Thread: Hans Blix: western media pushing war agenda ahead of Syria attack. Conjures Weapons o

War Media Conjures Weapons of Mass Destruction Ahead of Obama’s Syria Attack

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
August 28, 2013

Time Magazine is calling for Obama to use Clinton’s illegal 1998 Operation Desert Fox bombing campaign as a template when he bombs Syria, possibly tomorrow. Clinton’s foray into organized mass murder – designed in part to distract from his dalliance with Monica Lewinsky – lasted four days and killed hundreds of Iraqis. According to the United States, a barrage of cruise missiles were fired into Iraq to “degrade” Saddam Hussein’s ability to produce weapons of mass destruction, weapons sold to him by the United States.



Hans Blix: western media pushing war agenda ahead of Syria attack.

Time says the “trigger” for the coming bombing of Syria will be its weapons of mass destruction and “use of chemical weapons in suburbs of the Syrian capital that killed hundreds of civilians,” an “indiscriminate” attack the United States and its corporate propaganda machine say al-Assad maliciously conducted despite the fact there is absolutely no evidence he did anything of the sort.

Time insists the attack will be “rooted in weapons of mass destruction” and will target Syria’s military infrastructure. “It’ll probably be aimed at Syria’s command-and-control systems, the forces who might have been involved in using it, and maybe expanded to include higher headquarters that would have coordinated the operations,” Jeffrey White, a former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst now with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told Time.

The corporate war propaganda media invariably trots out neocons and other professional warmongers when it peddles excuses for mass murder under the threadbare banner of subjective and politically expedient humanitarianism. The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, WINEP for short, is a “think tank” linked to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, and its “scholars” are interchangeable with those over at the American Enterprise Institute and the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, neocon operations responsible for pushing the invasion of Iraq (death toll: approximately 1.5 million).

“It’s a lot easier to declare ‘mission accomplished’ when your objective is to blow up command posts, weapons depots and runways, instead of hunting down and destroying weapons of mass destruction, which can be elusive,” Time reports.

In fact, so elusive were Iraq’s WMDs, they were never found. George W. Bush, amply demonstrating the personality quirks of a psychopath, went so far as to contrive a stand-up comedy routine after it was conclusively demonstrated Iraq did not have WMDs. Bush and his cronies knew this.

Following Clinton’s bombing the war media told us the Pentagon went out of its way to spare innocent civilians. “While numerous Ba’ath security, intelligence, and military targets were destroyed, power and telephone systems were spared,” Michael Knights writes for the Washington Institute.

Clinton avoided bombing “dual-use infrastructure” because his predecessor had taken it out a few years before and punitive and medieval sanctions – ultimately claiming the lives of more than 500,000 Iraqi children – made sure Iraq never recovered.

“Bombing of Iraqi cities served no military purpose but was designed to destroy the civilian infrastructure,” David Model wrote in 2005. “War games in July 1990 in South Carolina trained pilots to bomb civilian targets and Pentagon statements about plans to bomb civilian targets in August and September 1990 are evidence that these targets were set well in advance of January 15, 1991.

Critical elements of the civilian infrastructure were destroyed including communication systems, oil refineries, electric generators, water treatment facilities, dams, and transportation centers. Over 90 percent of Iraq’s electrical capacity was destroyed in the first days of the bombing.

One of the most diabolical decisions in the campaign was to destroy Iraq’s water supply, resulting in the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children long after the war was over. The capacity of Iraq to produce food was severely limited by the attacks on agriculture, food processing, food storage and the food distribution system. Half of Iraq’s agricultural output depended on irrigation systems which were also targeted.

Syria will be similarly targeted, but you won’t hear about it in the war propaganda media.

Time concludes:

There will be claims from Syria of innocent civilians killed (Desert Fox killed up to 2,000 Iraqis) and complaints from Syrian allies Iran and Russia that the strikes violated international law, predicts Anthony Cordesman, a military scholar at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “But, at the end of it,” he says, “they probably won’t use chemical weapons again.”

That may be the good news, relatively speaking. The bad news is that there’s no idea of what comes next for Syria, already torn apart by a 30-month civil war that has killed an estimated 100,000 people, after the all-but-certain U.S. attack.

Time does not put the 100,000 figure in context – if indeed accurate, and we have no way to verify the number for certain, it is largely the result of a civil war fomented by the United States and the CIA with their dual-use al-Qaeda mercenaries. It is an engineered civil war designed to take out the government of Bashar al-Assad and usher in a generation or more of failed state chaos in Syria.

“The conditions in Iraq ten years after the invasion do not look bright,” writes Fatih Abdulsalam. “There are more signs of division rather than unity, more signs of separation rather than coming together in regard to almost everything in the country.”

Following Obama’s attack, and subsequent attacks after the first one will undoubtedly prove insufficient, Syria’s future will also not look bright.
Once again, weapons of mass destruction serve as a pretext for a different agenda – the destruction of Syria and its removal as a geopolitical player in the region, an area increasingly dominated by the United States and its regional surrogate, Israel.



This article was posted: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 at 9:58 am

Tags: domestic news, foreign affairs, war

Related Articles

• US Chemical Weapons Report in Syria ‘Fabricated’ – Russian MP
• US-British Al Qaeda Airlift: 3,000 Tons of Weapons Fuel Syria’s Destruction
• Establishment Media Spins al-Qaeda’s Use of Chemical Weapons in Syria
• Sec. State Kerry Prepares WMD Pretext Ahead of Syria Attack
• Russia May Sell Syria Advanced Weapons as NATO Prepares to Attack

http://www.infowars.com/war-media-co...-syria-attack/

Guest Post: Delusional America Brokering Middle East Peace

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 08/28/2013 12:10 -0400

Submitted by Ben Tanosborn

Delusional America: Brokering Middle East Peace

So now it’s Assad’s government in Syria that has crossed the Rubicon. What shall the Emperor do?! Should he listen to voices coming from Russia, China… and elsewhere, who are warning the US from taking unilateral military action… or should he follow the advice of that dime-store oracle in Washington: John McCain.

As our Gullible-in-Chief weighs another critical foreign policy decision – this time to step into the moving sands of Syria – I am inclined to follow the advice that a friend, a retired academic, gave me back in 2008 as the presidential election gave us a choice between two candidates, both likely to pass on into history as duds: Barack Obama and John McCain. In this day and age, my friend told me, when we need to confront a major government decision, an “almost always” safe thing is to do the “un-McCain thing.” Art, a former history professor, was (he is since passed away) totally convinced that McCain was a great barometer, a leading indicator, of what not to do or follow, whether in matters of morality or politics (domestic or foreign). If McCain is advocating “A”, make sure your choice is “Z”, Art would say, and you’ll likely bat over .900.

It was Art’s contention that McCain, given his lack of grey matter, over-abundance of ignorance in most any field, low moral standards and personal recklessness, had little choice but to pick the goofy lady from Alaska, so he would not be outshone by a running mate during the presidential campaign. And Sarah Palin was perfectly sculpted to serve as his vice-presidential candidate.
Today, Wednesday, August 28, on the probable eve of yet another stupid, catastrophic decision by the White House, we ponder if we have become a victim of our own false pride and love-of-empire, declaring we are forced to act when we are not. Drawing a line in the sand, establishing specific boundaries and delivering an ultimatum, as President Obama had done with Assad’s regime in Syria should not imply a retribution likely to have dire consequences for millions of people… and an entire region. Consequences, all possible consequences, must be weighed in a rational humanitarian fashion, and not just in a purely, strategic military way. And that would be true even if the UN certified, in an indisputable way, evidence of chemical attacks directed by Assad personally or by his staff. Yet, it is unlikely that such indisputable proof will exist before any criminal “shock and awe” salvos are launched by the Pentagon.

Obama will not have any loss of face by waiting for such indisputable evidence, and then by determining a course of action with a long term humanitarian approach – doing it in concert with the UN and/or explicit international consent and approval. One cannot even fathom the embarrassment and eventual consequences for the US if, after taking unilateral action – Britain and France being US wing-nations do not a coalition make – such chemical attacks were found to be perpetrated or instigated by groups or nations that would benefit from Assad’s fall from power… a few of them come to mind that are best kept in obscurity at this time.

This moment in history could be one which will bring to light whether Barack Obama does possess the stature of a statesman, or is simply wearing the vestments conferred by the Empire, just like his incapable predecessor did when criminally, and foolishly, invading Iraq.

At a time when we claim to be seeking a permanent solution to the circular situation which exists between Israel and Palestine (Palestinians), it is incongruous to reality that we fail to see what is happening all around the Middle East. The old United Arab Republic, Syria and Egypt, have over 90 million people divided and fighting, whether in open civil war or through socioeconomic confrontation. It has less to do with political regimes, and so-called dictatorships such as those of Mubarak and Assad, and more to do with the existing distribution of wealth and power. And equity may or may not come through dialogue (hopefully) or civil struggle (unfortunately).

As for doltish Senator John McCain, he would not just be content with a few salvos of cruise missiles against specific, critical targets… as he contends Obama will limit his action. McCain, like his brother-in-arms George W. Bush did in Iraq, would have the US “liberate” the Syrian people under Assad’s yoke.

Maybe from beyond the grave, my friend Art can muster a few seconds’ audience with Obama to show McCain as the leading indicator for America’s impending disaster in the Middle East. But such thinking in my part is just as delusional as the idea that America could ever assist in, much less broker, bringing peace to the Middle East.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-0...dle-east-peace

‘War on chemical weapons’: Obama traps himself into Syrian combat

Pepe Escobar is the roving correspondent for Asia Times/Hong Kong, an analyst for RT and TomDispatch, and a frequent contributor to websites and radio shows ranging from the US to East Asia.

Published time: August 28, 2013 20:18

Syrian activists inspect the bodies of people they say were killed by nerve gas in the Ghouta region, in the Duma neighbourhood of Damascus August 21, 2013. (Reuters)

Tags Army, Conflict, Human rights, Military,Politics, Terrorism, War

Only a few days before the 12th anniversary of 9/11, Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama might be fighting side by side with… al-Qaeda, as he was foolish enough to be trapped by his own rhetoric on Syria.
The dogs of war bark and the caravan… is Tomahawked. Amid out-of-control hysteria, the proverbial“unnamed US officials” spin like demented centrifuges.

Obama’s “kinetic operation” on Syria will fall out of the sky “in the next few days.” It will be “limited,”lasting only “three days,” or “no more than two days.” It will “send a message,” a “short, sharp attack” against less than 50 sites on a list of targets.

But then long-range bombers may “possibly” join the Tomahawk barrage, and all bets are off.

A proverbial, anonymous “senior administration official” even stressed the “desire to get it done before the president leaves for Russia next week.”

That’s it; we bomb a country like dialing a pizza delivery, and then we go to a G20 summit with the world’s emerging powers hosted by no less than Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin. Just because we need to prove that the president of the United States meant what he said: chemical weapons are a red line. And to hell who’s responsible for deploying them.

I’m not making this up. This is the core of White House spokesman Jay Carney’s message, when he said, in faultless Newspeak: “The options that are being considered do not contain within them a regime change focus.”

So the administration of “constitutional lawyer” Barack Obama is mulling how to attack Syria, bypassing the UN Security Council – which will veto, via Russia and China, the new resolution proposed by the UK; bypassing always-docile NATO; and with 91 percent of Americans against it, just to send an (explosive) political message. And all because a US president was foolish enough to get trapped in his own rhetoric.

U.N. chemical weapons experts visit people affected by an apparent gas attack, at a hospital in the southwestern Damascus suburb of Mouadamiya August 26, 2013. (Reuters)

Remember Iraq?

Call it a 10th anniversary special: it’s Iraq 2003 all over again.

The attack dog presumably in charge of the Obama administration war brigade is Secretary of State John Kerry. Here, Gareth Porter thoroughly debunks Kerry’s game – and lies. No wonder Kerry’s “Powell moment” has gone viral – as in “deceived” Colin Powell in his infamous February 2003 UN presentation telling the world Saddam Hussein had tons of WMDs. Unlike Powell though, Kerry knows exactly what he’s doing.

The White House promises a “revelation” from above this Thursday, “above” being the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Yet the heart of the matter is that the UN chemical inspectors have had no time to identify what sort of chemical weapon is involved in the Ghouta attack (sarin or something else); where it was manufactured; how it was delivered (possibly by DIY rockets); and last but not least, who did it.

It’s imperative to remember that Russia presented an 80-page report last month to the UN Security Council detailing serious evidence about the “rebels” being behind the March 19 attack in Khan al-Assal. That’s why the inspectors are in Syria now. So the Obama administration is lying when it insists that it's “too late” for the inspectors to investigate the latest attack.
This time though, Russia may not have collected enough evidence; it's too early. Otherwise Ambassador Vitaly Churkin would be talking to the press, like he did last month.
These investigations take time. And the results cannot be fixed around the policy.
‘Fixing’ the facts

Let’s follow a track that is much more plausible than Washington’s official narrative.

Israeli intelligence has leaked to a Kuwaiti newspaper that Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Benny Gantz handed over to his good pal US Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey “documents and pictures” as evidence of the Syrian government’s culpability. Arguably, this will be the core of the White House “revelation” this Thursday.

The evidence points to rockets launched from a “Syrian army post near Damascus” – which Finnish researcher Petri Krohn, currently conducting a meticulous investigation, conclusively placed as occupied by the “rebels” since June. (scroll down to “Qaboun rocket launches”)
Add to it the Defense Ministry in Baghdad, one month ago, dismantling an Al-Qaeda cell in Iraq that was planning to launch attacks in Iraq and “abroad,” as in Syria, using chemical weapons.
According to Iraqi national security advisor Faleh al-Fayyadh, Jabhat al-Nusra (al-Qaeda in Syria) would have free access to these chemicals.
A Turkish fighter of the jihadist group Al-Nusra Front, bearing the flag of Al-Qaeda on his jacket (C-back), holds position with fellow comrades on April 4, 2013 in the Syrian village of Aziza, on the southern outskirts of Aleppo. (AFP Photo)

So here we have all the elements of a sophisticated false flag operation. Jabhat al-Nusra jihadis, mostly mercenaries, connected to al-Qaeda in Iraq, but with no connection with Syrian civilians, including women and children, use an area formerly occupied by the Syrian army to launch a chemical attack – perhaps using chlorine – under the cover of a Syrian offensive (admitted by the government). The offensive was codenamed “Operation City Shield.” Damascus had solid intel about scores of“rebels” trained by the CIA and the Saudis in Jordan converging to the area and planning a massive attack on the capital.
Then there is Saudi intel tsar Bandar bin Sultan, aka Bandar Bush’s threat to President Putin in their notorious four-hour meeting earlier this month: The military solution is the only one left for Syria. Bandar, a master of the dark arts, is in charge of “winning” Syria to the House of Saud by all means available, chemical or otherwise.

Any serious UN chemical weapons inspector would be following this lead as we speak. They might not – because of US political pressure (as in “It’s too late”). They might not because Washington wants the inspections over barely after they started – as in a lightning quick remix, once again, of Iraq 2003; fixing the facts around the policy.

Deconstructing Obama’s game

So we have to come back to the policy – as in “we bomb because we want to.” What exactly is Obama’s game?

Tel Aviv's Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper, as I reported earlier, badly wants Washington to attack Syria’s chemical weapons sites – regardless of possible, horrible, “collateral damage”, not to mention the possibility of al-Qaeda-linked jihadi outfits taking control of some of them.

Israel’s agenda is Syria bleeding in total chaos for the foreseeable future. Which is not the same as the House of Saud’s agenda: regime change. Which is not the same as the Obama administration’s agenda. At face value, it’s regime change, but Plan B calls for “leveling the playing field,” and that melts into the Israeli agenda.
As for President Obama, establishing a hazy “red line” with no context, just to appease clueless but influential neo-cons, not to mention the liberal hawks/humanitarian interventionists that surround him, and without regard for the consequences; this has to be construed as criminal irresponsibility.
Granted, Obama’s IQ in theory would equip him to know that yet another war of choice in the Middle East is the last thing he needs. At the same time, when we look at his record, we know he doesn’t have the balls to confront the awesome War Party Hydra – also featuring the mini-coalition of the willing, ranging from nostalgic opportunists such as Britain and France to cold-blooded actors pursuing their specific agendas, like Israel and the House of Saud.

And all this after Obama announced he would weaponize the “rebels” – in fact that’s been going on for ages, now fully supervised by Bandar Bush. The infinitely fractious rebel gangs have fractioned even further into sub-gangs of looters and assassins, with the more organized jihadis promising that after the Ghouta attack, they will kill any Alawite in sight.
A picture downloaded from the US air force website shows F-16 Fighting Falcons from the 35th and 80th Fighter Squadrons (AFP Photo/US AIR FORCE)

Obama knows these are bit players; the only factor that can deliver another one of his red lines –“Assad must go” – is a US military attack. Crucially, Assad also knows it; that’s why the notion that Assad would sanction a chemical weapons attack is beyond ludicrous.

So if we take the Obama administration at their word – at our own peril – they couldn’t care less about who deployed chemical weapons. Yet at the same time they don’t want regime change. They want a bombing to fulfill a “moral obligation,” and to boost Washington’s horrendously shattered “credibility.”American exceptionalists are even carping on “purity of intent” – as if purity was inherent to cold-blooded, hardcore geopolitical power play.

Both US and Israel assume they have perfect intel – as in knowing exactly where all of Syria’s chemical weapons are stored. Yet if anything could go wrong, it will. We all thought that the “war on terror”could not be topped as a meaningless concept. Wrong: meet the “war on chemical weapons.”

Amid all the hysteria, we’re not even talking about a counterpunch from Damascus itself, Hezbollah, Iran or, crucially, Russia. Moscow and Tehran are playing the chessboard like ninjas – as they clearly see the possibility of Washington being bogged down in a net of its own. All it takes would be a single Onyx SS-N-25, also known as Super-Sunburn SS-22, the fastest hypersonic anti-shipping missile in the world – which is part of Syria’s arsenal – to sink a US warship. Then what? Shock and Awe all over again?
So if we take the White House at its word, this “limited” kinetic whatever will end in a couple of days. Or it could spiral into something more hellish than Iraq 2003. And then, the clincher; only a few days before the 12th anniversary of 9/11, Nobel Peace Prize winner Obama is fighting side by side with… al-Qaeda. Why? Because, together, they can.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.


http://rt.com/op-edge/war-chemical-w...ama-syria-120/

Russia Chemical Attack Probe Shows "Weapons Similar To Ones Made By Rebels"

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/04/2013 12:48 -0400

While John Kerry remains adamant that it is "undeniable" that the Assad regime was behind the chemical weapon attacks in Syria, the results of Russia's probe suggest the truth is anything but undeniable...

• *RUSSIA SAYS SHELL USED IN ATTACK WASN'T STANDARD SYRIA ORDNANCE
• *RUSSIA SAYS SHELL USED IN CHEMICAL ATTACK WAS MAKESHIFT DEVICE
• *RUSSIA SAYS GAS USED IN SYRIA WASN'T INDUSTRIALLY PRODUCED

And perhaps most critically, as Reuters reports, the foreign minstry statement asserts that Russian expert findings show the weapon used in the Syrian chemical attack was similar to the ones made by a rebel group.


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-0...es-made-rebels