Why Were The Tapes Destroyed?

by PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

first posted on February 2, 2008

[Editor’s note – This editorial by former Assistant Treasury Secretary Paul Craig Roberts is even more relevant now than when it was first written over 5 years ago.  The illegal “War on Terror” has expanded to include the power to indefinitely detain and even assassinate US citizens without due process.  The US military remains deployed in Afghanistan, thousands of US military contractors remain in Iraq and the Obama administration is seeking to attack Syria as it arms and supports elements of al Qaeda in Syria.  All of these illegal actions flow from a post 911 worldview allegedly designed to combat terrorism.]

stj911.com

Many Americans are content with the 9/11 Commission Report, but the two chairmen of the commission, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton are not. Neither was commission member Max Cleland, a US Senator who resigned from the 9/11 Commission, telling the Boston Globe (November 13, 2003): “This investigation is now compromised.” Even former FBI director Louis Freeh wrote in the Wall Street Journal (November 17, 2005) that there are inaccuracies in the commission’s report and “questions that need answers.”

Both Kean and Hamilton have twice stated publicly, once in their 2006 book, ‘Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission,’ and again in (January 2, 2008), the New York Times, that there are inaccuracies in their report and unanswered — or mis-answered — questions.

On the second day of this new year, Kean and Hamilton accused the CIA of obstructing their investigation: “What we do know is that government officials decided not to inform a lawfully constituted body, created by Congress and the President, to investigate one of the greatest tragedies to confront this country. We call that obstruction.”

In their book, Kean and Hamilton wrote that they were unable to obtain “access to star witnesses in custody who were the only possible source for inside information about the 9/11 plot.”

The only information the commission was permitted to have about what was learned from interrogations of alleged plot ringleaders, such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, came from “third hand” sources. The commission was not permitted to question the alleged plotters in custody or even to meet with those who interrogated the alleged plotters. Consequently, write Kean and Hamilton, “We had no way of evaluating the credibility of detainee information” that was fed to them by third party hands. “How could we tell if someone such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was telling us the truth?”

The fact that video tapes of the interrogations existed was kept secret from the 9/11 Commission.

The video tapes have since been destroyed. The destruction of the videos has become an issue because of White House involvement in the decision to destroy the tapes and because the videos are believed to have been destroyed because they reveal methods of torture that the Bush administration denies using.

According to President Bush, the US does not practice torture even though he and his Department of Justice (sic) assert the right to torture.

Is the torture issue a red herring? The 9/11 Commission was not tasked with investigating interrogation methods or detainee treatment. The commission was tasked with investigating al Qaeda’s participation in the 9/11 attack and determining the perpetrators of the terrorist event. There was no reason to withhold from the commission video evidence of confessions implicating al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.

Was the video evidence withheld from the 9/11 Commission because the alleged participants in the plot did not confess, did not implicate al Qaeda, and did not implicate bin Laden? Does anyone seriously believe that evidence of confession would not have been revealed — evidence that could have foreclosed what has become a massive industry of 9/11 truth seekers involving large numbers of highly credible persons?

There is no reason for the Bush administration to fear the torture issue. The Justice Department’s memos have legalized the practice, and Congress has passed legislation, signed by President Bush, giving retroactive protection to US interrogators who tortured detainees. The Military Commissions Act, passed in September 2006 and signed by Bush in October 2006, strips detainees of protections provided by the Geneva Conventions: “No alien unlawful enemy combatant subject to trial by military commission under this chapter may invoke the Geneva Conventions as a source of rights.” Other provisions of the act strip detainees of speedy trials and of protection against torture and self-incrimination. The law has a provision that retroactively protects torturers against prosecution for war crimes.

Did the Bush administration cleverly take advantage of the torture claims in order to spin the destruction of the CIA video tapes as a “torture story.” It is much more likely that the tapes were destroyed because they reveal the absence of confession to the plot. As Kean and Hamilton ask, without evidence how do we know the truth? All we have is the word of the administration that told us Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and that, while sitting on a NIE report [National Intelligence Estimate on Iran] that concluded that Iran had terminated its weapons program in 2003, told us that Iran had an ongoing nuclear weapons program and was close to having a nuclear weapon.

What about the bin Laden video tape in which he takes credit for the 9/11 attack? Every indication is that the tape is a fake. The bin Laden in the November 9, 2001, “confession video” looks nothing like the bin Laden in the last confirmed video of December, 2001.

Recently, the Italian newspaper, Corriere Della Sera, reported that the former president of Italy, Francesco Cossiga, said that Italian intelligence had concluded that the bin Laden confession video was a fake.

William Arkin in the online Washington Post, February 1, 1999, described a voice-morphing technology developed at the government’s Los Alamos laboratory. Arkin reported that digital morphing, including appearance, “has come of age, available for use in psychological operations.”

Investigative reporter Kristina Borjesson reminds us that “six days after 9/11, CNN reported that bin Laden had sent a statement to Al Jazeera denying that he had been involved.” She also reminds us that the FBI says it has no hard evidence that bin Laden was responsible for 9/11. The FBI wants Osama for the 1998 bombings of US embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, not for 9/11. Borjesson also reports that in the “confession video” bin Laden is revealed writing with his right hand, but is known to be left-handed.

If the bin Laden “confession video” is indeed a fake, as it appears to be, why run the risk of creating such a video if the CIA has on video tape the confessions of the alleged al Qaeda participants in the 9/11 plot? Why destroy such evidence, especially when torture has been given a green light by the DOJ and US Congress?

Dr. Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He is a former university professor and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal.

Rethink 911 with Ben Swann

“… Over the last 12 years, we have watched just about every single constitutional liberty afforded to Americans taken away as a result of our “war on terror”.  We have watched our government take away our right to speech, due process, freedom from search and seizure, the right to privacy of your person or papers, all taken away in the name of security.  We can argue about whether that quest for security has made us more secure but what is beyond argument is that we are certainly less free. Despite all the rights that have been taken away, at least one right that still remains… the right to question who took those rights, how and why.”

benswann.com

US military Attacked Iraqi Civilians with White Phosphorus in 2004

policymic.com

10, chemical, weapons, attacks, washington, doesnt, want, you, to, talk, about,

Via: AP

In 2004, journalists embedded with the U.S. military in Iraq began reporting the use of white phosphorus in Fallujah against Iraqi insurgents. First the military lied and said that it was only using white phosphorus to create smokescreens or illuminate targets. Then it admitted to using the volatile chemical as an incendiary weapon. At the time, Italian television broadcaster RAI aired a documentary entitled, “Fallujah, The Hidden Massacre,” including grim video footage and photographs, as well as eyewitness interviews with Fallujah residents and U.S. soldiers revealing how the U.S. government indiscriminately rained white chemical fire down on the Iraqi city and melted women and children to death.

US: There is no Evidence Syrian Government Carried Out Attacks

September 9, 2013 (Tony Cartalucci) – US White House Chief of Staff Dennis McDonough made the unbelievable admission this week that Western interests have concluded Syria carried out an alleged chemical attack in eastern Damascus based on “common sense” rather than “irrefutable evidence.” Slate’s “White House: “Common-Sense Test” And Not “Irrefutable” Evidence Hold Assad Responsible,” states [emphasis added]: 

White House Chief of Staff Dennis McDonough went on the Sunday talk shows to drum up support for what he called a “targeted, limited effort” that will change “the momentum on the battle field” in Syria. Yet he also acknowledged on CNN that the evidence that ties Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to the Aug. 21 attack outside Damascus that allegedly killed 1,429 people has more to do with a “common-sense test” rather than “irrefutable, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence.”

And while McDonogh, and his collaborators both in Washington and abroad, claim their planned assault on Syria is not a repeat of Iraq in terms of scale, it is clear that in terms of deception it is.

Slate would continue by stating [emphasis added]:

Now do we have a picture or do we have irrefutable beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence? This is not a court of law and intelligence does not work that way.” Meanwhile, McDonough also emphasized on NBC that “nobody is rebutting the intelligence; nobody doubts the intelligence.”

The answer highlights how the White House still has not shown the public a concrete piece of intelligence that directly connect Assad’s regime to the alleged chemical weapons attack, as the Associated Press points out in a detailed story.

The AP story Slate referred to is titled, “DOUBTS LINGER OVER SYRIA GAS ATTACK RESPONSIBILITY,” and states: 

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.

In its absence, Damascus and its ally Russia have aggressively pushed another scenario: that rebels carried out the Aug. 21 chemical attack. Neither has produced evidence for that case, either. That’s left more questions than answers as the U.S. threatens a possible military strike.

While evidence of who actually carried out the attack remains elusive, what is clear is that the Western interests have made an intentionally baseless claim, echoing the verified lies told during the lead up to the military invasion and decade-long occupation of Iraq, and similar fabrications used to justify the 2011 assault on Libya. 

Image: From Independent’s “Man whose WMD lies led to 100,000 deaths confesses all: Defector tells how US officials ‘sexed up’ his fictions to make the case for 2003 invasion.” In retrospect, the corporate-media has no problem admitting the insidious lies that were told to justify the invasion and occupation of Iraq – the lead up to the war was another story. A verbatim repeat of these admitted lies are being directed at Syria amidst the West’s failure to overthrow the government with terrorist proxies. 

….


 What is also clear is the documented conspiracy to overthrow the Syrian government and destabilize neighboring Iran and Lebanon with a sectarian bloodbath by directly funding, arming, and otherwise providing material support for sectarian extremist groups aligned with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and who hold allegiance to Al Qaeda. This conspiracy began under the Bush administration as early as 2007 and has continued onward throughout the Obama administration.


 Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his 2007 New Yorker article, “The Redirection,” stated (emphasis added): 

“To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.”

More recently, it would be revealed that the United States, the United Kingdom, and its regional axis including Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar have sent millions of dollars and thousands of tons of weaponry to a predominantly Al Qaeda led terrorist force operating inside and along Syria’s borders.

For instance, in the Telegraph’s article titled, “US and Europe in ‘major airlift of arms to Syrian rebels through Zagreb’,” it is reported: 

It claimed 3,000 tons of weapons dating back to the former Yugoslavia have been sent in 75 planeloads from Zagreb airport to the rebels, largely via Jordan since November.

The story confirmed the origins of ex-Yugoslav weapons seen in growing numbers in rebel hands in online videos, as described last month by The Daily Telegraph and other newspapers, but suggests far bigger quantities than previously suspected.

The shipments were allegedly paid for by Saudi Arabia at the bidding of the United States, with assistance on supplying the weapons organised through Turkey and Jordan, Syria’s neighbours. But the report added that as well as from Croatia, weapons came “from several other European countries including Britain”, without specifying if they were British-supplied or British-procured arms.

British military advisers however are known to be operating in countries bordering Syria alongside French and Americans, offering training to rebel leaders and former Syrian army officers. The Americans are also believed to be providing training on securing chemical weapons sites inside Syria.

“Common sense” would then dictate that with such substantial aid flowing to terrorists operating within Syria, it would be inconceivable for sectarian extremists to overrun Western-backed “moderate fighters” unless of course the summation of Western support was in fact flowing directly and purposefully into the hands of sectarian extremists from the beginning.

These are the same extremists drawn from Al Qaeda, the United States has warned for well over a decade might obtain chemical weapons and use them against a civilian population to achieve their goals. This points the finger directly toward Western-backed terrorists regarding the recent alleged chemical attack in Damascus, not the Syrian government. The attack would enable the United States and its military axis to take a more active and direct role in supporting these terrorist forces who have this past year suffered tremendous irreversible loses against a prevailing Syrian Arab Army.

“Common sense” points the finger in the opposite direction White House Chief of Staff Dennis McDonough has suggested. Without any actual evidence coming from a nation who has waged war habitually on fabricated justification, and who is clearly involved in a long-standing conspiracy to overthrow the Syrian government, and who is responsible for the humanitarian catastrophe it feigns interest in now ending, the world has understandably and universally opposed this latest act of unprovoked military aggression. 

Unfortunately, the decision on whether or not the US goes ahead anyway with another act of unprovoked war and 21st century conquest, does not hinge on real common sense or the will of the American people who categorically oppose any military operation, but rather on the compromised, corporate-financier purchased US Congress. In Congress, astoundingly, the lack of evidence is not at the center of debate, but rather what the consequences of America’s proposed military assault might be, and whether the assault should be, in fact, expanded.

————————————————————-

4 Questions for those who support a strike against Syria

Pat Buchanan: Chemical attack reeks of a false flag operation

 

 

 

 

Do not support “Conservative” Organizations

Devvy Kidd
September 8, 2013

NewsWithViews.com

Someone sent me an email the other day:

“Jim DeMint Town Hall Meeting (Very Inspirational): If you were unable to attend the Jim DeMint Town Hall, I have attached the video for your viewing. Let’s ban together and start putting the pressure on our legislators (either inside their offices or outside their offices). We can do this, but we need everyone’s help.”

Jim DeMint [R] was a U.S. senator from the State of South Carolina. In all the years he was in the House and Senate never once did he introduce a bill to kill the cancers destroying this republic. DeMint was a Band Aid pusher[1], [2].  As a “conservative” DeMint was popular because of his position on issues like abortion and the Second Amendment. He also voted consistently to kill American jobs:

Voted YES on promoting free trade with Peru. (Dec 2007)
Voted YES on free trade agreement with Oman. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade. (Jul 2005)
Voted YES on implementing US-Australia Free Trade Agreement. (Jul 2004)
Voted YES on implementing US-Singapore free trade agreement. (Jul 2003)
Voted YES on implementing free trade agreement with Chile. (Jul 2003)
Voted NO on withdrawing from the WTO. (Jun 2000)

Keep good paying jobs that used to belong to Americans going in communist China, India and other countries while Americans stand in unemployment lines.

DeMint, like the rest of the “conservatives” in Congress, ignored the clauses in Art. 1, Sec. 8 in the U.S. Constitution on a daily basis. In 2010, he voted to “Devolve education to states” without abolishing the Department. The Federal Department of Education now correctly labeled the Dumbing Down America’s Children Institution is 100% unconstitutional.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan promised that, if elected, he would get that unconstitutional department abolished. That promise was abandoned after his election. While campaigning as the power broker elites designated loser for the presidency, Bob Dole said on Sept. 9, 1996, while in Georgia, “We’re going to cut out the Department of Education.” At that time, the GOP presidential platform read, in part:

Our formula is as simple as it is sweeping: The federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved in school curricula or to control jobs in the workplace. That is why we will abolish the Department of Education, end federal meddling in our schools, and promote family choice at all levels of learning.

We therefore call for prompt repeal of the Goals 2000 program and the School-To-Work Act of 1994, which put new federal controls, as well as unfunded mandates, on the States. We further urge that federal attempts to impose outcome- or performance-based education on local schools be ended.

Of course, just the opposite has taken place and, in fact, the goals for creating the “New Communist Man” was given a huge boost with President Bush’s deceptive “No Child Left Behind” program. As for the repeal of the School-To-Work Act of 1994, Council of Foreign Relations kingpin Henry Hyde explained it this way:

“When carried to its logical extreme, it chooses careers for every American worker. Children’s careers will be chosen for them by Workforce Development Boards and federal agencies at the earliest possible age …Statewide Workforce Development Boards have formed to study which labor skills are needed in each state to determine “human resources” training requirements. Of course, this will decide also where these human resources will reside.”

Chilling to say the least – and it gets worse when one reads Bush’s Executive Order, signed June 20, 2001, titled “21st Century Workforce Initiative.” The blueprint for forced labor is now being implemented quietly while parents and politicians scream, “More money for education.” Essentially they are asking Americans to pay for the rope to hang their own children.

DeMint consistently voted to kill the Bill of Rights:

Voted YES on extending the PATRIOT Act’s roving wiretaps. (Feb 2011)
Voted YES on reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act. (Mar 2006)
Voted YES on extending the PATRIOT Act’s wiretap provision. (Dec 2005)
Voted NO on restricting business with entities linked to terrorism. (Jul 2005)

He was also another war monger bankrupting we the people to pay for the grotesque, unconstitutional invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan:

Voted YES on emergency $78B for war in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Apr 2003)
Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq by March 2008. (Mar 2007)
Voted NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on investigating contract awards in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Nov 2005)
Voted NO on requiring on-budget funding for Iraq, not emergency funding. (Apr 2005)
Voted YES on approving removal of Saddam & valiant service of US troops. (Mar 2004)
Voted YES on authorizing military force in Iraq. (Oct 2002)

How many times did he vote for foreign aid? The continuing rape of we the people in complete violation of the U.S. Constitution and his oath of office.

DeMint knows nothing about the “income tax”, but he supported another dangerous Band Aid that would accomplish nothing except continue feeding the head of the beast: the unconstitutional Federal Reserve Banking Act of 1913. In 2003, Mr. Conservative voted to abolish the IRS and replace the income tax with national sales tax.

Back in 2010, 111 Republican incumbents and candidates wanted to abolish the unconstitutional Federal Depart of Propaganda [Education]. Some of those incumbents are no longer there. What about the rest of them? What have they done to abolish that massive failure once they were re-elected? Nothing, but it sounded good to conservative voters. You can see the list on this “progressive” web site which obviously supports anything unconstitutional and destructive to America’s moral compass. Of course, DeMint’s name isn’t on that list to abolish that monstrous waste of money ($66 BILLION BORROWED dollars a year ) because the whole time DeMint served in Congress, he consistently voted to conserve the rot and corruption in Washington, DC, by mouthing the worn out chant, “smaller government”.

Currently, Jim DeMint is president of the Heritage Foundation. If you haven’t read Charlotte Iserbyt’s July 2012 column, Heritage Foundation, NAFTA, School Choice and the Destruction of Traditional Education, I highly recommend you do because it is the truth everyone should know. The Heritage Foundation is also pushing the poison known as “The New Flat Tax“[3], [4], [5], which should tell you all you need to know about that organization once you know the truth about the federal income tax and non-ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment.[6]The Heritage Foundation is nothing but another “conservative” group that never touches the solution, just more Band Aids that benefit the banking cartels and destructive “free” trade treaties which have destroyed our most important job sectors.

Now, why would I be inspired by a speech from Jim DeMint?

There is a world of difference between a conservative and a constitutionalist. It’s not about a political party and their platform, it’s about our founding documents that created the greatest form of government (not a democracy) the world has ever known. It’s about an incumbent in the U.S. Congress who, despite shrieking from members of the Democratic/Communist Party USA or even the Republicrats, will stand firm in support of the Constitution. That means you adhere to your oath of office and are a strict constitutionalist. Not like DeMint who picked and chose which clauses in Art.1, Sec. 8, he liked; the rest he simply ignored.

There are more “conservative” organizations out there than you can count, all wanting your money to continue pushing Band Aids – which is why they don’t get my money. Let me give you another example: Dick Armey, former House member (became Majority “Leader”) who joined FreedomWorks. Armey is a big hero with conservatives because he “fought for lower taxes” by pushing for the poison known as a flat tax. He was big on social security reform instead of telling the American people the truth about that Ponzi scheme; no one is forced to apply for a SSN, but you will be taxed separately to keep that system barely floating. Indentured servitude. Additionally, Armey was anti-American jobs – another damn “free” trade advocate – as well fairly open on immigration. Now he makes his bread on the lecture circuit.

FreedomWorks supports “a low, flat, fair tax.” Under spending and budget they support a worthless balanced budget amendment. “FreedomWorks strongly advocates for leaving citizens free to use anything they want as money.” Under Budgets and Spending, “The budgetary process must be reformed to improve transparency and identify wasteful and redundant programs. In addition, institutional changes must be adopted to constrain spending by politicians.” No where did I see a top priority must be abolishing the unconstitutional “Federal” Reserve, which is neither Federal nor does it have any reserves. That is the only way to stop the obscene spending by the Outlaw Congress. Just more of the same: “less taxes, smaller government.”

The only groups and organizations I support are the ones who do understand the cancers, how they got started and real solutions by adhering to the U.S. Constitution. The Democratic Party is nothing more than a subset of the Communist Party USA/International. The Republican Party is only “conservative” on certain issues and not even then as there are “moderate” Republicans who support the killing of unborn babies, “rights” of sexual deviants and more spending. More and more Americans are coming to understand those two parties are nothing but two wings on the same bird of prey.

We are supposed to be a self-governing people. That can’t happen if folks give their blind loyalty to politicians or “conservative” groups that only push tweaks (flat or fair tax) instead of exposing the lies and demanding it stop. Once again, I strongly urge people watch The Purse and the Sword, a 4 DVD set. Eight hours that gives America constitutional solutions instead of more Band Aids. Every state legislator in our state houses and adults in this country need to watch this incredible presentation. If money is a bit tight, share the cost with friends. Have your group purchase a copy, get together and watch it in, say, two hour increments.

If you can, get a second copy to snail mail or deliver in person to the district office of your state rep or senator. Have your group sign a letter to your state legislator with the DVD asking him/her for a commitment to watch the entire presentation because you all will be following up. Follow up is critical. Present a list of questions. That will tell you whether or not your state rep bothered to watch the entire presentation. 2014 is an election year. They’re all quite aware of how angry thinking Americans are all across this country.

“This seminar featuring Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr. is the single greatest presentation regarding the Constitutional remedies and powers available to both the people and the national government to deal with our economy and homeland security challenges. Dr. Vieira presents his “visual Constitution” to make plainly clear what should and must be done for our nation to deal with these present and ever-increasing crisis. Be sure to view our online video clips. Visit our Purse & Sword page by clicking here and scroll down to see the latest clips from this one of a kind DVD set.”

Related Article:

1- Conservative Treason: Selling Out Your Children

(What is the Aid Aid Brigade? See columns below.)

Footnotes:

1. Re-electing the Band Aid Brigade
2. Electing New Band Aid Pushers
3. Fair tax is a trap
4. The Right Argument on Taxes
5. Why an Income Tax is Not Necessary to Fund the U.S. Government
6. The Memorandum by the late, great, Tommy Cryer – Proof the income tax does not apply to domestic Americans.

Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2 million copies sold. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country. She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn’t left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party.

Devvy’s regularly posted new columns are on her site at: www.devvy.com. You can also sign up for her free email alerts.

E-mail is: devvyk@npn.net

Defeated NATO Dangerously Desperate in Syria

landdestroyer.blogspot.com

Did the West Gas Thousands to Rescue Failed Syrian War?

August 25, 2013 – (Tony Cartalucci) As far back as 2007, it was a documented fact that the West, including the United States and its allies Saudi Arabia and Israel, conspired to use terrorists drawn from the ranks of the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda in an attempt to overthrow the governments of Iran and Syria.

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his 2007 New Yorker article, “The Redirection,” stated (emphasis added):

“To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.”

Starting in 2011, this conspiracy was catapulted into all out war – albeit behind the tenuous smokescreen of “pro-democracy activists” and the so-called “Free Syrian Army” fighting for “freedom” within and along Syria’s borders.

Not only has this conspiracy been exposed, but it has categorically failed. The Syrian government has routed even the most dug-in terrorist proxies, making irreversible gains against a clearly depleted enemy. While the US continuously threatens to “arm the opposition,” it is a fact that any and all weapons, cash, and support the US had, it has already sent over the last 3 years. This includes untold millions in cash, and literally thousands of tons of weaponry airlifted by the US and UK. The US and its regional allies have also scoured the global extremist networks they have built up over decades for every last fighter they could possible find – all to no avail.

There is nothing left  except direct military intervention, which cannot be sold as helping an opposition now clearly exposed as being Al Qaeda. That means, the humanitarian intervention, “right to protect” (R2P) must be wiped clean of NATO’s lies and crimes in Libya, and prepared for Syria. Only what exactly could the West use to justify an intervention against the Syrian government that is worse than what it and its proxies have already done to tens of thousands of Syrian civilians?

With a victorious Syrian government mopping up NATO’s terrorist proxies and currently hosting UN chemical weapons inspectors in Damascus, the use of chemical weapons now would defy all logic – from a tactical level, to a strategic and political level. Chemical weapons, according to the US military’s own reviews of their extensive use in the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980’s, reveal the true nature of chemical warfare – a truth the Western media has all but avoided in their speculative and purposefully manipulative coverage of the alleged incident.

A document produced by the US Marine Corps, titled, “Lessons Learned: The Iran-Iraq War” under “Appendix B: Chemical Weapons,” provides a comprehensive look at the all-out chemical warfare that took place during the devastating 8 year Iranian-Iraqi conflict. Several engagements are studied in detail, revealing large amounts of chemical agents deployed mainly to create areas of denial, not mass casualties. In the end, it is determined that conventional weapons are by far more effective and more preferable.

The effectiveness and lethality of chemical weapons is summarized in the document as follows (emphasis added):

Chemical weapons require quite particular weather and geographic conditions for optimum effectiveness. Given the relative nonpersistence of all agents employed during this war, including mustard, there was only a brief window of employment opportunity both daily and seasonally, when the agents could be used. Even though the Iraqis employed mustard agent in the rainy season and also in the marshes, its effectiveness was significantly reduced under those conditions. As the Iraqis learned to their chagrin, mustard is not a good agent to employ in the mountains, unless you own the high ground and your enemy is in the valleys.

We are uncertain as to the relative effectiveness of nerve agents since those which were employed are by nature much less persistent than mustard. In order to gain killing concentrations of these agents, predawn attacks are best, conducted in areas where the morning breezes are likely to blow away from friendly positions.

Chemical weapons have a low kill ratio. Just as in WWl, during which the ratio of deaths to injured from chemicals was 2-3 percent, that figure appears to be borne out again in this war although reliable data on casualties are very difficult to obtain. We deem it remarkable that the death rate should hold at such a low level even with the introduction of nerve agents. If those rates are correct, as they well may be, this further reinforces the position that we must not think of chemical weapons as “a poor man’s nuclear weapon.” While such weapons have great psychological potential, they are not killers or destroyers on a scale with nuclear or biological weapons.

Therefore, had the Syrian government used chemical weapons and somehow was able to create the perfect circumstances to create mass casualties, they did so solely to produce an abhorrent civilian death toll and the perfect pretext for Western intervention, knowing full well such weapons would be otherwise useless in battling armed formations. Since Syria’s chemical weapons would most likely be under the lock and key of its most elite forces, as they are in Iran, revealed in a RAND Corporation document, that would mean that their use was approved by the highest ranking members of the Syrian government and military – this would be the same government and military that exhibited unlimited restraint against intentional and coordinated provocations carried out by NATO-member Turkey and their regional partner, Israel – restraint exhibited solely to avoid providing the West with the pretext for direct military intervention.

Why then would the Syrian government choose now, of all times, to give the West exactly what it was looking for, right as the window was closing on the West to accomplish its goals versus Syria and neighboring Iran?

The answer is, the Syrian government did not use chemical weapons in Damascus, or elsewhere. And while the strawman currently being knocked down by the Western media is whether the attacks were faked or real, the stark reality is that NATO and its terrorist proxies most likely did expose a large number of people to something, seeking mass casualties in a last ditch effort to salvage what is clearly the end of their “Arab Spring” blitzkrieg.

As previously reported, NATO and its proxies in Syria have both the means and the motivation to carry out chemical weapon attacks.This includes access to Libya’s stockpile of chemical weapons and a NATO-enabled pipeline feeding fighters, cash, and weapons from Libya into Syria via NATO-member Turkey.

Image: (via the Guardian) “Chemical containers in the Libyan desert. There are concerns unguarded weapons could fall into the hands of Islamist militants. Photograph: David Sperry/AP”


It was also confirmed that the US had been providing select terrorist units operating in Syria, training in the handling of chemical weapons. CNN had reported in December of 2012, in a report titled, “Sources: U.S. helping underwrite Syrian rebel training on securing chemical weapons,” that: 

The United States and some European allies are using defense contractors to train Syrian rebels on how to secure chemical weapons stockpiles in Syria, a senior U.S. official and several senior diplomats told CNN Sunday.

The training, which is taking place in Jordan and Turkey, involves how to monitor and secure stockpiles and handle weapons sites and materials, according to the sources. Some of the contractors are on the ground in Syria working with the rebels to monitor some of the sites, according to one of the officials.

NATO not only ensured that chemical weapons in Libya remained in the hands of a proxy regime now openly arming, aiding, and sending fighters to assist terrorists in Syria, but also appears to have ensured these terrorists possessed the know-how on handling and using these weapons.

While absolutely nothing adds up across the West’s corporate media networks, one story that does add up is the claim by Syrian troops that terrorist tunnels have been discovered containing chemical agents – as reported in Reuters’ article, “Syrian soldiers enter rebel tunnels, find chemical agents: state TV.”

What we are now witnessing is an attempt by the West’s corporate-financier establishment to push for direct intervention faster than the facts can come out over what exactly happened near Damascus. Just as was the case in Afghanistan, Iraq, and  Libya, the West hopes people can be made hysterical enough, long enough, to get a “foot in the door,” so the bombs can start dropping. Failing to do so at this juncture would spell the absolute end of the West’s current plans versus Syria and Iran – and so however tenuous and discredited this latest plot may seem, expect dangerous desperation from the West.

Now more than ever, Syria and its allies must be prepared to defend against provocations both militarily and diplomatically.