this is irrelevant to this current situation we should point out that Zbigniew Brzezinski is an acknowledged friend and mentor to Barack Obama.
History proves that these dictators and extremists that the U.S. government installs are disposable and the very qualities that made them useful against enemies are later used to demonize them and thereby providing the justification for a full on invasion. This should be taken as a warning to those rebel groups that the U.S. is using to to destabilize Syria right now.
Now who are these Syrian rebels, this Free Syrian Army that the U.S. government so vocally supports? Well, while the West has tried to paint them as local freedom fighters, the reality is that the conflict has attracted foreign Jihadist from multiple countries, many of whom openly declare their intent to replace Assad's secular government with Sharia law. Numerous mainstream reports are already surfacing of Sharia motivated atrocities committed by the rebels. These reports are backed up by video footage that is far too graphic for me to show here. If you do a google search you can videos of men being beheaded and women being shot by rebels from the Al-Nusra Front. Yet the U.S. government isn't deterred by these details. They still want to help these extremists topple the Syrian government.
Funny isn't it how they require FBI background checks to buy a deer rifle in the states, but if you're a foreign Jihadist trying to overthrow a government that Washington isn't on good terms with they'll send you rocket launchers and heavy artillery no questions asked? And how do you reconcile the fact that the U.S. is fighting religious extremists in Afghanistan calling them terrorists, while supporting those same groups in Syria calling them freedom fighters. It doesn't make sense at all if you take the U.S. government's propaganda at face value.
On March 19th, 2013 sarin gas was used in Syria near Aleppo. Israel and the U.S. promptly blamed the Syrian government for the attacks even though many of those who were killed were Syrian government soldiers. Obama began talking about the event as a red line that had been crossed and the war mongers began their saber rattling in earnest.
However the U.N. insisted on investigating the issue themselves, and on May 6th, 2013 UN investigator, Carla Del Ponte, went public stating that evidence from their investigation indicated that it was Syrian rebels that had used the sarin gas and that there was no indication that the Syrian government had launched any chemical attacks whatsoever.
Russia's U.N. ambassador, Vitaly Churkin, agreed with Del Ponte after Russian experts visited the location where the projectile struck and took their own samples of material from the site. Those samples were then analyzed at a Russian laboratory certified by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. According to lab results they found that the presence of Hexogen, utilized as an opening charge, and which is not used in standard munitions pointed to the attack being launched by the rebels.
Rather than cover this development, the mainstream media did what they always do when they don't want the public to look at something: the simply changed the subject.
Now of course the fact that the U.S. backed rebels had attempted to frame the Syrian government in order to build support for a NATO invasion would be bad enough, they were trying to start a war of aggression, but let's remember that sarin gas was in fact used. This means that the U.S. and its allies were willing to commit a blatant war crime, killing scores of civilians in order to justify toppling Assad. Nor did the U.S. withdraw their support after this event, in fact they increased it.
You would think that the fact that after this first attempt at framing Syria had blown up in their face the west would back down or try a different approach, but no. By July of 2013 the U.S. was already openly discussing "kinetic strikes" against Syria as if their lies hadn't been exposed. This of course brings us to the attack on August 21st, 2013 where they attempted once again to frame the Syrian government for the use of sarin gas, and once again they got caught.
The first wave of media coverage tried to pin the attack on the Syrian government, and the U.S. and France instantly came out condemning Assad. By August 24th the Pentagon had already announced plans for missile strikes, but even as they did their story was already falling apart again.
The Syrian army came forward that same day with footage to back up their report that they had uncovered a massive chemical weapons cache in rebel tunnels in the Damascus suburb of Jobar. This is the exact neighborhood where the chemical attack took place.
Then witnesses came forward with this video footage showing the rebels preparing what appear to be crude chemical weapons rockets for an attack. If you look closely at these rockets you'll see that the device shown is clearly improvised. This isn't a mass produced military grade munition like Assad would have. This is homemade.
Reuters acknowledges in this article that photos of rockets matching the description of this clip are currently being examined by experts. These experts say the rockets in the pictures they have are "Relatively basic and with crude stabilizing fins" they also say that they "bear a striking resemblance to devices found elsewhere in Syria in the aftermath of much smaller suspected attacks". If that's the case, and if the U.N. and Russia have evidence that the rebels were the ones who were behind the first chemical weapons attacks back in March then what does that tell us?
Let's put this case together as a district attorney might when deciding who to prosecute for a crime. Let's establish motive, means, opportunity and evidence. These are the elements you need to reach a guilty verdict in court.
Who had motive? Not the Syrian government. The Syrian military has been making strong gains this past few months. They didn't need to use chemical weapons. Furthermore they knew full well that the U.S. and NATO where looking for an excuse to invade, so the last thing they would want to do would be to give them that excuse. The rebels on the other hand do have motive since they knew they could count on the western media to spin the story in their favor, and that's exactly what's happened.
But did the rebels have the means and the oportunity? Actually yes. On May 31st, 2013 security forces in Turkey found a 2kg cylinder filled with sarin gas after searching the homes of Syrian militants. On July 7, the Syrian army went public about a chemical lab they had found belonging to rebels in the city of Banias.
In terms of evidence everything that has been released to the public so far points to the rebels being behind the attack. If the U.S. government has any real evidence to support their side of the story why don't they produce it? The so called intel document that they released on August 30th to justify their position doesn't contain any evidence at all, it's just a statement of opinion. They're talking about bombing a nation, taking us into a war that will most likely spin out of control drawing in Iran, Russia and China just based on their word.
Both Russia and China have openly sided with Syria and Iran, and Russia has warned that thermonuclear war could result if the U.S. continues down this path. We're talking about world war 3 here! This is not a game people! This is by far the dangerous crossroads we have ever come to in living history. If we let these psychopaths continue taking us down this path the consequences are too horrific to contemplate.
We've been talking about this war that they're trying to start here right now for years. We've been trying to warn people where we are headed and trying to show you that there is no political solution that will turn the U.S. government around. Voting the bums out isn't going to work. The people are going to have to take the power that they've handed over to these madmen back directly.
The first stage of the revolution is the ideological revolution. That means our first job is to wake people up. To achieve this we must build networks of awareness. It's time to connect the activist groups, the facebook pages, the bloggers, the alternative media. It's time to build lines of communication that cross these artificial borders of left and right. It's time to find that common ground, that unifying idea that will enable us to face our common enemy and which will lay the framework for what comes next. We must reach a critical mass of awakening, because that's when those networks of awareness become networks of resistance.
Our network must reach into every aspect of society, especially to the police and military. The police and the military are the enforcement arm of this mafia. Without them the powers that be have no power at all.
We must show them that they are being tricked, that they are not being sent to fight for freedom nor do the American people or the Syrian people want this war. Only 9% of the U.S. population support strikes against Syria, 91% appose it. Who wants this war? A handful of narcissistic psychopaths and useful idiots.
History will remember the real heroes of this crisis as being the ones that had the courage to face this corrupt chain of command and say NO, I WILL NOT COMPLY! Some are already making that stand don't leave them standing alone.
If you want to understand the real reason we're being taken into these wars please watch the video below: