On this 12th anniversary of 9/11, ask yourself if you really want to believe that temperatures half those reached by your self-cleaning oven caused three massive steel structures to crumble into dust.
Then ask yourself why your government thinks you are so totally stupid as to believe such a fairy tale as your government has told you about 9/11.
Predictably, all hell broke loose at the State Department. Dammit! Darn Russki peacenik! A Kerry spokeswoman characterized it as a “rhetorical argument”. It was just “talk”. Damascus and Moscow have a horrible track record. This was just a “stalling tactic.” Washington could not trust Assad. And even if there was a “serious” proposal that would not delay the White House’s push to sell its war in the US Congress.
The repetitive debate about whether “we” should “take action” against selected dictators (i.e. cheer on the US and its acolytes in yet another aerial killing spree) is part of our brainwashing. Richard Falk, emeritus professor of international law and UN Special Rapporteur on Palestine, describes it as “a self-righteous, one-way, legal/moral screen [with] positive images of Western values and innocence portrayed as threatened, validating a campaign of unrestricted political violence”. This “is so widely accepted as to be virtually unchallengeable”.
There’s nothing ”tragic” about the fact that during this week – marking the 12th anniversary of 9/11 – this presidency will be fighting for its bombing ”credibility” trying to seduce Republican hawks in the US Congress while most of the warmongers du jour happen to be Democrats.
Republicans are torn between supporting the president they love to hate and delivering him a stinging rebuke – as much as they are aching to follow the orders of their masters, ranging from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee to military contractors.
Despite the Obama administration’s supposedly “high confidence” regarding Syrian government guilt over the Aug. 21 chemical attack near Damascus, a dozen former U.S. military and intelligence officials are telling President Obama that they are picking up information that undercuts the Official Story.
Pity David Cameron. It’s bad enough that he has to show up at the G-20 Conference, all dressed up and no one to bomb, because that ‘copper-bottomed —-’ Miliband voted against him, thereby denying him the opportunity to stand ‘shoulder to shoulder’ with Obama. Then he has to endure the galling spectacle of France riding up on the imperial stagecoach instead, with Hollande really looking like a bespectacled cat that got the cream.
The American people have a right to a full release and vetting of all facts before their elected representatives are asked to make a decision of great consequence for America, Syria and the world. Congress must be provided answers prior to the vote, in open hearings, not in closed sessions where information can be manipulated in the service of war. We’ve been there before. It’s called Iraq.
George Galloway talks to RT’s Abby Martin (Breaking The Set) about President Obama and the ‘most grotesque about faces in all history’ as the US is seen to be supporting, arming and training al Qaeda terrorists in Syria.
The Americans have a choice: either present your supposedly incriminating evidence against the Syrian government, or proceed with your plans and face international wrath for committing the supreme crime of aggression.
The Obama Administration’s intelligence report on Syria was a rehash of Iraq. “There are lots of things that aren’t spelled out” in the four-page document, according to Richard Guthrie, the former project head of the Chemical and Biological Warfare Project of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. One piece of evidence is the alleged interception of Syrian government communications, but no transcripts were provided.
“Lies, disinformation and half-truths”, are how Professor of International Law Francis Boyle describes the Obama Administration handling of the use of Chemical Weapons in Syria. In a news release at the Institute for Public Accuracy, posted August 30, 2013, and titled, A “Dodgy Dossier” Instead of a Congressional Debate?, “The test the Dossier [PDF] uses is ‘high confidence’ — but the appropriate standard by the International Court of Justice (in the Corfu Channel case) is ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’ The Dossier notes that it does not ‘confirm’ the allegations against Syria. So the U.S. intelligence community refuses to ‘confirm’ that the Syrian government did it.
While the UN and nations across the West feign shock over the growing humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in and around Syria, the goal of a violent sectarian conflict and its predictable, catastrophic results along with calls to literally “bleed” Syria have been the underlying strategy of special interests in the United States, Israel, Saudi Arabia and their regional partners since at least 2007.
