It does seem that there has been a momentary delay in the US launching its insanely stupid war against the innocent nation of Syria…. With the recent findings that absolutely prove that Assad did not gas his own people, and with the Syrians themselves allowing their own chemical weapons stockpiles to be turned over to international control, there is now definitely a backing off by the US, at least for the time being, in their rush to launch its missile attack on that peaceful nation…
With rising anger in the American people towards their own criminal federal government, there have been new questions about the so called “intelligence reports” that the Obama/Soetoro/Davis administration has been using to somehow justify their need to destroy Syria….And now, according to this new article from the Russia Today online news service, at www.rt.com, there is startling revelations that the President has been “misled” on Syria, due to the US “CIA” fabricating evidence to lure the United States into a war against Syria!
I have this shocking report from RT right here for everyone to read for themselves.. And I do I have my own thoughts and comments to follow:
‘CIA fabricated evidence to lure US into war with Syria’
Published time: September 09, 2013 17:17
Reuters / Larry Downing
The intelligence gathered against Syria’s Assad was manufactured by elements within the spy community in order to mislead the US President to take punitive action, Ray McGovern, a veteran CIA analyst, told RT.
McGovern was among the signatories to the letter from veteran intelligence professionals to Obama, warning the US president that Assad is not responsible for the chemical attack, and that “CIA Director John Brennan is perpetrating a pre-Iraq-War-type fraud on members of Congress, the media, [and] the public.”
RT:You were one of the signatories to that letter to the US President. Do you think it will influence Obama?
Ray McGovern: Well, the problem of course is getting into what they call the mainstream media. The media is drumbeating for the war just as before Iraq. And they don’t want to hear that the evidence is very very flimsy. They don’t want to hear that people within the CIA – senior people, with great access to this information – assure us, the veterans, that there’s no conclusive evidence that Assad ordered those chemical incidents on August 21. They don’t want to hear that. They want to process beyond that and just deal with what we must do. Now, you don’t assume those things – you need proof of them.
A U.N. chemical weapons expert, wearing a gas mask, holds a plastic bag containing samples from one of the sites of an alleged chemical weapons attack in the Ain Tarma neighbourhood of Damascus August 29, 2013 (Reuters / Mohamed Abdullah)
RT:In the letter, you cite evidence that the Syrian opposition and its allies carried out a chemical weapons provocation. Why do you think this has been ignored completely by Obama and Kerry? RM: The reason that they don’t adduce the evidence is because it wouldn’t stand up not only in the court of law, it wouldn’t bear close scrutiny. We’ve been down this road before. It happened before in Iraq. What the president needs to do is to release the intercepted message, on which most of this depends. And once he’s done that, we could see what he’s got. There’s precedent for this – Ronald Reagan in 1986, when the Libyans bombed a discotheque in Berlin, killing two US servicemen and wounding hundreds. He hit [Muammar] Gaddafi’s palace, killing his little daughter, 15 months old, and almost killing his son three years old. Now, the world said: ‘You can’t do that! What’s your evidence that the Libyans did that?’ And Reagan came to us and said: ‘We have to release that intercepted message. And we said; ‘No! No! No! You can’t do that because you’ll blow our source.’ And he said: ‘Do it anyway.’ That was released and the world calmed down. I don’t defend killing little children, but at least Reagan gained some credibility from the fact that he saw that the interests of the state, of the US, superseded protecting sources and methods. That’s what Obama has to do now. We’re very suspicious that if he’s unwilling to do that, since he sends his Chief of Staff before the camera and says: ‘Well, it wouldn’t stand up in a court of law, but, hey, intelligence is intelligence – you got to trust this. But we’re not going to trust him this time, especially when the head of the intelligence establishment is a self-admitted perjurer’.
RT:Why has it been so hard for Washington to sell to the world its case for intervention? Very few of their key allies explicitly support a military strike right now. RM: I have to say that if you look at the ‘Cui Bono’ – the classic question: ‘who does this profit?’ The only state, the only country that it profits is Israel. As long as, there’s an unending… looks like it’s going to be a 30-year war in Syria, a Shia against Sunni contest, not only in Syria, but in the whole Middle East area, now that Israel feels that the Sunni and the Shia aren’t going to be turning their swords and their guns on Israel. It’s that simple. Now, [US Secretary of State] John Kerry has amply demonstrated that he’s under the influence of [Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin] Netanyahu. He made believe he was talking about Palestine in the last couple of months, but what he was really talking about was Syria and that shows in his behavior and even his demeanor. So, what we have here is a situation where Israel and the tough guys – and tough gals now – in the White House, advising Obama, say, ‘you’ve got to do something’, and the only country that would profit from this is the state of Israel.
U.S. President Barack Obama (Reuters / Kevin Lamarque)
RT:We heard John Kerry backtrack a little yesterday, by saying that Obama hasn’t made a decision yet on Syria. The US President was much more certain about an attack on Syria a week ago. Why the softening of their stance? RM: You know what happened a week ago. Last Friday, Kerry went before the cameras and said: ‘We got to do this. And here’s not the intelligence assessment, mind you – but the government’s assessment.’ Meaning the White House had a chance to massage it, edit it. It didn’t hold up to scrutiny. Now, what happened? Apparently the military got to the president, and I see some evidence of this. Next thing we know the president changes his mind on Saturday afternoon, and the only thing that really intervened was that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey, telling the president:“Look. It’s going to be really hard to explain why we have to do it now. We could do it tomorrow, or next week, or next month. We don’t really have to do it now.”And the president said that in justifying this delay. What’s more evidence? Lindsey Graham and John McCain the next day just took off after the Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman in a very personal and vindictive way. Because they know the military leaders went to the president saying, “Look, we know you’re being told this is going to be easy and limited and all that – but these guys and gals don’t know a thing about war. We do. And we know that it’s not going to be so easy, so if you’re going to do this, you’d better gain wide support, because, otherwise, your presidency is over.” RT:And who do you think the Congressional vote is going to play out? RM: You know… I’m not a domestic political analyst. So, my opinion isn’t much better than anyone else’s. In Washington, within the beltway and in all the TV shows, it’s always“we’ve got to do something! We must protect the President!” The odd thing is that this time the Democrats have drunk the Kool Aid [an American expression in business and politics, meaning to follow blindly]. This time we have to protect the President, he’s gone out on a limb here. He’s drunk the Kool Aid, and I talked to a Congressman last night for five minutes… and it was every clear that he pledged the House leader that he would vote according to what the President says, because“we have to protect the President”. Are you going to say the President is lying? We don’t have to say [that]. What you do need to say, according to our information, is that the President is being given cooked-up intelligence because John Brennan, the head of the CIA, and James Clapper, the confessed perjurer, have thought it in their best interests to cater to the wishes of the White House, which have been very clear: ‘this time, we want to strike Syria.’ It’s a terrible situation, it’s a political sort of thing now, and we’ll have to see how it plays out. I have more hope than this time last week that it will be turned down. And then I don’t think the President would violate the constitution and the UN Charter both by starting a war.
NTS Notes: My friend, Noor, over at Snippits and Snappits, has an article up that contains the memorandum sent by Intelligence officials telling the US President that his information about Syria has been wrong.. The link to Noor’s article is here, and I do recommend that everyone take a look at its context:
I for one, am absolutely not buying any of this…. This to me has all the earmarks of the criminal Israeli Mossad written all over it… People must remember that all of the original “intelligence” that showed that Assad had gassed his own people came from the Mossad itself…… I therefore suspect that the Mossad operatives working in conjunction with the CIA are fully responsible and guilty of continuing with this falsified data about Syria to get the war going for the benefit of Israel! Always remember the motto of the criminal and insane Mossad: “By Way Of DECEPTION, Thou Shalt Do War!”.… These monsters indeed almost had their blood thirsty war by their criminal deception….
The other point about this is I look at this as a way of bailing out Obama/Soetoro/Davis himself, and his criminality, in almost leading the United States into a war that could have easily escalated into World War III. It does appear that somebody in the so called “intelligence” community has been told to take the fall so that Barry can save his own neck!
Either way, this finding may be the way out for the US, and their excuse to the American people as to why they have had to “call off” this insane war on Syria….. It will be an interesting next few days indeed…
September 10, 2013 (Tony Cartalucci) – After a stunning geopolitical move by Russia and Syria involving the surrendering of Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal, the special interests seeking war have been forced to adjust their rhetoric and timetable around what is now a quickly dissolving casus belli.
The surrendering of Syria’s chemical weapons would not only critically set back rhetorical arguments being made to justify war with the nation, but would also preempt future false flag operations in the works. Perhaps fearing war was not possible, just such a false flag appears to have been exposed by Russia’s English language news service, RT. RT claims sources have discovered a plot by terrorists to carry out a chemical weapons attack on Israel from government controlled areas within Syria for the sole purpose of framing the Syrian government and provoking an Israeli retaliation.
One can only imagine the torrent of propaganda that would burst forth from the Western media invoking “gassed Jews” and the 21st Century “Hitler” Bashar al-Assad – right around the anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks.
While Israel is portrayed as wanting to “co-exist” with the current Syrian government, it should be remembered that such public statements are meant to undermine and taintSyria’s credibility amongst the very extremist elements Israel, the United States and Saudi Arabia have armed, funded, and covertly directed for decades.