Thread: Jerome R. Corsi - Evidence: Syria gas attack work of U.S. allies

Obama, saddled with numerous scandals that would have impeached ANY OTHER PRESIDENT, sits comfortably without any real threat of impeachment by the Rinos.

To prove it, the Rinos will even assist him into plunging us into another war in Syria, just for added insurance.

GOP Congressman: House would impeach Obama tomorrow, but mean Senate won’t let them

US Attempts to Sabotage UN Chemical Weapons Investigation - Decision to attack Syria already made over a year ago. http://www.infowars.com/us-attempts-...investigation/

It seems Obama is intent on aiding his Islamist buddies on the US dime and at the expense of our military.

Syrian Rebels Used Sarin Nerve Gas, Not Assad's Regime: U.N. Official
Posted GMT 8-26-2013 18:19:25

Testimony from victims strongly suggests it was the rebels, not the Syrian government, that used Sarin nerve gas during a recent incident in the revolution-wracked nation, a senior U.N. diplomat said Monday.

Carla del Ponte, a member of the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria, told Swiss TV there were "strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof," that rebels seeking to oust Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad had used the nerve agent.

But she said her panel had not yet seen any evidence of Syrian government forces using chemical weapons, according to the BBC, but she added that more investigation was needed.

Damascus has recently facing growing Western accusations that its forces used such weapons, which President Obama has described as crossing a red line. But Ms. del Ponte's remarks may serve to shift the focus of international concern.

Ms. del Ponte, who in 1999 was appointed to head the U.N. was crimes tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda, has sometimes been a controversial figure. She was removed from her Rwanda post by the U.N. Security Council in 2003, but she continued as the chief prosecutor for the Yugoslav tribunal until 2008.

Ms. del Ponte, a former Swiss prosecutor and attorney general, told Swiss TV: "Our investigators have been in neighboring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals. According to their report of last week, which I have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated."

She gave no further details, the BBC said.

The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria was established in August 2011 to examine alleged violations of human rights in the Syrian conflict which started in March that year.

It is due to issue its next report to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva in June.

Rebel Free Syrian Army spokesman Louay Almokdad denied that rebels had use chemical weapons.

"In any case, we don't have the mechanism to launch these kinds of weapons, which would need missiles that can carry chemical warheads, and we in the FSA do not possess these kind of capabilities," Mr. Almokdad told CNN.

"More importantly, we do not aspire to have (chemical weapons) because we view our battle with the regime as a battle for the establishment of a free democratic state. … We want to build a free democratic state that recognizes and abides by all international accords and agreements -- and chemical and biological warfare is something forbidden legally and internationally."

By Shaun Waterman
Washington Times


http://www.aina.org/news/20130826131925.htm

Should U.S. military take sides in Syria's civil war?

No, Sarah Palin had it right: The U.S. should let the 2 sides fight and 'Let Allah sort 'em out' (47%, 401 Votes)

No, both sides are evil – but the current regime is better than what's coming if it's overthrown (26%, 219 Votes)

No, didn't we learn our lesson from Egypt and Libya? (10%, 88 Votes)

No, this is just some new world order scheme (5%, 39 Votes)

No, Assad is a monster, but he has protected religious minorities. That will be over when Brotherhood takes over (4%, 31 Votes)

I don't know who's who over there. Don't we have enough problems here to worry about? (3%, 22 Votes)

Yes, but only if Congress declares war, as is constitutionally required (2%, 20 Votes)

Yes, but we're supporting the wrong side! (2%, 13 Votes)

Other (1%, 12 Votes)

Yes, but Obama is going too far with military engagement and supplying arms to al-Qaida types (less than 1%, 8 Votes)

Yes, the U.S. should do everything possible to topple Bashar Assad's regime (less than 1%, 4 Votes)

Yes, the U.S. is taking appropriate measures to topple Syria's leadership (less than 1%, 1 Votes)

Total Voters: 858

Assad Warns: "Syria Will Never Become A Western Puppet State" - Full Interview

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 08/27/2013 09:35 -0400


President Bashar al-Assad stressed that "Syria is a sovereign country that will fight terrorism and will freely build relationships with countries in a way that best serves the interests of the Syrian people." As Syrian TV reports, in an interview with the Russian newspaper of Izvestia, President al-Assad stressed that "the majority of those we are fighting are Takfiris, who adopt the al-Qaeda doctrine, in addition to a small number of outlaws." On the alleged use of chemical weapons, President al-Assad said that the statements by the US administration, the West and other countries were made with disdain and blatant disrespect of their own public opinion, adding that "there isn’t a body in the world, let alone a superpower, that makes an accusation and then goes about collecting evidence to prove its point." Al-Assad stressed that these accusations are completely politicised and come on the back of the advances made by the Syrian Army against the terrorists.

Here is the full content of the interview:

Q1 Interviewer: Mr President, the most pressing question today is the current situation in Syria. What parts of the country remain under the rebels’ control?

President al-Assad: From our perspective, it’s not a matter of labelling areas as controlled by terrorists or by the government; we are not dealing with a conventional occupation to allow us to contextualise it in this manner. We are fighting terrorists infiltrating particular regions, towns or peripheral city areas. They wreak havoc, vandalise, destroy infrastructure and kill innocent civilians simply because they denounce them. The army mobilises into these areas with the security forces and law enforcement agencies to eradicate the terrorists, those who survive relocate to other areas. Therefore, the essence of our action is striking terrorism.

Our challenge, which has protracted the situation, is the influx of large amounts of terrorists from other countries - estimated in the tens of thousands at the very least. As long as they continue to receive financial and military aid, we will continue to strike them. I can confirm that there has not been any instance where the Syrian Army has planned to enter a particular location and has not succeeded in eliminating the terrorists within it.

The majority of those we are fighting are Takfiris, who adopt the al-Qaeda doctrine, in addition to a small number of outlaws, so as I said this not about who controls more areas of land. Wherever terrorism strikes, we shall strike back.

Q2 Interviewer: Yet, Western mainstream media claim that the terrorists control 40% to 70% of Syrian territory; what is the reality?

President al-Assad: There isn’t an army in the world that can be present with its armament in every corner of any given country. The terrorists exploit this, and violate areas where the army is not present. They escape from one area to another, and we continue to eradicate them from these areas with great success. Therefore, I reiterate, the issue is not the size of the territories they infiltrate but the large influx of terrorists coming from abroad.

The more significant criterion to evaluate success is - has the Syrian Army been able to enter any area infiltrated by terrorists and defeat them? Most certainly the answer is yes; the army has always succeeded in this and continues to do so. However, this takes time because these types of wars do not end suddenly, they protract for prolonged periods and as such carry a heavy price. Even when we have eradicated all the terrorists, we will have paid a hefty price.

Q3 Interviewer: Mr President, you have spoken of Islamist Takfiri extremists’ fighters who have entered Syria. Are they fragmented groups who fight sporadically? Or do they belong to a coherent major force that seeks to destroy the security and stability in Syria and the whole Middle East?

President al-Assad: They have both traits. They are similar in that they all share the same extremist Takfiri doctrine of certain individuals such as Zawahiri; they also have similar or identical financial backing and military support. They differ on the ground in that they are incoherent and scattered with each group adhering to a separate leader and pursuing different agendas. Of course it is well known that countries, such as Saudi Arabia, who hold the purse strings can shape and manipulate them to suit their own interests.

Ideologically, these countries mobilise them through direct or indirect means as extremist tools. If they declare that Muslims must pursue Jihad in Syria, thousands of fighters will respond. Financially, those who finance and arm such groups can instruct them to carry out acts of terrorism and spread anarchy. The influence over them is synergised when a country such as Saudi Arabia directs them through both the Wahhabi ideology and their financial means.

Q4 Interviewer: The Syrian government claims a strong link between Israel and the terrorists. How can you explain this? It is commonly perceived that the extremist Islamists loathe Israel and become hysterical upon hearing its name.

President al-Assad: If this was the case, why is it then that when we strike the terrorists at the frontier, Israel strikes at our forces to alleviate the pressure off of them? Why, when we blockade them into an area does Israel let them through their barricades so they can come round and re-attack from another direction? Why has Israel carried out direct strikes against the Syrian Army on more than one occasion in recent months? So clearly this perception is inaccurate. It is Israel who has publically declared its cooperation with these terrorists and treated them in Israeli hospitals. If these terrorist groups were indeed hostile to Israel and hysterical even on the mention of the word as you mention, why have they fought the Soviet Union, Syria and Egypt, whilst never carrying out a single strike against Israel? Who originally created these terrorist groups? These groups were initially created in the early 80’s by the United States and the West, with Saudi funding, to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. So logically speaking, how could such groups manufactured by the US and the West ever strike Israel!

Q5 Interviewer: Mr. President, this interview will be translated into several international languages, and shall be read by world leaders, some who may currently be working against you. What would you like to say to them?

President al-Assad: Today there are many Western politicians, but very few statesmen. Some of these politicians do not read history or even learn from it, whilst others do not even remember recent events. Have these politicians learned any lessons from the past 50 years at least? Have they not realised that since the Vietnam War, all the wars their predecessors have waged have failed? Have they not learned that they have gained nothing from these wars but the destruction of the countries they fought, which has had a destabilising effect on the Middle East and other parts of the world? Have they not comprehended that all of these wars have not made people in the region appreciate them or believe in their policies?

From another perspective, these politicians should know that terrorism is not a winning card you play when it suits you and keep it in your pocket when it doesn't. Terrorism is like a scorpion; it can unexpectedly sting you at any time. Therefore, you cannot support terrorism in Syria whilst fighting it in Mali; you cannot support terrorism in Chechnya and fight it in Afghanistan.

To be very precise, I am referring to the West and not all world leaders, if these western leaders are looking to achieve their interests, they need to listen to their own constituents and to the people in this region rather than seeking to install ‘puppet’ leaders, in the hope that they would be able to deliver their objectives. In doing so, western policy may become more realistic in the region.

Our message to the world is straightforward: Syria will never become a Western ‘puppet’ state. We are an independent country; we will fight terrorism and we will freely build relationships with countries in a way that best serves the interests of the Syrian people.

Q6 Interviewer: On Wednesday, the rebels accused the Syrian government of using chemical weapons; some Western leaders adopted these accusations. What is your response to this? Will you allow the UN inspectors access to the site to investigate the incident?

President Assad: The statements by the American administration, the West and other countries were made with disdain and blatant disrespect of their own public opinion; there isn’t a body in the world, let alone a superpower, that makes an accusation and then goes about collecting evidence to prove its point. The American administration made the accusation on Wednesday and two days later announced that they would start to collect the evidence - what evidence is it going to gather from afar?!

They claim that the area in question is under the control of the rebels and that the Syrian Army used chemical weapons. In fact, the area is in contiguity with the Syrian Army positions, so how is it possible that any country would use chemical weapons, or any weapons of mass destruction, in an area where its own forces are located; this is preposterous! These accusations are completely politicised and come on the back of the advances made by the Syrian Army against the terrorists.

As for the UN Commission, we were the first to request a UN investigation when terrorists launched rockets that carried toxic gas in the outskirts of Aleppo. Several months before the attack, American and Western statements were already preparing public opinion of the potential use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government. This raised our suspicion that they were aware of the terrorists’ intentions to use these weapons in order to blame the Syrian government. After liaising with Russia,

We decided to request a commission to investigate the incident. Whereas we requested an investigation based on the facts on the ground, not on rumours or allegations; the US, France and the UK have tried to exploit the incident to investigate allegations rather than happenings.

During the last few weeks, we have worked with the Commission and set the guidelines for cooperation. First of these, is that our national sovereignty is a red line and as such the Commission will directly liaise with us during the process. Second, the issue is not only how the investigation will be conducted but also how the results will be interpreted. We are all aware that instead of being interpreted in an objective manner, these results could easily be interpreted according to the requirements and agendas of certain major countries. Certainly, we expect Russia to block any interpretation that aims to serve American and western policies. What is most important is that we differentiate between western accusations that are based on allegations and hearsay and our request for an investigation based on concrete evidence and facts.

Q7 Interviewer: Recent statements by the American administration and other Western governments have stated that the US has not ruled out military intervention in Syria. In light of this, is it looking more likely that the US would behave in the same way it did in Iraq, in other words look for a pretext for military intervention?

President al-Assad: This is not the first time that the possibility of military intervention has been raised. From the outset, the US, along with France and Britain, has strived for military intervention in Syria. Unfortunately for them, events took a different course with the balance shifting against their interests in the Security Council despite their numerous attempts to haggle with Russia and China, but to no avail. The negative outcomes that emerged in Libya and Egypt were also not in their favour.

All of this made it impossible for them to convince their constituents and the world that they were following sound or successful policies.

The situation in Libya also differs to that of Egypt and Tunisia, and Syria as I have said is very different from all these. Each country has a unique situation and applying the same scenario across the board is no longer a plausible option. No doubt they can wage wars, but they cannot predict where they will spread or how they will end. This has led them to realise that all their crafted scenarios have now spiralled out of their control.

It is now crystal clear to everybody that what is happening in Syria is not a popular revolution pushing for political reform, but targeted terrorism aimed at destroying the Syrian state. What will they say to their people when pushing for military intervention: we are intervening in Syria to support terrorism against the state?!

Interviewer: What will America face should it decide on military intervention or on waging a war on Syria?

President al-Assad: What it has been confronted with in every war since Vietnam… failure. America has waged many wars, but has never been able to achieve its political objectives from any of them. It will also not be able to convince the American people of the benefits of this war, nor will it be able to convince the people in this region of their policies and plans. Global powers can wage wars, but can they win them?

Q8: Interviewer: Mr. President, how is your relationship with President Vladimir Putin? Do you speak on the phone? If so, what do you discuss?

President al-Assad: I have a strong relationship with President Putin, which spans back many years even before the crisis. We contact each other from time to time, although the complexity of events in Syria cannot be discussed on the phone. Our relationship is facilitated through Russian and Syrian officials who exchange visits, the majority of which are conducted away from the glare of the media.

Q9 Interviewer: Mr. President, are you planning to visit Russia or invite President Putin to visit Syria?

President Assad: It is possible of course; however the current priorities are to work towards easing the violence in Syria, there are casualties on a daily basis. When circumstances improve, a visit will be necessary; for now, our officials are managing this relationship well.

Q10: Interviewer: Mr. President, Russia is opposing the US and EU policies, especially with regards to Syria, what would happen were Russia to make a compromise now? Is such a scenario possible?

President Assad: Russian-American relations should not be viewed through the context of the Syrian crisis alone; it should be viewed in a broader and more comprehensive manner. The US presumed that with the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia was perpetually destroyed. After President Putin took office in the late 90s, Russia began to gradually recover and regain its international position; hence the Cold War began again, but in a different and subtler manner.

The US persisted on many fronts: striving to contain Russian interests in the world, attempting to influence the mentality of Russians closer to the West both in terms of culture and aspiration. It worked diligently to eliminate Russia’s vital and powerful role on many fronts, one of which is Syria. You may be wondering, like many Russians, why Russia continues to stand by Syria. It is important to explain this reason to the general public: Russia is not defending President Bashar al-Assad or the Syrian government, since the Syrian people should decide their president and the most suitable political system – this is not the issue. Russia is defending the fundamental principles it has embraced for more than a hundred years, the first of which is independence and the policy of non-interference in internal affairs. Russia itself has suffered and continues to suffer from such interference.

Additionally, Russia is defending its legitimate interests in the region. Some superficial analysts narrow these interests to the Port of Tartous, but in reality Russia’s interests are far more significant. Politically speaking, when terrorism strikes Syria, a key country in the region, it would have a direct impact on stability in the Middle East, which would subsequently affect Russia. Unlike many western governments, the Russian leadership fully understands this reality. From a social and cultural perspective, we must not forget the tens of thousands of Syrian-Russian families, which create a social, cultural and humanitarian bridge between our two countries.

If Russia were to seek a compromise, as you stipulated, this would have happened one or two years ago when the picture was blurred, even for some Russian officials. Today, the picture is crystal clear. A Russia that didn’t make a compromise back then, would not do so now.

Q11 Interviewer: Mr. President, are there any negotiations with Russia to supply fuel or military hardware to Syria? With regards to the S-300 defence system contract in particular, have you received it?

President al-Assad: Of course, no country would publically declare what armaments and weapons it possesses, or the contracts it signs in this respect. This is strictly classified information concerning the Armed Forces. Suffice to say that all contracts signed with Russia are being honoured and neither the crisis nor the pressure from the US, European or Gulf countries’ have affected their implementation. Russia continues to supply Syria with what it requires to defend itself and its people.

Q12 Interviewer: Mr President, what form of aid does Syria require from Russia today? Is it financial or perhaps military equipment? For example would Syria request a loan from Russia?

President al-Assad: In the absence of security on the ground, it is impossible to have a functioning and stable economy. So firstly, the support that Russia is providing through agreed military contracts to help Syrians defend themselves will lead to better security, which will in turn help facilitate an economic recovery. Secondly, Russia’s political support for our right of independence and sovereignty has also played a significant role. Many other countries have turned against us politically and translated this policy by cutting economic ties and closing their markets. Russia has done the complete opposite and continues to maintain good trading relations with us, which has helped keep our economy functioning. Therefore in response to your question, Russia’s supportive political stance and its commitment to honour the agreed military contracts without surrendering to American pressure have substantially aided our economy, despite the negative bearings the economic embargo - imposed by others, has had on the lives of the Syrian people.

From a purely economic perspective, there are several agreements between Syria and Russia for various goods and materials. As for a loan from Russia, this should be viewed as beneficial to both parties: for Russia it is an opportunity for its national industries and companies to expand into new markets, for Syria it provides some of the funding necessary to rebuild our infrastructure and stimulate our economy. I reiterate that Russia’s political stance and support have been instrumental in restoring security and providing the basic needs for the Syrian people.

Q13 Interviewer: Mr. President, do these contracts relate to fuel or basic food requirements?

President al-Assad: Syrian citizens are being targeted through their basic food, medical and fuel requirements.The Syrian government is working to ensure these basic needs are available to all Syrians through trade agreements with Russia and other friendly countries.

Q14 Interviewer: Returning to the situation in Syria and the current crisis. We are aware that you successively issue amnesties. Do these amnesties include rebels? And do some of them subsequently change sides to fight with the Armed Forces?

President al-Assad: Yes, this is in fact the case. Recently, there has been a marked shift, especially since the picture has become clearer to many that what is happening in Syria is sheer terrorism. Many have come back into the mainstream of civil life, surrendering their weapons and benefitting from the amnesties to help them return to their normal lives. Most remarkably, there are certain groups who have switched from fighting against the army to fighting beside it; these people were either misled by what was propagated in the media or were initially militarised under threats from the terrorists. It is for this very reason that from the start of the crisis, the Syrian government has adopted an open door policy to all those who wanted to U-turn on the initial route they took against their country. Despite the fact that many people in Syria were opposed to this policy, it has proven to be effective and has helped alleviate some of the tension from the crisis.

Q15 Interviewer: Mr. President, Syria’s relations with several states are collapsing consecutively, such as Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Who are your true allies, and who are your enemies?

President al-Assad: The countries that support us are well known to everyone: internationally - Russia and China, regionally - Iran. However, we are starting to see a positive shift on the international arena. Certain countries that were strongly against Syria have begun to change their positions; others have started to reinitiate relations with us. Of course, the changes in these countries’ positions do not constitute direct support.

In contrast, there are particular countries that have directly mobilised and buttressed terrorism in Syria.Predominantly Qatar and Turkey in the first two years; Qatar financed while Turkey provided logistical support by training terrorists and streaming them into Syria. Recently, Saudi Arabia has replaced Qatar in the funding role. To be completely clear and transparent, Saudi Arabia has nothing but funding; those who only have money cannot build a civilisation or nurture it. Saudi Arabia implements its agenda depending on how much money it commands.

Turkey is a different case. It is pitiful that a great country such as Turkey, which bears a strategic location and a liberal society, is being manipulated by a meagre amount of dollars through a Gulf state harbouring a regressive mentality. It is of course the Turkish Prime Minister who shoulders responsibility for this situation and not the Turkish people with whom we share a great deal of heritage and traditions.

Q17 Interviewer: Mr. President, what makes Russian-Syrian relations so strong? Is it geopolitical interests? Or that they jointly share a struggle against terrorism?

President al-Assad: There is more than one factor that forges Syrian-Russian relations so strongly. First of which is that Russia has suffered from occupation during World War II and Syria has been occupied more than once. Secondly, since the Soviet era, Russia has been subjected to continuous and repeated attempts of foreign intervention in its internal affairs; this is also the case with Syria.

Thirdly but no less significantly is terrorism. In Syria, we understand well what it means when extremists from Chechnya kill innocent civilians, what it means to hold under siege children and teachers in Beslan or hold innocent people hostage in Moscow’s theatre. Equally, the Russian people understand when we in Syria refer to the identical acts of terrorism they have suffered. It is for this reason that the Russian people reject the Western narrative of “good terrorists and bad terrorists.”

In addition to these areas, there are also the Syrian-Russian family ties I mentioned earlier, which would not have developed without common cultural, social and intellectual characteristics, as well as the geopolitical interests we also spoke of. Russia, unlike the Europeans and the West, is well aware of the consequences of destabilising Syria and the region and the affect this will have on the inexorable spread of terrorism.

All of these factors collectively shape the political stance of a great country like Russia. Its position is not founded on one or two elements, but rather by a comprehensive historical, cultural and intellectual perspective.

Q18 Interviewer: Mr. President, what will occur in Geneva 2, what are your expectations from this conference?

President al-Assad: The objective of the Geneva conference is to support the political process and facilitate a political solution to the crisis. However, this cannot be accomplished before halting the foreign support to terrorism. We expect that the Geneva conference would start applying pressure on the countries supporting terrorism in Syria, to stop the smuggling of weapons and the streaming of foreign terrorists into the country. When this is achieved, political steps can be easily pursued, most imperative of which is initiating a dialogue between Syrians to discuss the future political system, the constitution, various legislations and others.

Interviewer: Thank you for your sincerity and for such a transparent discussion during this interview.


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-0...n-puppet-state

Syria Warns Will Defend Itself Using "All Available Means", Coordinating With Iran, Russia Ties Strong

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 08/27/2013 06:57 -0400

• Iran
• Israel

Apparently Syria refuses to just roll over and play dead:

More:

• Syrian foreign minister says U.S., Israel don’t want political solution.
• Muallem says ties with Russia strong
• Muallem says coordinating with Iran on various issues
• Muallem says U.S. may be carrying out psychological warfare
• Muallem says Syria to defend itself, won’t surrender
• Muallem denies Assad threatened to ignite gulf oil fields
• Muallem says Syria is comfortable with progress in Russian ties
• Muallem says told Kerry alleged chemical attack is fabricated

But to really get through to the golfer-in-chief, does Syria know how to putt it in from 18 feet away?








http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-0...iran-russia-ti

Growing Evidence Supports Syrian Rebels Launched Chemical Attacks

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/08/gr...mical-attacks/

As The World Prepares For War, Will Obama Blink?

Tuesday, August 27, 2013 19:08
(Before It's News)



“The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.” Isaiah 17:1

The stakes have never been higher. The current conflict could involve the United States, Syria, Russia, Iran and China. Last time I checked that sounded suspiciously a lot like Psalm 83 and Ezekiel 38 and 39. Could this be the biblical conflict mentioned in prophecy? Time will tell, but one thing is for sure. You need this.

WSJ/DAMASCUS—The Arab League said Tuesday that Damascus had used chemical weapons against its population, and Western governments discussed military responses to the attacks, as Syria’s foreign minister vowed that his country would defend itself against any foreign attack.

French and U.K. military officials held talks with their American counterparts about coordinating their response to alleged chemical attacks last week near Damascus that activists and rebels said left more than 1,000 Syrians dead.
The U.S. Defense Department, meanwhile, has presented military options to President Barack Obama, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said, without outlining them. Defense officials have said the U.S. is considering cruise-missile strikes from navy ships in the Mediterranean.

“We are ready to go,” he said.

The U.S. is examining ways to attack Syria without the approval of the United Nations, where Russia would likely veto any military action, U.S. and European officials have said. The Obama administration has recently stepped up contacts with North Atlantic Treaty Organization and Arab League allies about supporting a military operation against Damascus.

While the Arab League’s accusation on Tuesday bolstered the U.S. case for military strikes, the group stressed that the perpetrators should be brought to justice in an international forum.

The league “demands that all those involved in this heinous crime be presented for international trials,” according to the statement. The league urged its member states and the international community to issue the necessary“ resolutions against the perpetrators of this crime, for which the Syrian regime bears responsibility, and to put an end to the violations and crimes of genocide that the Syrian regime has carried out for over two years.”

The statement came a day after U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said there was undeniable evidence that chemical weapons had been used in an attack he characterized as a “moral obscenity.” On Tuesday, Vice President Joe Biden said there was “no doubt” that the Assad regime was behind the attack.

“There is no doubt that an essential international norm has been violated,” Mr. Biden said at the American Legion’s annual convention in Houston. “No one doubts that innocent men, women and children have been the victims of chemical weapons attacks in Syria. And there is no doubt who is responsible for this heinous use of chemical weapons in Syria: the Syrian regime.”

U.S. officials have said they expect to release evidence in coming days that Syria’s regime was behind the attacks.

France’s President François Hollande vowed Tuesday to “punish” the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for what he said was its likely use of chemical weapons in recent attacks near Damascus.

Mr. Hollande, addressing ambassadors at the Élysée Palace, pressed his case for the West to respond to the attack with “necessary force” targeting the Assad regime.

“This mass chemical massacre cannot go unanswered,” he said. “France is ready to punish those who made the horrible decision to gas innocents.”

Syria “utterly and completely” rejects the allegations that it used chemical weapons, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem said Tuesday. He added that Syria would defend itself by means available. “We will surprise others” planning to attack Damascus, he said.

“We are hearing the drums of war,” Mr. Moallem added. “They want to attack Syria. I believe to use chemical weapons as a pretext is trite and inaccurate.” source – WSJ

The post As The World Prepares For War, Will Obama Blink? appeared first on Now The End Begins.

Source: http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/?p=14741

http://beforeitsnews.com/global-unre...k-2456198.html

Why Syria?

Tuesday, August 27, 2013 15:44
(Before It's News)


As Western military forces congregate in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea in anticipation of a “limited strike” on Syria, it is time to ask ourselves a simple question: Why?
by Jerry Robinson, FTMDaily.com Editor-in-Chief

FTMDAILY – In the summer of 2011, just weeks after civil war broke out in Syria, the Tehran Times released a report entitled, Iran, Iraq, Syria Sign Major Gas Pipeline Deal. The report provided details on how Iran planned to export its vast natural gas reserves to Europe through a pipeline that traversed both Iraq and Syria. This Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline would be the largest gas pipeline in the Middle East and would span from Iran’s gas-rich South Pars field to the Mediterranean coastline in Lebanon, via Iraq and Syria.
But the pipeline won’t stop there.
The agreement calls for the construction of an underwater pipeline under the Mediterranean Sea stretching from Lebanon to Greece to deliver Iranian gas to energy-hungry European nations.
The 6,000 kilometer pipeline, which has a massive price tag of $10 billion, will have an estimated capacity of 100-120 million cubic feet of gas per day, with a projected completion date sometime near 2018. As of this writing, the construction of this proposed pipeline has not begun and the question of who will finance the project has not been addressed. However, in July 2013, leaders from Syria, Iran, and Iraq met to sign a preliminary agreement on the pipeline with the hopes of finalizing the deal by the end of the year.
Like its Turkish neighbor, Syria’s geographic location on the Mediterranean Sea makes it an obvious export center for landlocked oil producers within the greater Middle East seeking to export their oil and gas reserves to European markets. For this reason, Syria’s strategic location, and its warm water port on the Mediterranean, have placed it near the center of a major effort by Western nations to pump cheap Middle East gas supplies to Europe and beyond.

Syria is already part of a Western-ordained gas pipeline that spans from Egypt to Homs. This pipeline, known as the Arab Gas Pipeline, was originally planned to continue traveling north of Homs up into Turkey. From there, it can be piped into Europe. The major players of this Western approved pipeline include Saudi Arabia and Qatar, among other Gulf nations.
Syrian President Assad has since rejected the Arab Gas Pipeline and has instead begun working closely with Iran on Iran’s proposed gas pipeline, dubbed the Islamic Pipeline. This proposed pipeline would obviously compete directly with the Arab Gas Pipeline and its goal of delivering Mideast natural gas to Europe.
Most Arabs view the Islamic Pipeline as a Shi’ite pipeline serving Shi’ite interests. After all, it originates in Shi’ite Iran, passes through Shi’ite Iraq, and flows into Shi’ite controlled Syria. Therefore, the Sunni-dominated Gulf nations have both an economic and to a lesser extent, a religious reason, for stopping the Islamic Pipeline from becoming a reality. So far, the Gulf nations have violently opposed Syria’s adoption of the Islamic Pipeline by arming opposition fighters within Syria in order to destabilize the nation. While the ultimate goal is to topple the Assad regime, these hopes appear to be diminishing as Assad remains strong and defiant in the face of recent opposition.
Despite his firm grip on power, Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad is opposed by many powerful actors within the Middle East, including Israel, Jordan, Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda also strongly opposes the Assad government and has joined other rebel factions in an effort to overthrow Assad and to install a more Sunni-friendly (and perhaps more importantly, a Western-friendly) government.
Western Pressure is Mounting

This week, it appears that the long planned U.S.-led war in Syria may finally commence. For nearly two decades, Western nations have been plotting an overthrow of the Syrian government with the aim of replacing the hostile regime with a new “democratic” government that is friendly to Western interests in the region.
The official Western narrative against Syria goes something like this:
The Syrian government has abused basic human rights, maintains deep ties with rogue regimes like Iran and North Korea, and just recently launched a chemical weapons strike on hundreds of its own people. In addition to killing its own people, the Assad regime is serving to destabilize an already unstable Middle East. Assad must go…
According to most reports, the U.S., Britain, and France are preparing for a strike against numerous key targets within Syria this week.
British Prime Minister, David Cameron, is calling for war and has recalled Parliament this week to discuss a military response against Syria.
French President, Francois Hollande, has increased its support for the Syrian rebels and has said that France is “ready to punish” whoever was responsible for the recent chemical weapons attack.
continue article at FTM Daily:

http://ftmdaily.com/global-issues/middle-east-crisis-global-issues/why-syria/


http://beforeitsnews.com/war-and-con...a-2447870.html