Top Ten Reasons To Doubt Official Story On Assad Poison-Gas Attack

fakenews
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
Jon Rappoport
April 13, 2017

The sarin-gas attack story prompted the US missile strike on a Syrian runway. Here are the top ten reasons for doubting that story, and instead calling it a convenient pretext:

ONE: Photos show rescue workers treating/decontaminating people injured or killed in the gas attack. The workers aren’t wearing gloves or protective gear. Only the clueless or crazy would expose themselves to sarin residue, which can be fatal.

TWO: MIT professor Thomas Postol told RT, “I believe it can be shown, without doubt, that the [US intelligence] document does not provide any evidence whatsoever that the US government has concrete knowledge that the government of Syria was the source of the chemical attack in Khan Shaykhun…Any competent analyst would have had questions about whether the debris in the crater was staged or real. No competent analyst would miss the fact that the alleged sarin canister was forcefully crushed from above, rather than exploded by a munition within it.” How would a canister purportedly dropped from an Assad-ordered plane incur “crushing from above?”

THREE: Why would President Assad, supported by Russia, scoring victory after victory against ISIS, moving closer to peace negotiations, suddenly risk all his gains by dropping sarin gas on his own people?

FOUR: In an interview with Scott Horton, ex-CIA officer Philip Giraldi states that his intelligence and military sources indicate Assad didn’t attack his own people with poison gas.

FIVE: Ex-CIA officer Ray McGovern states that his military sources report an Assad air strike did hit a chemical plant, and the fallout killed people, but the attack was not planned for that purpose. There was no knowledge the chemicals were lethal.

SIX: At consortiumnews.com, journalist Robert Parry writes, “There is a dark mystery behind the White House-released photo showing President Trump and more than a dozen advisers meeting at his estate in Mar-a-Lago after his decision to strike Syria with Tomahawk missiles: Where are CIA Director Mike Pompeo and other top intelligence officials?”

“Before the photo was released on Friday, a source told me that Pompeo had personally briefed Trump on April 6 about the CIA’s belief that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was likely not responsible for the lethal poison-gas incident in northern Syria two days earlier — and thus Pompeo was excluded from the larger meeting as Trump reached a contrary decision.”

“After the attack, Secretary of State Tillerson, who is not an institutional intelligence official and has little experience with the subtleties of intelligence, was the one to claim that the U.S. intelligence community assessed with a ‘high degree of confidence’ that the Syrian government had dropped a poison gas bomb on civilians in Idlib province.”

“While Tillerson’s comment meshed with Official Washington’s hastily formed groupthink of Assad’s guilt, it is hard to believe that CIA analysts would have settled on such a firm conclusion so quickly, especially given the remote location of the incident and the fact that the initial information was coming from pro-rebel (or Al Qaeda) sources.”

“Thus, a serious question arises whether President Trump did receive that ‘high degree of confidence’ assessment from the intelligence community or whether he shunted Pompeo aside to eliminate an obstacle to his desire to launch the April 6 rocket attack.”

SEVEN: As soon as the Assad gas attack was reported, the stage was set for a US missile strike. No comprehensive investigation of the purported gas attack was undertaken.

EIGHT: There are, of course, precedents for US wars based on false evidence—the missing WMDs in Iraq, the claims of babies being pushed out of incubators in Kuwait, to name just two.

NINE: Who benefits from the sarin gas story? Assad? Or US neocons; the US military-industrial complex; Pentagon generals who want a huge increase in their military budget; Trump and his team, who are suddenly praised in the press, after a year of being pilloried at every turn; and ISIS?

TEN: For those who doubt that ISIS has ever used poison gas, see the NY Times (11/21/2016). While claiming that Assad has deployed chemical attacks, the article also states that ISIS has deployed chemical weapons 52 times since 2014.

I’m not claiming these ten reasons definitely and absolutely rule out the possibility of an Assad-ordered chemical attack. But they do add up to a far more believable conclusion than the quickly assembled “Assad-did-it” story.

These ten reasons starkly point to the lack of a rational and complete investigation of the “gas attack.”

And this lack throws a monkey wrench into Trump’s claim that he was ordering the missile strike based on “a high degree of confidence.”

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Advertisements

Incisive Analysis Into Media Propaganda Regarding The Panama Papers

Source: TheCorbetReport
James Corbett
April 5, 2016

The Panama Papers are out and the Panama Papers propaganda is out right along with it. So why does this new mega-leak seemingly only expose those in the State Department crosshairs or expendable others and not a single prominent American politician or businessman? And what does this have to do with the OECD’s plan for a global taxation grid? Find out more in today’s Thought For The Day with James Corbett.

ISIS Attacked Brussels? The US Created ISIS? Therefore?

TruthLies
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com
Jon Rappoport
March 23, 2016

I want to acknowledge two researchers and reporters, whose work cuts deeply into the ISIS mirage: Tony Cartalucci and Brandon Turbeville. In a half-sane world, Cartalucci would be the international editor of the New York Times, if the Times were a real news outlet.

If we accept the premise that ISIS attacked Brussels, then the next question is: what is ISIS?

Who is behind it? Who supplies it? Who funds it? Who sustains it?

Brandon Turbeville, writing at Activist Post (“Congress Votes To Fight ISIS By Funding ISIS To Fight Assad”, 9/19/2014), states:

“Obama’s plan [is] to ‘detect and degrade’ ISIS…the reality is that the plan is nothing more than a plan to…destroy the Syrian government to benefit of ISIS and other fundamentalist groups that the United States has created, funded, trained, and directed since the very beginning of the Syrian crisis.”

Cartalucci, in an article titled, “In Syria, There No Moderates” (9/2013), writes:

“…there were never, nor are there any ‘moderates’ operating in Syria. The West has intentionally armed and funded Al Qaeda and other sectarian extremists since as early as 2007 in preparation for an engineered sectarian bloodbath serving US-Saudi-Israeli interests. This latest bid to portray the terrorists operating along and within Syria’s borders as ‘divided’ along extremists/moderate lines is a ploy to justify the continued flow of Western cash and arms into Syria to perpetuate the conflict, as well as create conditions along Syria’s borders with which Western partners, Israel, Jordan, and Turkey, can justify direct military intervention [in Syria].”

Turbeville writes:

“Indeed, even the New York Times has been forced to admit that there are, as Cartalucci expertly argues in his article, no moderates in the ranks of the Syrian death squads. As Ben Hubbard [NY Times] wrote in April, 2013 (“Islamist Rebels Create Dilemma on Syria Policy”), ‘In Syria’s largest city, Aleppo, rebels aligned with Al Qaeda control the power plant, run the bakeries and head a court that applies Islamic law. Elsewhere, they have seized government oil fields, put employees back to work and now profit from the crude they produce…Across Syria, rebel-held areas are dotted with Islamic courts staffed by lawyers and clerics, and by fighting brigades led by extremists. Even the Supreme Military Council, the umbrella rebel organization whose formation the West had hoped would sideline radical groups, is stocked with commanders who want to infuse Islamic law into a future Syrian government…Nowhere in rebel-controlled Syria is there a secular fighting force to speak of.‘” (emphasis added)

In other words, the “moderate Syrian rebels” are a fiction no one could fail to notice. The US funding has always gone to ISIS.

I could cite much more from Cartalucci and Turbeville, who effectively argue that ISIS is a created tool of the US government and its allies. I strongly recommend you read and study their work.

Continue Reading At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com

 

Brussels Attacks – The Next Step – Bye Bye Europe

the matrix revealed
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com
Jon Rappoport
March 22, 2016

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)

Hours after Donald Trump suggested the US should downsize its role in NATO (also here), bombs went off in Brussels.

In the wake of the attacks, the Globalist party line is shaping up: Downsize? Absolutely not. NATO must respond. Led by the US, it must, wait for it, invade Syria, an ISIS stronghold. With ground troops.

Don’t even bother trying to figure out the logic behind that idea. It goes something like this: get rid of President Assad (who is in a war against ISIS) because somehow the Brussels attack is all his fault.

Led by the US, NATO should attack ISIS in Syria—ISIS, the group funded and backed and armed by the US government (see here and here). Perfect.

Gibberish.

I can just hear a US general trying to decipher his marching orders: “Let’s see, we have to go into Syria and get rid of President Assad, and he’s the one fighting against ISIS. Hmm. And we also have to decimate ISIS. In other words, we should more or less level the whole country, wipe out everybody, and turn the place into a wasteland worse than the wasteland it already is. Right? And while we’re doing that, we have to ignore the fact that our government shipped weapons to ISIS from Libya (see here). How about this instead? Locate the key people who are urging this insane military campaign and put them in prison where they can’t do more harm. Or let’s launch an operation against the moon. That would be good, too.”

French President Hollande is also right up there on the insanity index. His latest statement, after the Brussels attacks, assures one and all that this is a war against Europe, not merely Belgium. But he is the one who has been asserting that Europe has no right to question the flood of immigrants streaming across the continent. Border controls? No, no. What possible relationship could any of these immigrants have to terror attacks? They were trained outside Europe on how to mount bombing operations against civilian populations, after which they came into Europe with that intention? Sure, but so what?

Housed within Brussels, of course, is the headquarters of the European Union, which is Globalism Inc. for Europe. Its covert aim is to drown all nations of the continent in immigrants, so that within a few decades there will be no more recognizable countries—at which point a simple declaration that all of Europe is one indivisible entity will carry the day. This intention must never be spoken of. It must be hidden. Instead, the population of Europe must enlist in a universal, what shall we call it, Tolerance Corps, grinning from ear to ear wherever they go, urging acceptance of the new status quo, now and then grieving as new terror attacks blow people up. Who could doubt the efficacy and wisdom of this plan?

Continue Reading At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com