Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Washington Floats Chemical Weapons Charge as Pretext for Syria Buildup
12-04-2012, 10:36 PM,
#1
Washington Floats Chemical Weapons Charge as Pretext for Syria Buildup
Quote:Washington Floats Chemical Weapons Charge as Pretext for Syria Buildup
By Bill Van Auken
Global Research, December 04, 2012

"The Obama administration and the corporate media have cited unspecified “intelligence” about the movement of chemical weapons to issue new threats of direct intervention in Syria, where Washington and its allies have been backing so-called “rebels” in a bid to topple the regime of President Bashar al-Assad.

President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton both made public statements Monday alleging a danger of Syria using chemical weapons and threatening US retaliation.

Appearing before a military audience at the National Defense University in Fort McNair, Obama declared, “I want to make it absolutely clear to Assad and anyone who is under his command… If you make the tragic mistake of using these weapons there will be consequences and you will be held accountable.”

“This is a red line for the United States,” Clinton said earlier in the day after a meeting in Prague with Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg.

“I’m not going to telegraph in any specifics what we would do in the event of credible evidence that the Assad regime has resorted to using chemical weapons against their own people, but suffice it to say that we’re certainly planning to take action if that eventuality were to occur,” Clinton warned.

Schwarzenberg told the media that Czech troops specializing in chemical weapons had been sent to Jordan and were “training” with forces there.

Citing unnamed senior officials who claim to have seen unspecified intelligence on Syrian chemical weapons, the New York Times, CNN and other media have joined forces with the Obama administration in promoting the chemical weapons justification for another US war of aggression.

What becomes clear in examining these reports, as well as the statements from the administration, is that the alleged threat from Syrian “weapons of mass destruction” is entirely concocted. Not a single piece of hard evidence is cited by any government official or any media source."
You may read the rest of the article at http://www.globalresearch.ca/washington-floats-chemical-weapons-charge-as-pretext-for-syria-buildup/5314106
An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it.
Mohandas Gandhi


Each of us is put here in this time and this place to personally decide the future of humankind.
Did you think you were put here for something less?
Chief Arvol Looking Horse
Reply
12-04-2012, 11:58 PM, (This post was last modified: 12-07-2012, 06:11 AM by macfadden.)
#2
RE: Washington Floats Chemical Weapons Charge as Pretext for Syria Buildup
One would think it takes much chutzpa to pull another WMD hoax as proschema so soon, but since the public's memory hole is more of a gaping bottomless chasm, it's not really all that impressive.
Reply
12-06-2012, 02:41 PM,
#3
RE: Washington Floats Chemical Weapons Charge as Pretext for Syria Buildup
I don't follow the news. Why does the U.S. want to invade Syria?

Is there a pipeline? Is Syria refusing IMF debt?

Anybody know what the deal is?
Reply
12-06-2012, 11:28 PM,
#4
RE: Washington Floats Chemical Weapons Charge as Pretext for Syria Buildup
(12-06-2012, 02:41 PM)CharliePrime Wrote: I don't follow the news. Why does the U.S. want to invade Syria?

Is there a pipeline? Is Syria refusing IMF debt?

Anybody know what the deal is?

Syria was one of the original countries listed by PNAC as a terrorist state that needed to be invaded, along with Iraq, Iran, Libya, Sudan and Lebanon. PNAC dances to Israel's tune.
Reply
12-07-2012, 06:32 AM, (This post was last modified: 12-07-2012, 08:57 AM by macfadden.)
#5
RE: Washington Floats Chemical Weapons Charge as Pretext for Syria Buildup
(12-06-2012, 02:41 PM)CharliePrime Wrote: I don't follow the news. Why does the U.S. want to invade Syria?

Is there a pipeline? Is Syria refusing IMF debt?

Anybody know what the deal is?


Syria is a stepping stone to Iran, once Iran has been conquered U.S. of A. Inc. will be in full control of that very strategically important region of the world along with all of its very strategically important resources. That will guarantee a "New American Century".

“We had a policy coup; some hard-nosed people took over U.S. policy and didn’t bother to inform any of us. I went through the Pentagon ten days after 9/1...and an officer from the Joint Staff called me into his office and said, "I want you to know sir that we are going to attack Iraq." I asked ‘why?’ He said, ‘We don’t know’…I came back to the Pentagon six months later. I saw the same officer. I said, ‘Why haven’t we attacked Iraq? Are we going to attack Iraq?’ He said, “Oh sir, it’s worse than that. He pulled up a piece of paper from his desk saying ‘I just got this memo from the Secretary of Defense’s office. We’re going to start with Iraq and move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran — Seven countries in five years.” - 4-Star General Wesley Clark

Quote:Gen. Clark said he “sat on this info for a long time” before linking it with a 1991 meeting with then US Undersecretary for Defense Paul Wolfowitz. “I said, ‘Mr. Secretary, you must be pretty happy with the performance of our troops in Desert Storm.' ‘Well, yeh, but not really. The truth is that we should have got rid of Saddam Hussein and we didn’t. But one thing we did learn is that we can use our military in the region, in the Middle East, and the Soviets won’t stop us. And we’ve got about five or ten years to clean up those old Soviet client regimes — Syria, Iran, Iraq — before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us."

That conversation may have taken place decades ago, but keeping a resurgent Russia out of the loop is still pertinent from the American perspective no matter who has the top job. In the event the Syrian and Iranian regimes fell, the region would be almost completely within the West’s sphere of influence. Both Moscow and Beijing would lose out big-time strategically, economically and geo-politically.

Secondly, it won’t have escaped your notice that hobbling Syria and Iran would automatically quell Israel’s existential concerns and reduce incentives for Israel to swap land for a comprehensive peace treaty with the Palestinians and all 22 Arab League member countries. A US-dominated region would guarantee Israel’s security and impunity without Tel Aviv being obliged to make concessions.

The little-publicized H.R. 4133 Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012 passed by the House of Representatives earlier this year by a vote of 411-2 — and drafted with AIPAC’s in-put — reaffirms the “enduring commitment of the United States to the security of the State of Israel as a Jewish state” and the provision to Israel “of the military capabilities necessary to deter and defend itself by itself against any threats.” The act also urges the US vetoing of “any one-sided anti-Israel resolutions at the United Nations Security Council and to ensure that Israel retains a “qualitative military edge.” For some unknown reason, the US mainstream media took the view that the act wasn’t newsworthy.

If the proof is in the pudding, then the neoconservative’s grand plan is still alive and well. Iraq and Libya have been defanged. The Syrian regime’s longevity is unlikely to be long and Israeli — and to a lesser extent, US — war drums are beating against Iran. A major obstacle on Israel’s doorstep Hezbollah must also be tackled before any Iran strike when Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah has threatened missile attacks on Israeli cities should Iranian nuclear sites be targeted. It’s notable that the UK and the EU are currently considering designating Hezbollah as a terrorist organization and are pushing for anti-Hezbollah sanctions, ostensibly for its role in Syria.
http://english.alarabiya.net/views/2012/09/11/237354.html
Reply
12-07-2012, 03:29 PM, (This post was last modified: 12-07-2012, 03:30 PM by CharliePrime.)
#6
RE: Washington Floats Chemical Weapons Charge as Pretext for Syria Buildup
(12-07-2012, 06:32 AM)macfadden Wrote: Syria is a stepping stone to Iran, once Iran has been conquered U.S. of A. Inc. will be in full control of that very strategically important region of the world along with all of its very strategically important resources.

Ah. The old "Geographical Pivot of History", only with America doing the fighting instead of Britannia.

We know New York and London bankers are setting up this empire, but what I don't understand is who opposes them. Chinese and Russian bankers? Who are they fighting against?
Reply
12-23-2012, 11:49 PM, (This post was last modified: 12-24-2012, 12:01 AM by macfadden.)
#7
RE: Washington Floats Chemical Weapons Charge as Pretext for Syria Buildup
(12-06-2012, 11:28 PM)crotchy Wrote:
(12-06-2012, 02:41 PM)CharliePrime Wrote: I don't follow the news. Why does the U.S. want to invade Syria?

Is there a pipeline? Is Syria refusing IMF debt?

Anybody know what the deal is?

Syria was one of the original countries listed by PNAC as a terrorist state that needed to be invaded, along with Iraq, Iran, Libya, Sudan and Lebanon. PNAC dances to Israel's tune.

Quote:Since the mid-1940s, Washington has regarded the Persian Gulf as “a stupendous source of strategic power, and one of the greatest material prizes in world history”—in Eisenhower’s words, the “most strategically important area of the world” because of its “strategic position and resources.” Control over the region and its resources remains a policy imperative. After taking over a core oil producer, and presumably acquiring its first reliable military bases at the heart of the world’s major energy-producing system, Washington will doubtless be happy to establish an “Arab façade,” to borrow the term of the British during their day in the sun. Formal democracy will be fine, but if history and current practice are any guide, only if it is of the submissive kind tolerated in Washington’s “backyard.”
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
Information New York Times OP-ED: What Putin Has to Say to Americans About Syria FastTadpole 10 2,429 09-26-2013, 01:07 PM
Last Post: FastTadpole
  Details About Chemical Attack In Damascus You Won’t Be Hearing On BBC Or Sky News Frank2 4 2,158 09-20-2013, 03:51 PM
Last Post: Frank2
  US attack on Syria delayed after surprise U-turn from Obama drummer 2 1,448 09-01-2013, 09:37 AM
Last Post: mexika
Bug IRS Scandal is to Cover Up Syrian Chemical Weapons Operation CharliePrime 0 1,063 05-18-2013, 06:47 PM
Last Post: CharliePrime
  Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars Purity Control 11 6,788 10-26-2012, 02:45 PM
Last Post: annagolinska1
  For the release of our compatriots and colleagues held captive in Baba Amr, Syria Solve et Coagula 0 803 02-27-2012, 12:31 AM
Last Post: Solve et Coagula
  Buchanan - What Happens in Iran and Syria is None of Our Business datars 0 957 02-22-2012, 07:10 PM
Last Post: datars
  Syria Regime Change PR in High Gear: More ‘Newborn Baby Slaughter’ Propaganda Solve et Coagula 0 883 02-11-2012, 01:36 PM
Last Post: Solve et Coagula
  NATO's Secret War on Syria Solve et Coagula 0 850 02-11-2012, 11:38 AM
Last Post: Solve et Coagula
  Syria's Bloody CIA Revolution - A Distraction? Solve et Coagula 1 912 02-11-2012, 12:40 AM
Last Post: sitra11ahra

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)