*Who is railroading us into the final war? - Cynthia
McKinney*
**
Newsletter published on 10 April 2017
Trump had the rudeness to order the attack on Syria
just before his
dinner with Xi Jinping. As if to say, this is what we'll do
to North Korea.
*(1) Who is railroading us into the final war? - Cynthia
McKinney *
*(2) Kushner vs. Bannon - NYT*
*(3) Goldman Sachs &
Deep State takeover Trump Admin - Zero Hedge *
*(4) Assad was in a strong
position a week ago. A suspected chemical
attack changed everything - LA
Times*
*(5) Rothschild The Economist backs Trump decisiveness,
willingness to
confront Russia*
*(6) Erdogan Welcomes US Attack on
Syria, calls for Regime Change*
*(7) Trump Ordered Syria Attack, then Ate
Dinner with Chinese President*
*(8) Trump Has Surrendered - Paul Craig
Roberts*
*(9) Trump Joins The War Party -Brother Nathanael*
*(10)
Crowdstrike (behind “Russian Hacking” claims) has ties to
Soros-supported
Atlantic Council*
*(11) CrowdStrike retract parts of report alleging
Russian hack; refuses
to address Congress about its findings*
*(12)
Hacker Group Releases Password To NSA's "Top Secret Arsenal"
InProtest Of
Trump Betrayal*
**
*(1) Who is railroading us into the final war?
- Cynthia McKinney*
**
cg <acmealethia@gmail.com>
7 April
2017 at 19:55
Why does someone want the final war? This is beyond
conspiracy. This is
Ahriman.
*(2) Kushner vs. Bannon - NYT*
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us/politics/stephen-bannon-white-house.html
In
Battle for Trump’s Heart and Mind, It’s *Bannon vs. Kushner*
**
By
MAGGIE HABERMAN, JEREMY W. PETERS and PETER BAKERAPRIL 6, 2017
WASHINGTON
— Thick with tension, the conversation this week between
Stephen K. Bannon,
the chief White House strategist, and Jared
Kushner, the president’s
son-in-law and senior adviser, had deteriorated
to the point of
breakdown.
Finally, Mr. Bannon identified why they could not compromise,
according
to someone with knowledge of the conversation. “Here’s the reason
there’s no middle ground,” Mr. Bannon growled. “You’re a
Democrat.”
The schism within Mr. Trump’s perpetually fractious White
House has
grown in recent weeks, fueled by personality, ideology and
ambition. At
its core are Mr. Bannon, the edgy, nationalist bomb-thrower
suddenly in
the seat of power, and Mr. *Kushner, the polished,
boyish-looking scion
of New Jersey and New York real estate*. Even as Mr.
Kushner’s portfolio
of responsibilities has been expanding, Mr. Bannon’s in
recent days has
shrunk with the loss of a national security post.
The
escalating feud, though, goes beyond mere West Wing melodrama, the
sort of
who’s-up-and-who’s-down scorekeeping that typically consumes
Washington.
Instead, *it reflects a larger struggle to guide the
direction of the Trump
presidency*, played out in disagreements over the
policies Mr. Trump should
pursue, the people he should hire and the
image he should put forward to the
American people.
On one side are Mr. Bannon’s guerrilla warriors, eager
to close the
nation’s borders, dismantle decades of regulations, empower
police
departments and take on the establishment of both parties in
Washington.
On the other are Mr. Kushner’s “Democrats,” an appellation used
to
describe even Republicans who want to soften Mr. Trump’s rough edges and
broaden his narrow popular appeal after months of historically low poll
numbers. [...]
The wrestling match has spilled over into public view
as each camp seeks
reinforcements among news media and conservative figures.
Roger J. Stone
Jr., an on-and-off adviser to Mr. Trump for 30 years, accused
*Mr.
Kushner of planting negative views of Mr. Bannon on MSNBC’s “Morning
Joe,”* a show the president is known to watch.
“Many of the
anti-Steve Bannon stories that you see, the themes that you
see on ‘Morning
Joe,’ are being dictated by Kushner, while Mr. Kushner’s
plate is very full
with Middle Eastern peace and the China visit and
so on,” Mr. Stone said
this week on the radio show hosted by Alex Jones,
an avid fan of Mr. Trump’s
who loathes establishment figures and
traffics in conspiracy theories.
[...]
*(3) Goldman Sachs & Deep State takeover Trump Admin - Zero
Hedge*
**
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-06/have-goldman-sachs-deep-state-taken-over-trump-administration
Have
Goldman Sachs & The Deep State Taken Over The Trump
Administration?
by Tyler Durden
Apr 6, 2017 9:45
PM
Authored by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,
The
writing is on the wall and the message is not good. Trump will
likely expand
the war in Syria and increase tensions with Russia. The
American empire is
likely to implode under Trump’s watch, as he once
again betrays many of the
people who voted for him.
*Hillary or Trump, we’d be getting the same
thing*. We had no real
choice, and empires don’t reform. Prepare for
impact.
– From yesterday’s post: The Imperial War Machine Marches Forward
Under
Donald Trump
The*takeover of the Trump administration by
Goldman Sachs* has been
obvious for months now. The *takeover by the deep
state has taken a bit
longer*, hence the non-stop *Russia hysteria, which
was clearly intended
to back him into a corner*. If Trump takes military
action against
Syria, we’ll know for certain the *deep state coup* is
complete. [...]
*(4) Assad was in a strong position a week ago. A
suspected chemical
attack changed everything - LA Times*
http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-syria-assad-20170406-story.html
Syria's
*Assad was in a strong position a week ago. A suspected chemical
attack
changed everythin*g
Patrick J. McDonnellContact Reporter
Just a
few days ago, Syria’s long-embattled President Bashar Assad
appeared to be
in his strongest position in years.
Members of President Trump’s foreign
policy circle had signaled a
definitive break from the Obama
administration’s “Assad must go”
refrain — the insistence that the departure
of Syria’s autocratic leader
was a precondition to any long-term solution in
the violent crisis that
has roiled the Middle East for more than six
years.
“Our priority is no longer to sit and focus on getting Assad out,”
Nikki
Haley, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said last week, while
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said it was up to the “Syrian people”
to decide Assad’s ultimate fate.
The comments seemed finally to
signal a convergence of Syria strategy
between Washington and Moscow,
longtime antagonists on the question of
Syria. Assad, it seemed, could be
part of the solution after all.
How things have changed.
This
week’s suspected chemical attack in a rebel-held stretch of
northwest Syria
has put Assad’s government squarely back in the U.S.
cross-hairs.
Washington appears to have concluded that the strike was
the work of
Assad’s war planes — even before there has been an on-the-ground
inquiry
into the reported deaths of more than 70 people Tuesday in
rebel-held
Idlib province.
There have been adamant disavowals from
Syria and its ally Russia.
*Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem said
Thursday it was "not
reasonable” to assume Syria would resort to chemical
weapons when
government forces have been making substantial gains* on the
battlefield. “We condemn such a criminal act,” he said.
But U.S.
officials have said *radar detected Syrian aircraft *in the
vicinity of Khan
Sheikhoun on the morning of the attack there, and by
midday Thursday, Trump
was already considering military retaliation.
Critics of the Assad
government said the attack, which left victims
gasping for breath and
foaming at the mouth, is a continuation of years
of scorched-earth tactics
meant to eradicate the opposition and ensure
total victory. [...]
On
the other hand, the chemical incident not only has put the Assad
government
on the defensive. It *may breathe new life into a divided,
demoralized rebel
force that has been losing territory* and has looked
to be on the verge of
defeat.
Many Syrians have become disillusioned with the armed opposition
since
it became dominated by hard-line Sunni Islamists, some linked to Al
Qaeda.
Yet all diplomatic efforts to stop the fighting have failed, as
outside
governments continue to pour arms and money to their favored
militias.
Now, for the first time since 2013, there is the prospect of
U.S.
military involvement. [...]
*(5) Rothschild The Economist backs
Trump decisiveness, willingness to
confront Russia*
**
http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21720467-what-happens-next-donald-trump-strikes-syrias-bashar-al-assad
Overnight
cruise missiles launched
Donald Trump strikes at Syria’s Bashar
al-Assad
But what happens next?
Apr 7th 2017
NO DOUBT
Donald Trump was keen to emphasise his decisiveness, in
contrast with his
predecessor’s dithering. There were hints earlier in
the week that the
president was thinking of doing something. After a
nerve-gas attack by the
Syrian air force killed more than 85 people in
the rebel-held town of Khan
Sheikhoun on April 4th, he said that Bashar
al-Assad, the Syrian dictator,
had crossed “many, many red lines”. In
the early hours of April 7th, Mr
Trump took action.
American ships fired 59 cruise missiles at the
al-Shayrat airfield, from
which planes carrying the chemical bombs are
believed to have taken off.
The strike was limited and targeted. Even so it
debunked the idea that
the use of any kind of force in response to the
barbaric behaviour of
the Assad regime was no longer possible because of
fears that it would
mean confrontation with his Russian ally, which has been
operating in
Syria since September 2015. The Russians were informed of the
strike in
advance, but they were not, apparently, consulted over it. It is
not
clear whether any Russians would have been at the base. But the warning,
doubtless passed on to the Syrians, seems to have given the latter
enough time to evacuate at least some of their planes. In military
terms, therefore, the operation will make little difference to the
Assad
regime’s capabilities.
Mr *Trump will rightly win praise for his
willingness* to make more than
a hand-wringing statement about the Syrian
regime’s flouting both of
international norms and its own obligations since
becoming a reluctant
signatory in 2013 of the convention against the use of
chemical weapons,
following its last major outrage of this kind. In the
past, Mr Trump has
appeared indifferent to the idea of humanitarian
intervention. But faced
with such a vile and provocative act perpetrated on
his watch, he asked
his generals for an appropriate response, which they
provided. The
professional national-security team that he now has in place
in the
shape of his defence secretary, James Mattis, and his national
security
adviser, H.R. McMaster, deserves credit for this, but the final
decision
was of course the president’s.
Many Obama-era officials will
regret that their own administration did
not do something similar. Mr Obama
still maintains that he is proud of
the agreement struck with Russia in
2013, following a much more serious
attack, to strip Mr Assad of his
chemical weapons in return for calling
off the air strikes that Mr Obama had
previously threatened. It is now
clear that even despite the best efforts of
weapons inspectors, Mr Assad
hid some of his huge chemical arsenal with the
intention of deploying it
again when he thought he could get away with
it.
The question now is what happens next. Rex Tillerson, Mr Trump’s
hitherto almost invisible secretary of state, is due to meet Russia’s
president, Vladimir Putin, in Moscow next week. Mr Tillerson has accused
Russia of either being “complicit” in the attack or “incompetent” in its
inability to restrain its ally. Only a few days ago, Mr Trump’s
officials were signalling that it was no longer an aim of the
administration to remove Mr Assad from power as a prerequisite for a
deal to end the war in Syria, which has claimed perhaps half a million
lives. Has Mr Trump changed his mind? Or, having slapped Mr Assad on the
wrist and warned the Russians that he cannot act with impunity, will
America continue to stand back from the peace negotiations? Confusingly,
Mr Tillerson said, after the attack, that policy toward Syria has not
changed.
There are other uncertainties too. Even if Mr Assad forsakes
chemical
weapons but continues to drop barrel bombs on civilians, will Mr
Trump
want to stop him or will that be as permissible as it was only a few
days ago? If the former, what are the risks of escalation that could
lead to a much bigger confrontation with Russia and Mr Assad’s other
ally, Iran, especially if military escalation slips into having regime
change as its objective? So far, there is no indication that the
cruise-missile attack will be anything more than a one-off, but that, of
course, could change.
Either way, the prospects of co-operation with
Moscow in the campaign
against Islamic State in Syria that Mr Trump was once
so keen on were
already slim and are now probably doomed. Will that make it
harder for
America and its allies to complete the job of expelling IS from
its
“capital” Raqqa and elsewhere in Syria? Is there now a greater danger
that Iranian-backed Shia militias in Iraq, fighting more or less
alongside Americans in the battle to retake Mosul, will at some point be
turned against them?
It will also be interesting to see what this
means for the wider
relationship with Russia that Mr Trump was once so keen
to develop. The
Russian response to the missile strike will be telling. The
initial
reaction from the Kremlin was to brand the American action as a
violation of international law, but Mr Putin the pragmatist may decide
that nothing further needs to be done. In warning Russia of the attack,
some agreement may already have been forged, particularly if Mr Putin
indicated a readiness to constrain Mr Assad in the future. Despite Mr
Tillerson’s harsh tone in describing Russia’s role, Mr Trump has been
milder, describing the chemical attack as a “very sad day for
Russia”.
At home, Mr Trump will almost certainly see at least short-term
benefits. The speedy way the action was carried out creates a
counter-narrative to the picture of muddle and confusion his
administration usually presents, particularly in the recent debacle over
health care. The president’s willingness to risk a confrontation with
Russia may, for a while, take a little of the heat out the speculation
that Mr Trump is in some way compromised by the Kremlin or in its debt.
Republican hawks, such as Senator John McCain, who have been appalled
both by America’s passivity over Syria and Mr Trump’s chumminess towards
Mr Putin, may now see him in a new and more flattering light. So might
some Democrats.
Whatever else, Mr Trump has demonstrated his capacity
to surprise.
*(6) Erdogan Welcomes US Attack on Syria, calls for Regime
Change*
http://news.antiwar.com/2017/04/06/erdogan-would-welcome-us-attack-on-syria/
Erdogan
Welcomes US Attack on Syria
**
Turkish President Promises to 'Do
Our Part'
by Jason Ditz, April 06, 2017
Turkey has been hoping for
a war of regime change against Syria
virtually since the civil war in that
nation began, and on the eve of US
attacks against Syria overnight, Turkey’s
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan
told interviewers he would “welcome” a US
attack on Syria.
Erdogan, whose comments came in an interview on Kanal 7,
said that his
country was ready to “do our part” if the US put forward a
plan of
action to*impose regime change* in Syria. Secretary of State Rex
Tillerson indicated earlier today that the US is in the process of doing
so.
Turkey already occupies much of northern Syria militarily, after
invading in August, but is also a participant in a ceasefire with the
Syrian government, which they negotiated alongside Russia, so
participating in the US attack would likely face serious backlash.
If
the US continues to escalate beyond simple missile strikes, they
would
likely need to use Turkish territory as a staging area for major
ground
incursions. This would likely have a major impact on the rest of
the Syrian
war, as Turkey would doubtless condition this on the US
abandoning it’s
support for the Syrian Kurds.
*(7) Trump Ordered Syria Attack, then Ate
Dinner with Chinese President*
**
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/04/06/trump-ordered-attack-ate-dinner-chinese-president/
by
Joel B. Pollak
6 Apr 2017167
President Donald Trump ordered
Tomahawk missile strikes against a Syrian
airfield on Thursday evening —
then sat down to dinner with visiting
Chinese President Xi Jinping at
Mar-a-Lago.
CNN, citing a White House source, reports:
Trump met
with his national security team *before his dinner* with
Chinese President
Xi Jinping in Mar-a-Lago Thursday, where he made the
decision to pull the
trigger on the biggest military action of his
presidency, an administration
official says.
He sat through dinner with the President Xi as action was
under way.
Trump was briefed after dinner by Secretary of Defense James
“Mad Dog”
Mattis, according to the report.
The *message would not
have been lost on the Chinese president*, whose
visit was expected to
include difficult discussions about the threat of
North Korean ballistic
missiles, as well as about China’s ambitious
naval expansion on artificial
islands in international waters. [...]
From: "Diogenesquest diogenesquest@gmail.com
[shamireaders]"Date: Fri,
07 Apr 2017 09:10:13 -0500 Subject: [shamireaders]
Trump Has
Surrendered. Will Putin Be The Next To Surrender?
*(8)
Trump Has Surrendered - Paul Craig Roberts*
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/04/06/trump-surrendered-will-putin-next-surrender/
April
6, 2017
*Trump Has Surrendered *Will Putin Be The Next To
Surrender?
*Paul Craig Roberts*
**
Update: Washington has
reopened the conflict with a Tomahawk missile
attack on Syrian Air Force
Bases. The Russian/Syrian air defense systems
did not prevent the
attack.
The *Washington Establishment has reasserted control. First Flynn
and
now Bannon*. All that are left in the Trump administration are the
*Zionists and the crazed generals *who want war with Russia, China,
Iran, Syria, and North Korea.
There is no one in the White House to
stop them.
Kiss good-bye normalized relations with Russia.
The
Syrian conflict is set to be reopened. That is the point of the
chemical
attack blamed by Washington on Syria despite the absence of any
evidence. It
is completely obvious that the*chemical attack is a
Washington orchestrated
event*. According to reports US Secretary of
State Tillerson has warned
Russia that steps are underway to remove
Syrian president Assad. Trump
agrees.
The removal of Assad allows Washington to impose another
Washington
puppet on Muslim peoples, to remove another Arab government with
an
independent policy from Washington, to remove another government that is
opposed to Israel’s theft of Palestine, and for Exxon’s Tillerson and
the neoconservative hegemonists to cut Russian natural gas off from
Europe with a US controlled gas pipeline from Qater to Europe via
Syria.
By ignoring all of these US advantages, the Russian government
dithered
in completing the liberation of Syria from Washington-backed ISIS.
The
Russians dithered, because they had totally unrealistic hopes of
achieving a partnership with Washington via a joint effort against
terrorism.
This was a ridiculous idea as terrorism is Washington’s
weapon. If
Washington can move Russia out of the way with threats or more
Russian
misplaced hopes of “cooperation” with Washington, terrorism will
next be
directed against Iran on a large scale. When Iran falls, terrorism
will
start to work on the Russian Federation and on the Chinese province
that
borders Kazakhstan. Washington has already given Russia a taste of
US-supported terrorism in Chechnya. More is to come.
If the Russian
government had not dithered in cleaning out ISIS from
Syria when Russia
unexpectedly took the lead from the West, Syria would
not face partition or
renewed US determination to overthrow Assad for
the reasons given above. But
the Russians, mesmerized by dreams of
cooperating with Washington, have put
both Syria and themselves in a
difficult position.
The Russians
grabbed the initiative and surprised the world by accepting
the Syrian
government’s invitation and entering the conflict. Washington
was helpless.
The Russian intervention immediately turned the tide
against ISIS. Then
suddenly Putin accounced a Russian pullout, claiming
like Bush on the
aircraft carrier, “Mission Accomplished.”
But mission wasn’t
accomplished, and Russia reentered, still with the
initiative but set back
somewhat from the irrational withdrawal. If
memory serves, this in and out
business happened a couple of times. Then
when Russia has the war agains
ISIS won, they hold back on the finish in
the vain belief that now
Washington will finally cooperate with Russia
in eliminating the last ISIS
stronghold. Instead, the US sent in
military forces to block the
Russian/Syrian advances. The Russian
Foreign Minister complained, but Russia
did not use its superior power
on the scene to move aside the token US
forces and bring the conflict to
an end.
Now Washington gives
“warnings” to Russia not to get in Washington’s
way. Will the Russian
government ever learn that coopertion with
Washington has only one meaning:
sign up as a vassal?
Russia’s only alternative now is to tell Washington
to go to hell, that
Russia will not permit Washington to remove Assad. But
the Russian Fifth
Column, which is allied with the West, will insist that
Russia can
finally gain Washington’s cooperation if only Russia will
sacrifice
Assad. Of course, Russia’s acquiescence will destroy the image of
Russian power, and it will be used to deprive Russia of foreign exchange
from natural gas sales to Europe.
Putin has said that Russia cannot
trust Washington. This is a correct
deduction from the facts, so why does
Russia keep putting itself in a
quandry by seeking cooperation with
Washington?
“Cooperation with Washington” has only one meaning. It means
surrender
to Washington.
Putin has only part-way cleaned up Russia.
The country remains full of
American agents. Will Putin fall to the
Washington Establishment just as
Trump has?
It is extraordinary how
little of the Russian media understand the peril
that Russia is
in.
*(9) Trump Joins The War Party -Brother Nathanael*
http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=1201
Trump
Joins The War Party
**
By Brother Nathanael Kapner
April 9,
2017 ©
HE’S IN THE ARMY NOW, we’ll never be rich, he’s digging us into a
ditch, he’s in the army now.
And Trump’s a war president who broke
his promise to “keep us out of
foreign wars.”
It wasn’t long ago that
Trump told Reuters, “*We should focus on ISIS,
not Syria.* You’re going to
end up in *World War Three over Syria if we
listen to Hillary*
Clinton.”
But the sound of US bombs bursting in air over Syria’s Shayrat
airfield
gave proof through the night that our flag’s over there, not here,
in
the abandoned land of America First.
“Intervene and you’re not
fighting Syria any more, you’re fighting
Syria, Russia and Iran,” Trump
reminded Reuters.
Welcome to the war party, Mr Trump!
The
Israel-Firsters at CNN, Capitol Hill, and AIPAC are proud of you.
Even
Senators Sissy Graham and Maniac McCain have warmed to you. Kind of
makes
you feel all nuked over, doesn’t it? I mean, real warm and real
fuzzy.
And Netanyahu thinks you’re the matzo ball king. Keep it up and
you’ll
be eating gefilte fish at his passover table!
You’ll be eating
more than gefilte, dear Donald. For out your own mouth
you warned Clinton
backers that they’d be fighting not just Syria, but
Russia and
Iran.
That’s a recipe for a Bar Mitzvah catered by Schumer, Schiff, and
Zeldin, where Goys are sent off to war while the Jews eat lox and bagels
at home. (Jews don’t send their own off to wars abroad for
Israel.)
You own that war now, Mr Trump, against the Russian bear and her
allies.
Who’s going to eat your words when you spew them out into a
nuclear
holocaust? That’ll be the REAL ‘holocaust’ that your Jewish enablers
will wreak upon the entire world.
ALL YOU ‘GOYIM’ who send your sons
to wars for Jews, you should’ve seen
it coming:
Netanyahu visits
Trump; IsraHell bombs Syria; Netanyahu demands buffer
zones into the Golan
Heights; Tillerson says Assad can stay; ‘Sarin gas’
(fake news) explodes in
Idlib; The Jew-owned media blames Assad sans any
proof; War criminals Mattis
and McMaster concur and Trump buys the JEW
LIE; Tillerson caves; Trump BOMBS
Syria; Tillerson reverses and says
Assad must go and Russia is complicit;
Jews applaud!
But what really galls the heck out of meeself, is seeing
the little Jew
worm, Jared Kushner, in the driver’s seat and Steve Bannon
sent to the
back of the bus.
No surprise.
The*Kushner family
gave Trump his start in New Jersey*, (couldn’t quite
break into Jew York
yet); funded his campaign from the get-go; and came
collecting, putting
sonny-boy as daddy-in-laws’ right hand man.
The more things change the
more Jews keep the war party going.
It’s a swamp out there.
How
can America soar with eagles when surrounded by turkeys?
It can’t…when
surrounded by war-mongering rats like Kushner & Tribe.
*(10)
Crowdstrike (behind “Russian Hacking” claims) has ties to
Soros-supported
Atlantic Council*
**
From: chris lancenet <chrislancenet@gmail.com> Date: Thu,
6 Apr 2017
03:21:08 +0900 Subject: Cyber Firm Behind “Russian Hacking”
Claims Has
Ties To Soros-Supported Think Tank | Zero Hedge
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-05/cyber-firm-behind-%E2%80%9Crussian-hacking%E2%80%9D-claims-has-ties-soros-supported-think-tank
Cyber
Firm Behind “Russian Hacking” Claims Has Ties To Soros-Supported
Think
Tank
by William Craddick Apr 5, 2017 10:43 AM
Via Disobedient
Media
The*cyber firm Crowdstrike has been one of the main proponents of
allegations that Russia interfered* in the 2016 American presidential
elections using their cyber capabilities. The analysis performed by
Crowdstrike was relied on almost exclusively by the Democratic National
Committee (DNC) to establish their claims of "Russian hacking."
It
has subsequently been revealed that Crowdstrike has in the past both
misrepresented data in an attempt to *frame the Russian government* for
cyber attacks and also failed to account for known capabilities of third
parties which enable them to impersonate Russian hackers. The founder of
Crowdstrike is also tied to the Atlantic Council, a think tank supported
by George Soros which has been accused of accepting funds in exchange
for support of favored policy positions as well as promoting
disinformation and propaganda attacks against anti establishment
figures.
I. Crowdstrike's Claims Of Russian Hacking Cannot Be
Independently
Verified By Government Agencies, Ignore Known Attribution
Techniques
On June 14, 2016, Crowdstrike published a study commissioned
by the DNC,
in which they accused the Russian government of breaching the
DNC's
computer systems. The DNC's choice to rely on Crowdstrike exclusively
was incredibly controversial. CNN reported that the DNC actually refused
to grant the FBI access to their servers despite the agency's explicitly
stating that they could conduct a satisfactory investigation if they
were forced to rely on third party data. The report by Crowdstrike stood
as one of the first definitive authorities which has found evidence of
Russian cyber infiltration or electronic meddling in the 2016 elections.
Rather than confirm the notion that Russia interfered in American
elections, a number of other developments since Crowdstrike's report
have cast increasing doubt on their claims and in fact have suggested
that they may be part of a widespread attempt to push disinformation for
financial gain and benefit to the groups clients and
affiliates.
Alarming indicators that Crowdstrike may have been promoting
the idea of
"Russian hacking" out of ulterior motives began to emerge almost
immediately after their report was released. On July 28th, 2016, The
Washington Post reported that Crowdstrike was one of a number of cyber
security firms making a large profit thanks to widespread fears about
Russian hackers. Beyond running a report which would satisfy the DNC,
the drumming up of fear about Russian cyber menaces meant created a
blatant potential conflict of interest for Crowdstrike.
Crowdstrike's
analysis also ignored known capabilities, since publicized
by Wikileaks in
their Day Zero and Marble releases from the Vault 7
series, which have
proven the existence of cyber capabilities that allow
*programmers mask the
identity of their malware* and *masquerade it as
belonging to foreign
intelligence agencies* and mimic their online
attack methods. They have also
shown that many programmers have the
ability to create an appearance of
‘false attribution’ which gives the
impression that the malware was created
by another country, even
mimicking the native language of the host country
they intend to
attribute the attack to. [...]
III. Crowdstrike Has
Ties To The Soros-Supported Atlantic Council
Further investigation has
revealed that Crowdstrike has deep ties to a
think tank which has a history
of pay to play practices and a track
record of seeking to foment
confrontation between the United States and
Russia. *Crowdstrike founder
Dmitri Alperovitch acts as a Senior Fellow
for the Atlantic Council*. In
February, Disobedient Media reported that
the Atlantic Council has a
troubling history of taking money from
foreign special interest groups and
government agencies in return for
pushing propaganda to support various
initiatives around the globe. The
New York Times has named the Atlantic
Council along with theBrookings
Institution and the Center for Strategic and
International Studies as
being think tanks which have made undisclosed
“agreements” with foreign
governments. The article denounced the Atlantic
Council for having
“opened a whole new window into an aspect of the
influence-buying in
Washington that has not previously been
exposed.”
In May 2016, a report by the Associated Press identified the
Atlantic
Council as one of a number of think tanks which had*received
funding
from the Ploughshares Fund*, which was a major player in efforts to
sell
the Iranian nuclear deal to the American public. The Ploughshares Fund
is financed by George Soros’ Open Society Foundation. The Atlantic
Council consistently promotes hostile, anti-Russian rhetoric. The
organization has also promoted unsourced and unfounded claims that
Russia was responsible for “hacking” the 2016 U.S. presidential
elections despite the fact that this conspiracy theory has been
resoundingly debunked by various authorities in the intelligence
community and by multiple media sources. The Atlantic Council, unfazed
by the evidence that their claims of hacking were false, have continued
to promote these falsehoods in the aftermath of the election in what
appeared to be a possible effort to undermine American democratic
institutions.
IV. Conclusion
The tight relationship between
Crowdstrike and a think tank which also
has a long track record of promoting
unproven claims about Russian
hacking, their failure to account for false
attribution techniques
commonly used by programmers to frame other countries
for hacking
attacks and their history of making factually untrue and
misleading
claims about Russian hacking creates concerns about their ability
to
objectively report on whether or not the DNC's servers were breached by
a foreign actor during the 2016 elections. Their association with the
DNC comes at a time when the party has been attempting to craft a
narrative of alleged Russian hacking to support their election bids in
the upcoming 2018 U.S. midterm elections and delegitimize the victories
of their political opponents in 2016.
The Atlantic Council's past
relationship with George Soros is also
problematic given that Soros has deep
financial ties to groups
organizing resistance movements as part of an
attempt to enact regime
change in the United States. As former CIA Director
Michael Morell,
James Clapper and the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence
have all clearly stated that there is not, nor has ever been
any
evidence that Russian hacking affected any election results in the 2016
U.S. Presidential Elections, the efforts of Crowdstrike to promote
claims to the contrary raises serious questions about their research as
well as the intentions of the DNC in preventing neutral federal
regulatory agencies from examining their servers firsthand to verify the
claims.*Cybersecurity experts ABANDON claims of Russian hacking;
CrowdStrike refuses to testify*
**
*(11) CrowdStrike retract
parts of report alleging Russian hack; refuses
to address Congress about its
findings*
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4376628/New-questions-claim-Russia-hacked-election.html
EXCLUSIVE:*Cybersecurity
experts who were first to conclude that Putin
hacked presidential election
ABANDON some of their claims against
Russia* - and refuse to co-operate with
Congress
Claims of Russian interference in the presidential election
through
hacking Democratic emails have been long-running scandal
First link between hacking and Vladimir Putin was made by
CrowdStrike,
Irvine, CA, based firm hired by the Democratic National
Committee
It concluded in June 2016 Moscow spies had hacked DNC - before
embarrassing
emails were published - setting off Russian election scandal
Cybersecurity firm examined DNC's servers, something FBI was not
allowed to
do, and its conclusion has been repeated by the intelligence
community
DailyMail.com reveals it has had to abandon key claims
in another
report on hacking by same Russians it blamed for DNC
attack
It used unproven claims by a pro-Putin blogger to wrongly
conclude
Russian hackers had helped to virtually wipe out Ukrainian
artillery
*CrowdStrike is also refusing to testify in public* to the
House
Intelligence Committee on what it knows and declined to speak to
DailyMail.com
By Alana Goodman For Dailymail.com
Published:
00:48 +10:00, 6 April 2017 | Updated: 01:40 +10:00, 6 April 2017
It was
an explosive conclusion which cast a pall over the entire
election: that the
Kremlin was behind a hack of the Democratic National
Committee which
resulted in its embarrassing secrets being published.
First made in June
2016, it has overshadowed the election, transition
and now presidency of
Donald Trump.
And the FBI, CIA, NSA and 12 other intelligence agencies
published an
unprecedented joint report saying the Vladimir Putin ordered a
hacking
campaign to tip the election against Hillary Clinton.
But now
the first expert company to make a link between the DNC hacks
and the
Kremlin is facing a damaging series of questions over its
credibility,
DailyMail.com can disclose.
Cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has had to
retract portions of a report
supporting its allegations of Russian
cyberattacks – and is also
refusing to address Congress about its findings
on Moscow's election
hacking.
Standing by his position: FBI Director
James Comey told the House
Intelligence Committee last month that the
conclusion on Putin hacking
the election was unchanged
*CrowdStrike
was hired by the Democratic National Committee* to
investigate suspicious
network activity last May. In June it declared
that the committee had been
hacked by the Russian government, starting a
firestorm over the
campaign.
CrowdStrike, based in Irvine, California, is also the only
group that
the DNC allowed to directly examine its servers.
Not even
the FBI has been granted access to the servers.
*U.S. agencies have
instead relied on CrowdStrike's work*. There is no
other known forensic
evidence which has been publicly disclosed to link
the Kremlin to the
attacks, including in a series of intelligence
community statements and
reports.
But now questions are emerging about the reliability of the
company's
findings.
DailyMail.com can disclose that *in March
CrowdStrike quietly retracted
portions of a December report* that had made
further Russian hacking
claims, after the firm was found to have relied on
inaccurate data
posted online by a pro-Putin 'propaganda'
blogger.
The errors prompted both the Ukrainian military and a prominent
British
think tank to issue public statements disputing CrowdStrike's
data.
The errors, and retraction, surrounded a report in December which
claimed that Fancy Bear, the same Russian hackers it said were behind
the DNC attacks, were working on behalf of Russia's military
intelligence agency, the GRU.
CrowdStrike said it found evidence that
Fancy Bear had also hacked into
Ukrainian military technology using the same
software it used to
infiltrate the DNC.
According to the report, the
hackers were targeting an app used by
Ukrainian soldiers to improve the
efficiency of ther 122mm howitzers.
The hack resulted in Ukraine losing 80
percent of these weapons in its
ongoing low-level battle with Russian forces
in the east of the country,
the report said.
The report received
widespread attention, including from NBC News,
Foreign Policy, and The
Guardian.
Alperovitch used an interview with the Washington Post to push
the
report and said: 'The fact that [these hackers] would be tracking and
helping the Russian military kill Ukrainian army personnel in eastern
Ukraine and also intervening in the U.S. election is quite
chilling.
And Donna Brazile, the interim chairman of the DNC who had been
revealed
by the leaked emails to have given CNN's debate questions in
advance to
Hillary Clinton, and who then lied about it, highlighted the
CrowdStrike
report on Twitter, saying: 'Cybersecurity firm finds a link
between DNC
hack and Ukrainian artillery'
Vested interest: *Donna
Brazile was revealed to be a cheat who handed
CNN's debate questions to
Hillary* Clinton and a liar who claimed
falsely that the leaked emails had
been altered. She promoted a
Washington Post story based on the
party-retracted CrowdStrike report
But questions about the report quickly
emerged. The Ukrainian military
posted a public statement disputing the
claim that it was the victim of
hackers and denying that it had lost such a
large number of howitzers.
The International Institute for Strategic
Studies – which CrowdStrike
cited as the source of its claim that 80 percent
of Ukraine's howitzers
had been taken out, told the VOA that this number was
inaccurate. It
said the actual percentage of howitzer losses was closer to
15 to 20
percent.
It was soon discovered that CrowdStrike had not
obtained this number
from IISS directly, and instead relied on post
published by a
pro-Russian website called The Saker.
The Saker
article was written by Russian blogger who goes by the name
'Colonel Cassad'
and calls himself the 'bullhorn of totalitarian
propaganda,' according to
Voice of America.
Last month CrowdStrike quietly dropped the key claim of
an 80 per cent
loss, adding a short statement above the initial blogpost to
say the
report had been 'amended' and due to 'an update' from the IISS about
the
howitzer numbers.
But CrowdStrike did not explain why its
researchers had used such
inflated numbers, or say how this could impacts
its conclusions.
It also did not address other concerns about the report
from the
Ukrainian military and the military app developer, who denied the
hacking claim entirely.
While the retraction does not mean that
Russia did not hack the DNC or
Ukraine, critics say it calls into question
CrowdStrike's work on the
subject.
Cybersecurity expert Jeffrey Carr
said this is part of 'a pattern' for
the company, and raises concerns about
its credibility.
'It shows a pattern, that CrowdStrike's intelligence
reports were
clearly a problem,' said Carr, who has authored books on cyber
warfare
and founded the security firm Taia Global Ltd.
'They just
found what they wanted to find…they didn't stop for a moment
to question it,
they didn't contact the primary source,' added Carr.
'This is like an
elementary school-level analysis.'
Source of claim: This is the website
where the 80 per cent claim made by
CrowdStrike was found. it is run by a
virulently pro-Putin blogger
*Alperovitch canceled a March 15 interview
with Voice of America, the
news outlet that first reported CrowdStrike had
misstated data* from the
ISSS. The company declined to speak to
DailyMail.com.
However CrowdStrike is proving hostile to further scrutiny
of its
methods, DailyMail.com can disclose.
Last month, CrowdStrike's
co-founder Dmitri Alperovitch and its
president Shawn Henry *turned down an
invitation to testify before the
House Intelligence Committee *about Russian
interference in the U.S.
election.
'They declined the invitation, so
we're communicating with them about
speaking to us privately,' said Jack
Langer, a spokesperson for House
Intelligence Committee chairman Devin
Nunes.
There remain unanswered questions about the sequence of events
which led
to the secrets of the DNC being laid bare.
The *DNC said it
originally hired CrowdStrike* in late April last year
after discovering
suspicious activity on its computer system indicating
a 'serious'
hack.
But according to internal emails, *CrowdStrike was already working
for
the DNC to investigate whether Bernie Sanders campaign staffers had
gained unauthorized access to its voter database*.
That five-week
investigation appeared to have wrapped up on April 29, 2016.
The DNC did
not make its first payment to CrowdStrike until early May.
Over the next
three months, it paid the cybersecurity firm a total of
$168,000.
*(12) Hacker Group Releases Password To NSA's "Top Secret
Arsenal"
InProtest Of Trump Betrayal*
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-08/hacker-group-releases-password-nsas-top-secret-arsenal-protest-trump-betrayal
by
Tyler Durden Apr 8, 2017 2:16 PM
Last August, the intel world was abuzz
following the news that a
previously unknown hacker collective, "The Shadow
Brokers" had hacked
and released legitimate hacking tools from the NSA's own
special-ops
entity, the "Equation Group", with initial speculation emerging
that the
Russians may have penetrated the US spy agency as suggested by none
other than Edward Snowden. The Shadow Brokers released a bunch of the
organization's hacking tools, and were asking for 1 million bitcoin
(around $568 million at the time) to release more files, however failed
to find a buyer.
Attention then shifted from Russians after some
speculated that the
agency itself may be housing another "mole" insider. At
the time, a
former NSA source told Motherboard, that “it’s plausible” that
the
leakers are actually a disgruntled insider, claiming that it’s easier to
walk out of the NSA with a USB drive or a CD than hack its servers." As
famed NSA whistleblower William Binney - who exposed the NSA's pervasive
surveillance of Americans long before Snowden confirmed it - said, “My
colleagues and I are fairly certain that this was no hack, or group for
that matter, This ‘Shadow Brokers’ character is one guy, an insider
employee."
In a subsequent Reuters op-ed by cybersecurity expert
James Bamford,
author of The Shadow Factory: The Ultra-Secret NSA From 9/11
to the
Eavesdropping on America, and columnist for Foreign Policy magazine,
he
said that seemed as the most probable explanation, and that Russia had
nothing to do with this latest - and most provocative yet -
hack.
Since then, the Shadow Broker group, whose origin and identity
still
remains a mystery, disappeared from the radar only to emerge today,
when
in an article posted on Medium, the group wrote an op-ed, much of it in
broken English, in which it slammed Donald Trump's betrayal of his core
"base", and the recent attack on Syria, urging Trump to revert to his
original promises and not be swept away by globalist and MIC interests,
but far more imporantly, released the password which grants access to
what Edward Snowden moments ago called the NSA's "Top Secret arsenal of
digital weapons."
The article begins with the group explaining why it
is displeased with
Trump.
Don’t Forget Your Base
Respectfully,
what the fuck are you doing? TheShadowBrokers voted for
you.
TheShadowBrokers supports you. TheShadowBrokers is losing faith in
you. Mr.
Trump helping theshadowbrokers, helping you. Is appearing you
are abandoning
“your base”, “the movement”, and the peoples who getting
you elected.
[...]
The peoples whose voted for you, voted against the Republican
Party, the
party that tried to destroying your character in the primaries.
The
peoples who voted for you, voted against the Democrat Party, the party
that hates, mocks, and laughs at you. Without the support of the peoples
who voted for you, what do you think will be happening to your
Presidency? Without the support of the people who voted for you, do you
think you’ll be still making America great again? Do you be remembering
when you were sitting there at the Obama Press Party and they were all
laughing at you? Do you be remembering when you touring the country and
all those peoples believed in you and supported you? You were those
peoples hope. How do you be thinking it will be feeling when those
people turn on you? Will they be laughing at you, hating you, and
mocking you too?
TheShadowBrokers doesn’t want this to be happening
to you, Mr. Trump.
TheShadowBrokers is wanting to see you succeed.
[...]
The report than goes on to suggest that the hacking group is in
fact
comprised mostly of former US spies: "President Trump, theshadowbrokers
is offering our services to you and your administration. Did you know
most of theshadowbrokers’ members have taken the oath “…to protect and
defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign
and domestic…”. Yes sir! *Most of us used to be TheDeepState* everyone
is talking about."
Then something changed, and the collective notes
that "The*DeepState is
being the enemy of the constitution*, individualism,
life, liberty, and
the pursuit of happiness. With the right funding we can
recruit some of
the best hacker intel peoples in United States and world.
“Unmasking” is
being new buzz word, so we use. TheShadowBrokers is being
happy to
unmask anyone we considering to be an enemy of the Constitution of
the
United States." [...]
Shortly after the blog post hit, Wikileaks
noticed:
Shadow Brokers releases password to NSA hacking tool binaries
from 2013
as "protest" over "abandoning base" https://t.co/zFrz1vumcL
pic.twitter.com/7ruMT0JPTH
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) April 8,
2017
Even Edward Snowden got involved
NSA just lost control of its
Top Secret arsenal of digital weapons;
hackers leaked it.1) https://t.co/zleVbyBtE32) https://t.co/aKwdiNbrJA
— Edward
Snowden (@Snowden) April 8, 2017
Bitter lesson:When any government
conceals knowledge of vulnerabilities
in common software, those vulns will
be found and used by enemies.
https://t.co/EfLgJMwbNs
— Edward
Snowden (@Snowden) April 8, 2017
Quick review of the #ShadowBrokers leak
of Top Secret NSA tools reveals
it's nowhere near the full library, but
there's still so... (1/2)
— Edward Snowden (@Snowden) April 8,
2017
Speak not because it is safe, but because it is right.
—
Edward Snowden (@Snowden) February 11, 2017 [...]
Wednesday, July 5, 2017
915 *Swedish Doctors on White Helmets Video, staged Chemical Weapons attack to justify No-Fly Zone*
*Swedish Doctors on White Helmets Video, staged Chemical Weapons attack
to justify No-Fly Zone*
**
Newsletter published on 9 April 2017
*(1) White Helmets Video, Macabre Manipulation of Dead Children and
Staged Chemical Weapons Attack to Justify a “No-Fly Zone”*
*(2) White Helmets Movie: Updated Evidence From Swedish Doctors Confirm
Fake ‘Lifesaving’ and Malpractices on Children*
*(3) White Helmets staged 'incidents' to instigate action against Syrian
gov't - Lavrov*
**
*(1) White Helmets Video, Macabre Manipulation of Dead Children and
Staged Chemical Weapons Attack to Justify a “No-Fly Zone”*
http://theindicter.com/swedish-doctors-for-human-rights-white-helmets-video-macabre-manipulation-of-dead-children-and-staged-chemical-weapons-attack-to-justify-a-no-fly-zone-in-syria/
Swedish Doctors for Human Rights: White Helmets Video, Macabre
Manipulation of Dead Children and Staged Chemical Weapons Attack to
Justify a “No-Fly Zone” in Syria
by The Indicter |posted in: March 2017 issue
By Prof Marcello Ferrada de Noli, chairman, Swedish Doctors for Human
Rights – SWEDHR.
An examination of a White Helmets video, conducted by Swedish medical
doctors, specialists in various fields, including paediatrics, have
revealed that the life-saving procedures seen in the film are incorrect
– in fact life-threatening – or simply fake, including simulated
emergency resuscitation techniques being used on already lifeless children.
The Alleged Sarmin Attack
There has been a recent, intense, publicity campaign that has
capitalised on the Oscar for best documentary being awarded to the NATO
and Gulf state funded organization, the White Helmets and their Netflix
documentary producers. [1] The White Helmets had previously been winners
of the “Alternative Nobel Prize”, given to them in Sweden in 2016. [2]
These various awards have ensured that the White Helmet fictitious
“saving-children-lives” videos have been re-circulating across corporate
and social media, a major PR coup for the sponsors of this questionable
organization.
Central to this PR campaign and just prior to the Oscar award ceremony,
Human Rights Watch published a “retrospective” report on February 13th
2017, focusing on spurious accounts of chemical attacks on the recently
liberated city of Aleppo. This familiar HRW propaganda piece recycled a
previous report from April 2015 detailing an alleged chlorine gas attack
in Sarmin, Idlib [4].
Footage of the aftermath of this attack was provided, at the time, by
none other than the White Helmets, which brings us to the macabre video,
uploaded by this alleged first responder NGO to YouTube on March 15th
2015. [5]
{caption} Kenneth Roth’s obsessed ‘denouncing’ of unverified chlorine
gas attacks, allegedly, carried out by the Syrian state against its own
people {end}
{caption} Ken Roth has waged a longstanding campaign for military
intervention in Syria and the No Fly Zone, effectively a declaration of
war {end}
The “Sarmin attack” report published by HRW in April 2015 is, in itself,
a remarkable feat of evidence engineering. HRW refers to two witnesses –
anonymous “Sarmin residents” – stating they have “heard” helicopters
“shortly before the attack”. They heard them but did not see them. Both
witnesses also reported hearing “no explosions”. [4] In the entire HRW
report there is not one reported sighting of a helicopter, the existence
of which should be an essential element of the White Helmet claims,
uncritically reproduced by HRW and never questioned by the UN.
One of the key witnesses cited in the HRW, April 2015, report is a White
Helmet operative by the name of Leith Fares: [6]
“Leith Fares, a rescue worker with Syrian Civil Defence, told Human
Rights Watch. “A helicopter always drops two barrels.” “You know, we
were at first actually happy,” Fares said. “It is usually good news when
there is no explosion.” [4]
A notably peculiar factor of the White Helmet footage of this alleged
attack is that they do not film any external shots of the attack itself,
despite their declared anticipation of being targeted, having “heard”
helicopters.
Instead, the only footage is of an enclosed indoor space with no
contextual filming to evidence where they are in Syria or that an attack
has just taken place. The indoor environment certainly resembles a
makeshift hospital emergency room. White Helmet “rescuers” parade in and
out, manhandling and maneuvering the limp, lifeless bodies of three
children. The naked bodies of these children have no external, visible
injuries and do not respond when the various “medics” perform all manner
of ostensibly “life-saving” procedures, in a haphazard effort to
resuscitate these children.
II “A Macabre Scene”
In order to obtain qualified clinical opinions, I sent the video
uploaded by White Helmets to eminent Swedish medical specialists. I
stressed that, particular attention, must be paid to the Syringe needle
procedure (seemingly, intracardiac injection) carried out on one of the
children.[Click on the image for a clip from the video, showing the
syringe-needle scene]:
Dr Leif Elinder, a known Swedish medical doctor profile, author and
specialist in paediatrics, summarised the following in his reply: [7]
“After examination of the video material, I found that the measures
inflicted upon those children, some of them lifeless, are bizarre,
non-medical, non-lifesaving, and even counterproductive in terms of
life-saving purposes of children”.
Further, I received a detailed clinical statement from Dr Lena Oske, a
Swedish medical doctor and general practitioner. In her statement, Dr
Oske referred to the presumed, adrenaline injection, performed in the
White Helmet video (excerpt in the photo above). Her specialist opinion
dismisses the procedure conducted in the White Helmet video, as
unqualified and incorrect. Furthermore, she describes the earlier
assessment of the procedure by a colleague who had exclaimed:
“If not already dead, this injection would have killed the child!” [...]
III ‘White Helmets’ Associations with Nusra-Front, Al-Qaeda in Syria
It is also important to highlight that the so called *White Helmets who
have bestowed upon themselves, the title of Syria Civil Defence*, are
actually fraudulently mimicking the REAL Syria Civil Defence,
established in Syria (not in Turkey) in 1953 and the only Syria Civil
Defence officially recognised as such, by the (UN affiliated)
International Civil Defence Organisation, based in Geneva.
This UK/US shadow state building project, in Syria, has been extensively
investigated in the prominent work of independent journalist, Vanessa
Beeley. [9] The authentic Syria Civil Defence serves an estimated 80
percent of the Syrian population inside Syria that lives under the
protection of the Syrian state in Syrian government held territory.
Conversely, the *White Helmets operate exclusively in Nusra Front and
ISIS terrorist-controlled areas* and therefore would service less than
20 percent of the remaining Syrian civilian population, when one takes
into account the sheer numbers of foreign mercenaries and militants who
also occupy those areas. Added to which, these “moderate” extremist held
areas are continuously dwindling as the Syrian armed forces and their
allies inexorably reconquer the national territory of Syria and release
it from the grip of externally funded terrorism. As the terrorist
factions are pushed out of liberated areas, such as East Aleppo, we
clearly see the White Helmets depart in tandem.
Evidence of the*White Helmet affiliation to the various terrorist
faction*s is extensively documented. There are evidenced reports on one
of the more prominent White Helmet leaders, Mustafa al Haj Yussef, in
Khan Sheikhoun, Idlib where many of the East Aleppo terrorists and their
civil defence have fled. [11] These reports detail his declarations of
allegiance to various extremist factions such as Ahrar Al Sham,
responsible for many of the ethnic cleansing pogroms across Syria.
Yussef has openly called for the shelling of civilians in Damascus
during the 2014 elections. He has advocated robbery, looting and
sectarian punishments and murder under certain circumstances. Imagine a
Red Cross official calling for such reprisals, and you can understand
how extraordinary this behaviour is for an Oscar winning, “neutral,
apolitical, impartial” allegedly, humanitarian NGO.
Yusef’s affiliations and behaviour are not the exception, the majority
of White Helmet operatives have demonstrated the same ideological
allegiances to extremist, armed groups in Syria.
The UN Theatre of the Macabre
The final scene of this “drama” is the closed-door session at the UN
Security Council, where the White Helmet video we have referred to, took
centre stage at a performance by former US Ambassador to the UN,
Samantha Power.
Predictably, the shocking scenes of children’s lifeless bodies being
crudely manipulated and “arranged” combined with the theatrical and
entirely ineffectual “life-saving” interventions – as depicted by the
White Helmet movie – emotionally impacted upon the UN decision makers.
In Samantha Power’s words:
“I saw no one in the room without tears. If there was a dry eye in the
room, I didn’t see it” [12]
Unfortunately, UN officials were so distracted by the macabre
performance they had just witnessed, that they did not think to ask for
a translation of the various instructions being issued by the “medics”
in the film. A rudimentary element of any investigation process must be
to clarify context, particularly when the results have potential to
precipitate a terrifying conflict escalation between the US and Russia
on Syrian soil.
SWEDHR took the time to get the dialogue in the White Helmet movie
translated. At 1:16 the doctor in full light green and a gray & black
jumper says:
”Include in the picture (meaning in the film or the frame -translators
note) the mother should be underneath and the children on top of her,
hey! Make sure the mother is underneath.”
Perhaps, if the video had been subtitled, the UN officials might have
queried this overt staging of an event that one must assume, was
chaotic, harrowing and stressful. Perhaps, they would have found it
strange, that in the midst of a “chemical weapon” attack, one of the
medics, attempting to save the lives of three Syrian children, would be
concerned with the positioning of their bodies for the camera.
*Objective: No Fly Zone*
**
The UNSC showing of the White Helmet footage, coincided with a universal
call for a No-Fly Zone from NATO and Gulf state funded “moderate rebel”
and terrorist groups, who depend upon the White Helmets for their civil
defence. This international No-Fly-Zone campaign gathered momentum on
the back of the UNSC tears over the White Helmet video of the alleged
Sarmin chlorine gas attack, and was even supported in the Swedish media.
[13]
In a later Channel 4 report on the alleged Sarmin chlorine gas attacks,
during which they aired a brief, sanitized segment of the White Helmet
video, Samantha Power declared:
“This document that we record now will be used at some point in a court
of law, and the perpetrators of this crime need to have that in mind” [14]
In addition to calls for a No-Fly Zone and the analogous term ‘Safe
Zones’, it should not be overlooked that all of the dubious and
misrepresented media reporting emanating from the White Helmets is also
being used to justify a continuous program of crippling US-led sanctions
against Syria. According to a 2016 leaked UN internal report [15], US
and EU economic sanctions on Syria are causing ‘huge suffering among
ordinary Syrians’ and prohibiting the delivery of essential,
humanitarian aid.
Conclusion
*UN representatives were moved to tears* by the spectacle presented to
them by the White Helmets. An appropriate response, to the black art
performance of the White Helmets, whose acting talents have propelled
them onto Hollywood’s red carpet. In any sane world, however, the
‘misuse’, the propaganda abuse, of the children being exploited as props
in a war that will inevitably kill more children, should also qualify
the White Helmets for due process in a court of law and condemn their
sponsors to prosecution in the European Court of Human Rights.
As for war-hawk, Samantha Power’s threats, echoed by her puppet human
rights organisations, controlled by western corporate elites, I would
like to mention that the war in Syria started when the US and NATO
states, in unholy alliance with Gulf State tyrannies, funded, trained
and armed the “moderate” extremist forces which have since invaded and
terrorized the Syrian state and its people, who have steadfastly stood
with their elected government against the tide of regime change
propaganda and proxy military intervention.
In the final judgement, when the international court for war crimes puts
the immoral warmongers on trial, they will be condemned and found guilty
of abhorrent crimes against Humanity by all the decent people of this world.
Acknowledgements
The author wish to thank independent journalist Vanessa Beeley for
invaluable feedback.
References, Notes.
[1] The nomination done by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and
Sciences took place January 27, 2017. The award decision was taken
February 26. The Human Rights Watch (HRW) report sustaining the
not-proved allegations by the White Helmets against the government of
Syria was published Feb 13, 2017, right in the middle of the period
between the nomination and the decision of the Oscar award to the film
White Helmets.
[2] M Ferrada de Noli, “Why Is Sweden Giving the “Alternative Nobel
Prize” to Syria’s ‘White Helmets’?” The Indicter Magazine, 25 November 2016.
[3] “Syria: Coordinated Chemical Attacks on Aleppo“. HRW, 13 February 2017.
[4] “Syria: Chemicals Used in Idlib Attacks”. HRW, 13 April 2015.
[5] “ ?? 26_3_2015”. Uploaded by ???? [“Syrian Civil Defence, Idlib”].
YouTube video published 16 March 2015.
[6] Leith (or Laith) Fares is repeatedly found in both Arab and Western
news giving statements –from a variety of locations in Syria– to
visiting Western journalists. For instance, while in the Human Rights
Watch report Fares gives the notion of being present at the alleged
event in Sarmin, in Arab News is given that Leith Fares is “a rescue
worker in Ariha”, and that “(Fares) told AFP his team had pulled at
least 20 wounded people out of the rubble.”
‘Laith Fares’ keeps also an uploading account in You Tube with
anti-Syria propaganda videos, and on behalf of White Helmets political
positions. [5]
Laith Fares’ YouTube account reaches 204 upload videos.
[7] Dr Leif Elinder’s email communication to the author, 4 March 2017.
[8] Dr Lena Oske’s email communication to the author, 4 March 2017.
[9] Vanessa Beeley, “The REAL Syria Civil Defence Exposes Fake ‘White
Helmets’ as Terrorist-Linked Imposters“. 21st Century Wire, 23 September
2016.
[10] Vanessa Beeley, ” Syria White Helmets Hand In Hand With Al Qaeda”.
YouTube, published 22 January 2017.
[11] Vanessa Beeley, ” ‘President’ Raed Saleh’s Terrorist Connections
within White Helmet Leadership“. 21st Century Wire, 10 December 2016.
[12] Nick Logan, “UN officials in tears watching video from alleged
chlorine attack in Syria”. Global News, 17 April 2017.
[13] See video “Sweden’s elites endorse H. Clinton No Fly Zone War with
Russia & Syria”. The Indicter Channel, YouTube, published 22 November 2016.
[14] Quoted from ”UN tears over Syria chlorine attack video”. Channel 4
News. YouTube video published 17 April 2015.
[15] Patrick Cockburn, US and EU sanctions are ruining ordinary Syrians’
lives, yet Bashar al-Assad hangs on to power, The Independent (UK),
October 2016. __
The author:
Professor Dr med Marcello Ferrada de Noli, formerly at the Karoilinska
Institute and ex Research Fellow Harvard Medical School, is the founder
and chairman of Swedish Professors and Doctors for Human Rights and
editor-in-chief of The Indicter. Also publisher of The Professors’ Blog,
and CEO of Libertarian Books – Sweden. Author of “Sweden VS. Assange –
Human Rights Issues.” Apart of research works published in scientific
journals,his op-ed articles have been published in Dagens Nyheter (DN),
Svenska Dagbladet (Svd), Aftonbladet, Västerbotten Kuriren, Dagens
Medicin,Läkartidningen and other Swedish media. He also has had
exclusive interviews in DN, Expressen, SvD and Aftonbladet, and in
Swedish TV channels (Svt 2, TV4, TV5) as well as international TV and
media (e.g. Norway, Italy TG, Cuba, Chile, DW, Sputnik, RT, Pravda, etc.).
Reachable via email at editors@theindicter.com, chair@swedhr.org
Follow the professor on Twitter at @Professorsblogg
*(2) White Helmets Movie: Updated Evidence From Swedish Doctors Confirm
Fake ‘Lifesaving’ and Malpractices on Children*
http://theindicter.com/white-helmets-movie-updated-evidence-from-swedish-doctors-confirm-fake-lifesaving-and-malpractices-on-children/
by The Indicter |posted in: March 2017 issue
By Prof Marcello Ferrada de Noli,
Chairman, Swedish Doctors for Human Rights – SWEDHR.
I Summary. This article reports updated findings I obtained in a further
examination of videos published by the White Helmets, and which aimed to
represent consequences of an alleged gas attack in Sarmine in March 2015
[See my first report of March 6, 2017]. [1] The videos depict a medical
rescuing scenario focused on ‘lifesaving’ procedures on children.
The new findings, which have also been confirmed in second-opinions
issued by MD specialists and members of Swedish Doctors for Human Rights
(SWEDHR) on March 12, 2017, a) demonstrate that the main highlighted
‘life-saving‘ procedure on the infant shown in the second video of the
sequence was faked. Namely, no substance (e.g. adrenaline) was injected
into the child while the ‘medic’ or doctor introduced the syringe-needle
in a simulated intracardiac-injection manoeuvre [See video below with
the findings’ synopsis]; b) may bring support to the hypothesis
mentioned by doctors in the previous report, referring that the child in
question, “if not already dead, might have died because the injection
procedure”.
The three children subjected to ‘life-saving’ procedures in the second
video were eventually dead, and the cause of death –that according to
the White helmets video would be attributed to chlorine gas– has been
disputed by other medical opinions independently of the assessments by
the Swedish doctors mentioned in the SWEDHR reports. For instance, in
the opinion of a UK doctor, the health-status in reference to the above
mentioned child could be instead attributed to drug overdose, likely
opiates.
The findings in these reports raise serious questions about the ethical
integrity of the organization White Helmets, on the anti-medical
procedures they advertise in its videos, and the war-criminal behaviour
represented by the misuse of dead children with propaganda aims.
Synopsis of the findings, in video upload in You Tube by The Indicter
Channel, March 12.
II The White Helmets videos
The White Helmets videos analysed here are two consecutive uploadings
done on March 16, 2017 by the “Syrian Civil Defense in Idlib Province”
(a description given by White Helmets to themselves) [2] which will be
here referred to as respectively “WH Vid-1≤, and “WH Vid-2”. [3] [4] The
production of the videos served the immediate purpose by White Helmets
and the “moderate rebels” of promoting “their” campaign for a No-Fly
Zone in Syria. In fact, the campaign has its origins in Hillary
Clinton’s doctrine, as showed in a video upload by The Indicter Channel’
here. [5]
At the time, *Senator McCain, the White Helmets, al-Nusra Front and
other CIA-backed jihadist organizations were intensively campaigning for
a No-Fly Zone* in Syria. The videos aimed to represent the effects of an
alleged gas attack in Sarmin, and imputed to the Syrian government. No
evidence was ever produced regarding the attacks, beside two “anonymous”
witnesses that claimed they had heard a helicopter (“heard”; not “seen”
the helicopter). One of the anonymous sources turned out to be a White
Helmets personnel [1].
The *‘save-rescuing’ videos,* whose content was never analyzed or
verified, were thereafter *shown at the UN Security Council *April 16,
2015. After that meeting, US Ambassador Samantha Powers declared, “I saw
no one in the room without tears. If there was a dry eye in the room, I
didn’t see it”. [6] Reuters reported the event [Box embedded in image
below].
Ensuing, just four days after, on April 20, 2015, CNN broadcasted a
news-program reproducing segments taken from exactly the same videos and
propagated for the No-Fly Zone on behalf of “the Syrian doctors”
campaigning. The newscast was published by CNN in YouTube on April 20,
2015. [7] The CNN anchor presented the ‘Syrian doctor’ “who has
campaigned around the world for a no-fly zone” [Hear it in the MP3 audio
here below]:
A striking, as well as politically relevant fact relating to these
videos that were showed at the UN Security Council –and thereafter
reproduced by CNN– is that such videos had been *simultaneously
published in YouTube, on the same day* 16 of March 2015, *by an
organization showing a logo with the jihadist Shahada flag used by
Al-Qaeda*. According to communications I have received from European
journalists with contacts inside Syria – the origins of “Coordinating
Sarmin” (??????? ?????) –organization behind the propaganda videos
posted by, and in apparent coordination, them and the White Helmets– is
to be found in earlier al-Qaeda formations. The flags and symbols showed
in the image sequence below may offer proof to such communications.
The reproduction of those al-Qaeda / White Helmets footage by CNN,
camouflaged as “normal news”, is a fact that should be investigated
together with the deceiving content in such footage. A clearer
illustration of ‘fake news’ around the disinformation on the Syrian
conflict is hard to find.
It is remarkable that no UN official, no CNN journalist, etc., ever
reflected on the veracity or authenticity of the enacted ‘saving-lives’
scenes in the video. For instance, and to the best of my knowledge, this
is the first time that an analysis of the syringe episode is conducted
in the terms I describe here below.
The result of this observation, later supported by two Swedish doctors
–one GP and a pediatrician– demonstrates that the syringe’s content was
never pumped into the needle injected in the infant’s chest. An
alternative explanation, equally bizarre, is that the child was injected
with the needle connected to an empty syringe-barrel.
III The frame-analysis of the White Helmets video WH Vid-2
Procedure:
Between March 9 and March 10 I studied the video by running it in slow
motion.
After I selected the segment, I studied the sequence frame by frame. I
took screenshots of the relevant frames in sequence, which also
indicated the position on the video in order to allow visualization of
the full sequence.
On March 11, I made a 27% slow-motion video sequence, and I sent
thereafter the link with the material to the same doctors, colleagues at
SWEDHR, which have examined the first material [published in The
Indicter on March 6], Dr Leif Elinder and Dr Lena Oske. The video
featured the full syringe-episode.
On March 12, I received the feedback of my colleagues, statements which
are attached in Section IV below. Furthermore, Dr Martin Gelin –also a
senior member of SWEDHR– made post-observations about the laryngoscope
positioned on the child’s left wrist/hand.
The same day I summarized the results and published a synopsis of the
findings via The Indicter Channel. [12]
V Conclusion
‘Lifesaving’ procedures on the children showed in the White Helmets
videos were found to be fake, and ultimately performed on dead children.
The syringe used in the ‘intracardial injection’ performed on the male
infant was empty, or its fluid was never injected into the child.
This same child showed, briefly, discrete life-signs (uncertain in my
judgement) in the first segment of WH Vid-1. If so, this child might
have died during the lapse in which the ‘lifesaving’ manoeuvres showed
in the White Helmets movie went on. (Which is not the same than
affirming that the personnel seen in the videos caused the dead of the
infant. In forensic terms, the actual cause of death, as well as the
mode and the issue of intent, refer to different items than those
treated in our analysis).
External comment ref. likely diagnosis
I received a reply via email from a medical doctor in the UK. I withhold
his name and specialty (not pediatrics) in order to avoid
identification, since he expressly asked to remain anonymous, for
reasons I understand.
The UK Dr hypothesizes the following:
“I think that even from the very brief video, we can see that this child
has a reduced level of consciousness: he does not vocalize, does not
open his eyes, and his only movements are to turn his head to one side
and to open his mouth before he stops breathing altogether. This looks
like respiratory depression, rather than injury to the lungs; he appears
to be too sleepy to breathe.I think the most likely diagnosis is a drug
overdose causing reduced level of consciousness and respiratory
depression.Opiates are the most likely class of drug to cause this.
Chlorine causes acute inhalation injury, but does not (in any of the
sources I have read) cause reduced level of consciousness: the victim
struggles to breathe until the end.” [16]
Editors Note: This article was updated by the author March 18, 2017.
Medical opinions are welcome in the discussion, replication or
refutation of the above findings. Email to editors@theindicter.com
Read also: 1. "Swedish Doctors for Human Rights: White Helmets Video,
Macabre Manipulation of Dead Children and Staged Chemical Weapons Attack
to Justify a “No-Fly Zone” in Syria"2."Swedish Doctors for Human Rights
Reply to German ARD/BR-Television ‘Verification Team’ ref. RT interview
on White Helmets video"
Notes and references
[1] M. Ferrada de Noli, “Swedish Doctors for Human Rights: White Helmets
Video, Macabre Manipulation of Dead Children and Staged Chemical Weapons
Attack to Justify a ‘No-Fly Zone’ in Syria“. The Indicter Magazine,
March 6, 2017.
[2] See info. in Vanessa Beeley’s Twitter, October 6, 2016. More from
author V. Beeley ref. the real Syrian Civil Defence, in this article.
[3] Upload by White Helmets under the name “Syrian Civil Defence in
Idlib Province”, “ ???? 26_3_2015”. YouTube video published 16 March
2015. Here referred as to “WH Vid-1”.
[4] Upload by White Helmets under the name “Syrian Civil Defence in
Idlib Province”,
???, YouTube video published 16 March 2015. Here referred as to “WH Vid-2”.
[5] “Sweden’s elites endorse H. Clinton No Fly Zone War with Russia &
Syria“. The Indicter Channel, November 22, 2016.
[6] Nick Logan, “UN officials in tears watching video from alleged
chlorine attack in Syria”. Global News, 17 April 2017.
[7] CNN, “Chlorine gas attack reported in Syria“. CNN Channel, YouTube,
April 20, 2015.
[8] “Know Your Terror Flags”. The Muslim Issue, Word press blog.
September 28, 2013.
[9] Image found in “Pinterest”.
[10] Jenna McLaughlin, “Stop Mixing Up Islamic Flags: A Guide for Lazy
Journalists“. Mother Jones, December 16, 2014.
The author quotes: “Black banners will appear from the East and they
will kill you in a way that has never before been done by a nation.”
Many Islamic flags—especially those of militant groups—are black in
reference to this hadith.”
[11] Retrieved March 16, 2017, at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gx2h3_jXGzc at 0:01 / 0:35
[12] “White Helmets video with fake life-saving procedures deceived UN
sec council“. Published by The Indicter Channel, YouTube, March 12, 2017.
[13] Email-reply from Dr Leif Elinder, March 12, 2017.
[14] Email-reply from Dr Lena Oske, March 12, 2017.
[15] Email-reply from Dr Martin Gelin, March 18, 2017.
[16] Email-reply from UK Dr, March 11, 2017.
*(3) White Helmets staged 'incidents' to instigate action against Syrian
gov't - Lavrov*
**
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-07/putin-responds-syria-strikes-cripple-us-russia-relations-deploys-cruise-missile-frig
Putin Responds: Syria Strikes "Cripple US-Russia Relations"; Deploys
Cruise Missile Frigate To Syria
by Tyler Durden
Apr 7, 2017 6:12 AM
Responding to Trump's unexpected military attack on Syria in which 59
cruise missiles were launched (of which only 23 allegedly hit their
target), Russian President Vladimir Putin "regards the strikes as
aggression against a sovereign nation,” his spokesman Dmitry Peskov
said, noting that the president believes the strikes were carried out
“in violation of international law, and also under an invented pretext.”
The Kremlin spokesman insisted that “the Syrian army doesn’t have
chemical weapons,” saying this had been “observed and confirmed by the
Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, a special UN
unit.” [...]
Other Russians took the opportunity to opine as well, led by Russian
foreign minister Sergey Lavrov who said the US missile attack on a
Syrian airbase is an act of aggression under a far-fetched pretext and
is *reminiscent of the 2003 invasion of Iraq*.
Quoted by Tass, the top Russian diplomat said "It is an act of
aggression under a completely far-fetched pretext. This is reminiscent
of the situation in 2003, when the US and the UK, along with some of
their allies, invaded Iraq without the consent of the UN Security
Council and in violation of international law."
"When speaking about the military intervention in Iraq many years after
it happened, Tony Blair (who served as the Prime Minister of the United
Kingdom from 1997 to 2007) acknowledged that they had misled everybody,"
Lavrov emphasized. "Now *they did not even bother to provide any facts
referring only to photos*," he noted. "They indulged in speculations on
children’s photos, on evidence provided by various non-governmental
organizations, including the so-called *White Helmets, which staged
various 'incidents' to instigate action against the Syrian government*."
[...]
to justify No-Fly Zone*
**
Newsletter published on 9 April 2017
*(1) White Helmets Video, Macabre Manipulation of Dead Children and
Staged Chemical Weapons Attack to Justify a “No-Fly Zone”*
*(2) White Helmets Movie: Updated Evidence From Swedish Doctors Confirm
Fake ‘Lifesaving’ and Malpractices on Children*
*(3) White Helmets staged 'incidents' to instigate action against Syrian
gov't - Lavrov*
**
*(1) White Helmets Video, Macabre Manipulation of Dead Children and
Staged Chemical Weapons Attack to Justify a “No-Fly Zone”*
http://theindicter.com/swedish-doctors-for-human-rights-white-helmets-video-macabre-manipulation-of-dead-children-and-staged-chemical-weapons-attack-to-justify-a-no-fly-zone-in-syria/
Swedish Doctors for Human Rights: White Helmets Video, Macabre
Manipulation of Dead Children and Staged Chemical Weapons Attack to
Justify a “No-Fly Zone” in Syria
by The Indicter |posted in: March 2017 issue
By Prof Marcello Ferrada de Noli, chairman, Swedish Doctors for Human
Rights – SWEDHR.
An examination of a White Helmets video, conducted by Swedish medical
doctors, specialists in various fields, including paediatrics, have
revealed that the life-saving procedures seen in the film are incorrect
– in fact life-threatening – or simply fake, including simulated
emergency resuscitation techniques being used on already lifeless children.
The Alleged Sarmin Attack
There has been a recent, intense, publicity campaign that has
capitalised on the Oscar for best documentary being awarded to the NATO
and Gulf state funded organization, the White Helmets and their Netflix
documentary producers. [1] The White Helmets had previously been winners
of the “Alternative Nobel Prize”, given to them in Sweden in 2016. [2]
These various awards have ensured that the White Helmet fictitious
“saving-children-lives” videos have been re-circulating across corporate
and social media, a major PR coup for the sponsors of this questionable
organization.
Central to this PR campaign and just prior to the Oscar award ceremony,
Human Rights Watch published a “retrospective” report on February 13th
2017, focusing on spurious accounts of chemical attacks on the recently
liberated city of Aleppo. This familiar HRW propaganda piece recycled a
previous report from April 2015 detailing an alleged chlorine gas attack
in Sarmin, Idlib [4].
Footage of the aftermath of this attack was provided, at the time, by
none other than the White Helmets, which brings us to the macabre video,
uploaded by this alleged first responder NGO to YouTube on March 15th
2015. [5]
{caption} Kenneth Roth’s obsessed ‘denouncing’ of unverified chlorine
gas attacks, allegedly, carried out by the Syrian state against its own
people {end}
{caption} Ken Roth has waged a longstanding campaign for military
intervention in Syria and the No Fly Zone, effectively a declaration of
war {end}
The “Sarmin attack” report published by HRW in April 2015 is, in itself,
a remarkable feat of evidence engineering. HRW refers to two witnesses –
anonymous “Sarmin residents” – stating they have “heard” helicopters
“shortly before the attack”. They heard them but did not see them. Both
witnesses also reported hearing “no explosions”. [4] In the entire HRW
report there is not one reported sighting of a helicopter, the existence
of which should be an essential element of the White Helmet claims,
uncritically reproduced by HRW and never questioned by the UN.
One of the key witnesses cited in the HRW, April 2015, report is a White
Helmet operative by the name of Leith Fares: [6]
“Leith Fares, a rescue worker with Syrian Civil Defence, told Human
Rights Watch. “A helicopter always drops two barrels.” “You know, we
were at first actually happy,” Fares said. “It is usually good news when
there is no explosion.” [4]
A notably peculiar factor of the White Helmet footage of this alleged
attack is that they do not film any external shots of the attack itself,
despite their declared anticipation of being targeted, having “heard”
helicopters.
Instead, the only footage is of an enclosed indoor space with no
contextual filming to evidence where they are in Syria or that an attack
has just taken place. The indoor environment certainly resembles a
makeshift hospital emergency room. White Helmet “rescuers” parade in and
out, manhandling and maneuvering the limp, lifeless bodies of three
children. The naked bodies of these children have no external, visible
injuries and do not respond when the various “medics” perform all manner
of ostensibly “life-saving” procedures, in a haphazard effort to
resuscitate these children.
II “A Macabre Scene”
In order to obtain qualified clinical opinions, I sent the video
uploaded by White Helmets to eminent Swedish medical specialists. I
stressed that, particular attention, must be paid to the Syringe needle
procedure (seemingly, intracardiac injection) carried out on one of the
children.[Click on the image for a clip from the video, showing the
syringe-needle scene]:
Dr Leif Elinder, a known Swedish medical doctor profile, author and
specialist in paediatrics, summarised the following in his reply: [7]
“After examination of the video material, I found that the measures
inflicted upon those children, some of them lifeless, are bizarre,
non-medical, non-lifesaving, and even counterproductive in terms of
life-saving purposes of children”.
Further, I received a detailed clinical statement from Dr Lena Oske, a
Swedish medical doctor and general practitioner. In her statement, Dr
Oske referred to the presumed, adrenaline injection, performed in the
White Helmet video (excerpt in the photo above). Her specialist opinion
dismisses the procedure conducted in the White Helmet video, as
unqualified and incorrect. Furthermore, she describes the earlier
assessment of the procedure by a colleague who had exclaimed:
“If not already dead, this injection would have killed the child!” [...]
III ‘White Helmets’ Associations with Nusra-Front, Al-Qaeda in Syria
It is also important to highlight that the so called *White Helmets who
have bestowed upon themselves, the title of Syria Civil Defence*, are
actually fraudulently mimicking the REAL Syria Civil Defence,
established in Syria (not in Turkey) in 1953 and the only Syria Civil
Defence officially recognised as such, by the (UN affiliated)
International Civil Defence Organisation, based in Geneva.
This UK/US shadow state building project, in Syria, has been extensively
investigated in the prominent work of independent journalist, Vanessa
Beeley. [9] The authentic Syria Civil Defence serves an estimated 80
percent of the Syrian population inside Syria that lives under the
protection of the Syrian state in Syrian government held territory.
Conversely, the *White Helmets operate exclusively in Nusra Front and
ISIS terrorist-controlled areas* and therefore would service less than
20 percent of the remaining Syrian civilian population, when one takes
into account the sheer numbers of foreign mercenaries and militants who
also occupy those areas. Added to which, these “moderate” extremist held
areas are continuously dwindling as the Syrian armed forces and their
allies inexorably reconquer the national territory of Syria and release
it from the grip of externally funded terrorism. As the terrorist
factions are pushed out of liberated areas, such as East Aleppo, we
clearly see the White Helmets depart in tandem.
Evidence of the*White Helmet affiliation to the various terrorist
faction*s is extensively documented. There are evidenced reports on one
of the more prominent White Helmet leaders, Mustafa al Haj Yussef, in
Khan Sheikhoun, Idlib where many of the East Aleppo terrorists and their
civil defence have fled. [11] These reports detail his declarations of
allegiance to various extremist factions such as Ahrar Al Sham,
responsible for many of the ethnic cleansing pogroms across Syria.
Yussef has openly called for the shelling of civilians in Damascus
during the 2014 elections. He has advocated robbery, looting and
sectarian punishments and murder under certain circumstances. Imagine a
Red Cross official calling for such reprisals, and you can understand
how extraordinary this behaviour is for an Oscar winning, “neutral,
apolitical, impartial” allegedly, humanitarian NGO.
Yusef’s affiliations and behaviour are not the exception, the majority
of White Helmet operatives have demonstrated the same ideological
allegiances to extremist, armed groups in Syria.
The UN Theatre of the Macabre
The final scene of this “drama” is the closed-door session at the UN
Security Council, where the White Helmet video we have referred to, took
centre stage at a performance by former US Ambassador to the UN,
Samantha Power.
Predictably, the shocking scenes of children’s lifeless bodies being
crudely manipulated and “arranged” combined with the theatrical and
entirely ineffectual “life-saving” interventions – as depicted by the
White Helmet movie – emotionally impacted upon the UN decision makers.
In Samantha Power’s words:
“I saw no one in the room without tears. If there was a dry eye in the
room, I didn’t see it” [12]
Unfortunately, UN officials were so distracted by the macabre
performance they had just witnessed, that they did not think to ask for
a translation of the various instructions being issued by the “medics”
in the film. A rudimentary element of any investigation process must be
to clarify context, particularly when the results have potential to
precipitate a terrifying conflict escalation between the US and Russia
on Syrian soil.
SWEDHR took the time to get the dialogue in the White Helmet movie
translated. At 1:16 the doctor in full light green and a gray & black
jumper says:
”Include in the picture (meaning in the film or the frame -translators
note) the mother should be underneath and the children on top of her,
hey! Make sure the mother is underneath.”
Perhaps, if the video had been subtitled, the UN officials might have
queried this overt staging of an event that one must assume, was
chaotic, harrowing and stressful. Perhaps, they would have found it
strange, that in the midst of a “chemical weapon” attack, one of the
medics, attempting to save the lives of three Syrian children, would be
concerned with the positioning of their bodies for the camera.
*Objective: No Fly Zone*
**
The UNSC showing of the White Helmet footage, coincided with a universal
call for a No-Fly Zone from NATO and Gulf state funded “moderate rebel”
and terrorist groups, who depend upon the White Helmets for their civil
defence. This international No-Fly-Zone campaign gathered momentum on
the back of the UNSC tears over the White Helmet video of the alleged
Sarmin chlorine gas attack, and was even supported in the Swedish media.
[13]
In a later Channel 4 report on the alleged Sarmin chlorine gas attacks,
during which they aired a brief, sanitized segment of the White Helmet
video, Samantha Power declared:
“This document that we record now will be used at some point in a court
of law, and the perpetrators of this crime need to have that in mind” [14]
In addition to calls for a No-Fly Zone and the analogous term ‘Safe
Zones’, it should not be overlooked that all of the dubious and
misrepresented media reporting emanating from the White Helmets is also
being used to justify a continuous program of crippling US-led sanctions
against Syria. According to a 2016 leaked UN internal report [15], US
and EU economic sanctions on Syria are causing ‘huge suffering among
ordinary Syrians’ and prohibiting the delivery of essential,
humanitarian aid.
Conclusion
*UN representatives were moved to tears* by the spectacle presented to
them by the White Helmets. An appropriate response, to the black art
performance of the White Helmets, whose acting talents have propelled
them onto Hollywood’s red carpet. In any sane world, however, the
‘misuse’, the propaganda abuse, of the children being exploited as props
in a war that will inevitably kill more children, should also qualify
the White Helmets for due process in a court of law and condemn their
sponsors to prosecution in the European Court of Human Rights.
As for war-hawk, Samantha Power’s threats, echoed by her puppet human
rights organisations, controlled by western corporate elites, I would
like to mention that the war in Syria started when the US and NATO
states, in unholy alliance with Gulf State tyrannies, funded, trained
and armed the “moderate” extremist forces which have since invaded and
terrorized the Syrian state and its people, who have steadfastly stood
with their elected government against the tide of regime change
propaganda and proxy military intervention.
In the final judgement, when the international court for war crimes puts
the immoral warmongers on trial, they will be condemned and found guilty
of abhorrent crimes against Humanity by all the decent people of this world.
Acknowledgements
The author wish to thank independent journalist Vanessa Beeley for
invaluable feedback.
References, Notes.
[1] The nomination done by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and
Sciences took place January 27, 2017. The award decision was taken
February 26. The Human Rights Watch (HRW) report sustaining the
not-proved allegations by the White Helmets against the government of
Syria was published Feb 13, 2017, right in the middle of the period
between the nomination and the decision of the Oscar award to the film
White Helmets.
[2] M Ferrada de Noli, “Why Is Sweden Giving the “Alternative Nobel
Prize” to Syria’s ‘White Helmets’?” The Indicter Magazine, 25 November 2016.
[3] “Syria: Coordinated Chemical Attacks on Aleppo“. HRW, 13 February 2017.
[4] “Syria: Chemicals Used in Idlib Attacks”. HRW, 13 April 2015.
[5] “ ?? 26_3_2015”. Uploaded by ???? [“Syrian Civil Defence, Idlib”].
YouTube video published 16 March 2015.
[6] Leith (or Laith) Fares is repeatedly found in both Arab and Western
news giving statements –from a variety of locations in Syria– to
visiting Western journalists. For instance, while in the Human Rights
Watch report Fares gives the notion of being present at the alleged
event in Sarmin, in Arab News is given that Leith Fares is “a rescue
worker in Ariha”, and that “(Fares) told AFP his team had pulled at
least 20 wounded people out of the rubble.”
‘Laith Fares’ keeps also an uploading account in You Tube with
anti-Syria propaganda videos, and on behalf of White Helmets political
positions. [5]
Laith Fares’ YouTube account reaches 204 upload videos.
[7] Dr Leif Elinder’s email communication to the author, 4 March 2017.
[8] Dr Lena Oske’s email communication to the author, 4 March 2017.
[9] Vanessa Beeley, “The REAL Syria Civil Defence Exposes Fake ‘White
Helmets’ as Terrorist-Linked Imposters“. 21st Century Wire, 23 September
2016.
[10] Vanessa Beeley, ” Syria White Helmets Hand In Hand With Al Qaeda”.
YouTube, published 22 January 2017.
[11] Vanessa Beeley, ” ‘President’ Raed Saleh’s Terrorist Connections
within White Helmet Leadership“. 21st Century Wire, 10 December 2016.
[12] Nick Logan, “UN officials in tears watching video from alleged
chlorine attack in Syria”. Global News, 17 April 2017.
[13] See video “Sweden’s elites endorse H. Clinton No Fly Zone War with
Russia & Syria”. The Indicter Channel, YouTube, published 22 November 2016.
[14] Quoted from ”UN tears over Syria chlorine attack video”. Channel 4
News. YouTube video published 17 April 2015.
[15] Patrick Cockburn, US and EU sanctions are ruining ordinary Syrians’
lives, yet Bashar al-Assad hangs on to power, The Independent (UK),
October 2016. __
The author:
Professor Dr med Marcello Ferrada de Noli, formerly at the Karoilinska
Institute and ex Research Fellow Harvard Medical School, is the founder
and chairman of Swedish Professors and Doctors for Human Rights and
editor-in-chief of The Indicter. Also publisher of The Professors’ Blog,
and CEO of Libertarian Books – Sweden. Author of “Sweden VS. Assange –
Human Rights Issues.” Apart of research works published in scientific
journals,his op-ed articles have been published in Dagens Nyheter (DN),
Svenska Dagbladet (Svd), Aftonbladet, Västerbotten Kuriren, Dagens
Medicin,Läkartidningen and other Swedish media. He also has had
exclusive interviews in DN, Expressen, SvD and Aftonbladet, and in
Swedish TV channels (Svt 2, TV4, TV5) as well as international TV and
media (e.g. Norway, Italy TG, Cuba, Chile, DW, Sputnik, RT, Pravda, etc.).
Reachable via email at editors@theindicter.com, chair@swedhr.org
Follow the professor on Twitter at @Professorsblogg
*(2) White Helmets Movie: Updated Evidence From Swedish Doctors Confirm
Fake ‘Lifesaving’ and Malpractices on Children*
http://theindicter.com/white-helmets-movie-updated-evidence-from-swedish-doctors-confirm-fake-lifesaving-and-malpractices-on-children/
by The Indicter |posted in: March 2017 issue
By Prof Marcello Ferrada de Noli,
Chairman, Swedish Doctors for Human Rights – SWEDHR.
I Summary. This article reports updated findings I obtained in a further
examination of videos published by the White Helmets, and which aimed to
represent consequences of an alleged gas attack in Sarmine in March 2015
[See my first report of March 6, 2017]. [1] The videos depict a medical
rescuing scenario focused on ‘lifesaving’ procedures on children.
The new findings, which have also been confirmed in second-opinions
issued by MD specialists and members of Swedish Doctors for Human Rights
(SWEDHR) on March 12, 2017, a) demonstrate that the main highlighted
‘life-saving‘ procedure on the infant shown in the second video of the
sequence was faked. Namely, no substance (e.g. adrenaline) was injected
into the child while the ‘medic’ or doctor introduced the syringe-needle
in a simulated intracardiac-injection manoeuvre [See video below with
the findings’ synopsis]; b) may bring support to the hypothesis
mentioned by doctors in the previous report, referring that the child in
question, “if not already dead, might have died because the injection
procedure”.
The three children subjected to ‘life-saving’ procedures in the second
video were eventually dead, and the cause of death –that according to
the White helmets video would be attributed to chlorine gas– has been
disputed by other medical opinions independently of the assessments by
the Swedish doctors mentioned in the SWEDHR reports. For instance, in
the opinion of a UK doctor, the health-status in reference to the above
mentioned child could be instead attributed to drug overdose, likely
opiates.
The findings in these reports raise serious questions about the ethical
integrity of the organization White Helmets, on the anti-medical
procedures they advertise in its videos, and the war-criminal behaviour
represented by the misuse of dead children with propaganda aims.
Synopsis of the findings, in video upload in You Tube by The Indicter
Channel, March 12.
II The White Helmets videos
The White Helmets videos analysed here are two consecutive uploadings
done on March 16, 2017 by the “Syrian Civil Defense in Idlib Province”
(a description given by White Helmets to themselves) [2] which will be
here referred to as respectively “WH Vid-1≤, and “WH Vid-2”. [3] [4] The
production of the videos served the immediate purpose by White Helmets
and the “moderate rebels” of promoting “their” campaign for a No-Fly
Zone in Syria. In fact, the campaign has its origins in Hillary
Clinton’s doctrine, as showed in a video upload by The Indicter Channel’
here. [5]
At the time, *Senator McCain, the White Helmets, al-Nusra Front and
other CIA-backed jihadist organizations were intensively campaigning for
a No-Fly Zone* in Syria. The videos aimed to represent the effects of an
alleged gas attack in Sarmin, and imputed to the Syrian government. No
evidence was ever produced regarding the attacks, beside two “anonymous”
witnesses that claimed they had heard a helicopter (“heard”; not “seen”
the helicopter). One of the anonymous sources turned out to be a White
Helmets personnel [1].
The *‘save-rescuing’ videos,* whose content was never analyzed or
verified, were thereafter *shown at the UN Security Council *April 16,
2015. After that meeting, US Ambassador Samantha Powers declared, “I saw
no one in the room without tears. If there was a dry eye in the room, I
didn’t see it”. [6] Reuters reported the event [Box embedded in image
below].
Ensuing, just four days after, on April 20, 2015, CNN broadcasted a
news-program reproducing segments taken from exactly the same videos and
propagated for the No-Fly Zone on behalf of “the Syrian doctors”
campaigning. The newscast was published by CNN in YouTube on April 20,
2015. [7] The CNN anchor presented the ‘Syrian doctor’ “who has
campaigned around the world for a no-fly zone” [Hear it in the MP3 audio
here below]:
A striking, as well as politically relevant fact relating to these
videos that were showed at the UN Security Council –and thereafter
reproduced by CNN– is that such videos had been *simultaneously
published in YouTube, on the same day* 16 of March 2015, *by an
organization showing a logo with the jihadist Shahada flag used by
Al-Qaeda*. According to communications I have received from European
journalists with contacts inside Syria – the origins of “Coordinating
Sarmin” (??????? ?????) –organization behind the propaganda videos
posted by, and in apparent coordination, them and the White Helmets– is
to be found in earlier al-Qaeda formations. The flags and symbols showed
in the image sequence below may offer proof to such communications.
The reproduction of those al-Qaeda / White Helmets footage by CNN,
camouflaged as “normal news”, is a fact that should be investigated
together with the deceiving content in such footage. A clearer
illustration of ‘fake news’ around the disinformation on the Syrian
conflict is hard to find.
It is remarkable that no UN official, no CNN journalist, etc., ever
reflected on the veracity or authenticity of the enacted ‘saving-lives’
scenes in the video. For instance, and to the best of my knowledge, this
is the first time that an analysis of the syringe episode is conducted
in the terms I describe here below.
The result of this observation, later supported by two Swedish doctors
–one GP and a pediatrician– demonstrates that the syringe’s content was
never pumped into the needle injected in the infant’s chest. An
alternative explanation, equally bizarre, is that the child was injected
with the needle connected to an empty syringe-barrel.
III The frame-analysis of the White Helmets video WH Vid-2
Procedure:
Between March 9 and March 10 I studied the video by running it in slow
motion.
After I selected the segment, I studied the sequence frame by frame. I
took screenshots of the relevant frames in sequence, which also
indicated the position on the video in order to allow visualization of
the full sequence.
On March 11, I made a 27% slow-motion video sequence, and I sent
thereafter the link with the material to the same doctors, colleagues at
SWEDHR, which have examined the first material [published in The
Indicter on March 6], Dr Leif Elinder and Dr Lena Oske. The video
featured the full syringe-episode.
On March 12, I received the feedback of my colleagues, statements which
are attached in Section IV below. Furthermore, Dr Martin Gelin –also a
senior member of SWEDHR– made post-observations about the laryngoscope
positioned on the child’s left wrist/hand.
The same day I summarized the results and published a synopsis of the
findings via The Indicter Channel. [12]
V Conclusion
‘Lifesaving’ procedures on the children showed in the White Helmets
videos were found to be fake, and ultimately performed on dead children.
The syringe used in the ‘intracardial injection’ performed on the male
infant was empty, or its fluid was never injected into the child.
This same child showed, briefly, discrete life-signs (uncertain in my
judgement) in the first segment of WH Vid-1. If so, this child might
have died during the lapse in which the ‘lifesaving’ manoeuvres showed
in the White Helmets movie went on. (Which is not the same than
affirming that the personnel seen in the videos caused the dead of the
infant. In forensic terms, the actual cause of death, as well as the
mode and the issue of intent, refer to different items than those
treated in our analysis).
External comment ref. likely diagnosis
I received a reply via email from a medical doctor in the UK. I withhold
his name and specialty (not pediatrics) in order to avoid
identification, since he expressly asked to remain anonymous, for
reasons I understand.
The UK Dr hypothesizes the following:
“I think that even from the very brief video, we can see that this child
has a reduced level of consciousness: he does not vocalize, does not
open his eyes, and his only movements are to turn his head to one side
and to open his mouth before he stops breathing altogether. This looks
like respiratory depression, rather than injury to the lungs; he appears
to be too sleepy to breathe.I think the most likely diagnosis is a drug
overdose causing reduced level of consciousness and respiratory
depression.Opiates are the most likely class of drug to cause this.
Chlorine causes acute inhalation injury, but does not (in any of the
sources I have read) cause reduced level of consciousness: the victim
struggles to breathe until the end.” [16]
Editors Note: This article was updated by the author March 18, 2017.
Medical opinions are welcome in the discussion, replication or
refutation of the above findings. Email to editors@theindicter.com
Read also: 1. "Swedish Doctors for Human Rights: White Helmets Video,
Macabre Manipulation of Dead Children and Staged Chemical Weapons Attack
to Justify a “No-Fly Zone” in Syria"2."Swedish Doctors for Human Rights
Reply to German ARD/BR-Television ‘Verification Team’ ref. RT interview
on White Helmets video"
Notes and references
[1] M. Ferrada de Noli, “Swedish Doctors for Human Rights: White Helmets
Video, Macabre Manipulation of Dead Children and Staged Chemical Weapons
Attack to Justify a ‘No-Fly Zone’ in Syria“. The Indicter Magazine,
March 6, 2017.
[2] See info. in Vanessa Beeley’s Twitter, October 6, 2016. More from
author V. Beeley ref. the real Syrian Civil Defence, in this article.
[3] Upload by White Helmets under the name “Syrian Civil Defence in
Idlib Province”, “ ???? 26_3_2015”. YouTube video published 16 March
2015. Here referred as to “WH Vid-1”.
[4] Upload by White Helmets under the name “Syrian Civil Defence in
Idlib Province”,
???, YouTube video published 16 March 2015. Here referred as to “WH Vid-2”.
[5] “Sweden’s elites endorse H. Clinton No Fly Zone War with Russia &
Syria“. The Indicter Channel, November 22, 2016.
[6] Nick Logan, “UN officials in tears watching video from alleged
chlorine attack in Syria”. Global News, 17 April 2017.
[7] CNN, “Chlorine gas attack reported in Syria“. CNN Channel, YouTube,
April 20, 2015.
[8] “Know Your Terror Flags”. The Muslim Issue, Word press blog.
September 28, 2013.
[9] Image found in “Pinterest”.
[10] Jenna McLaughlin, “Stop Mixing Up Islamic Flags: A Guide for Lazy
Journalists“. Mother Jones, December 16, 2014.
The author quotes: “Black banners will appear from the East and they
will kill you in a way that has never before been done by a nation.”
Many Islamic flags—especially those of militant groups—are black in
reference to this hadith.”
[11] Retrieved March 16, 2017, at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gx2h3_jXGzc at 0:01 / 0:35
[12] “White Helmets video with fake life-saving procedures deceived UN
sec council“. Published by The Indicter Channel, YouTube, March 12, 2017.
[13] Email-reply from Dr Leif Elinder, March 12, 2017.
[14] Email-reply from Dr Lena Oske, March 12, 2017.
[15] Email-reply from Dr Martin Gelin, March 18, 2017.
[16] Email-reply from UK Dr, March 11, 2017.
*(3) White Helmets staged 'incidents' to instigate action against Syrian
gov't - Lavrov*
**
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-07/putin-responds-syria-strikes-cripple-us-russia-relations-deploys-cruise-missile-frig
Putin Responds: Syria Strikes "Cripple US-Russia Relations"; Deploys
Cruise Missile Frigate To Syria
by Tyler Durden
Apr 7, 2017 6:12 AM
Responding to Trump's unexpected military attack on Syria in which 59
cruise missiles were launched (of which only 23 allegedly hit their
target), Russian President Vladimir Putin "regards the strikes as
aggression against a sovereign nation,” his spokesman Dmitry Peskov
said, noting that the president believes the strikes were carried out
“in violation of international law, and also under an invented pretext.”
The Kremlin spokesman insisted that “the Syrian army doesn’t have
chemical weapons,” saying this had been “observed and confirmed by the
Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, a special UN
unit.” [...]
Other Russians took the opportunity to opine as well, led by Russian
foreign minister Sergey Lavrov who said the US missile attack on a
Syrian airbase is an act of aggression under a far-fetched pretext and
is *reminiscent of the 2003 invasion of Iraq*.
Quoted by Tass, the top Russian diplomat said "It is an act of
aggression under a completely far-fetched pretext. This is reminiscent
of the situation in 2003, when the US and the UK, along with some of
their allies, invaded Iraq without the consent of the UN Security
Council and in violation of international law."
"When speaking about the military intervention in Iraq many years after
it happened, Tony Blair (who served as the Prime Minister of the United
Kingdom from 1997 to 2007) acknowledged that they had misled everybody,"
Lavrov emphasized. "Now *they did not even bother to provide any facts
referring only to photos*," he noted. "They indulged in speculations on
children’s photos, on evidence provided by various non-governmental
organizations, including the so-called *White Helmets, which staged
various 'incidents' to instigate action against the Syrian government*."
[...]
914 Syria 2013 gas attack was fabricated; US media refused to publish Seymour Hersh expose
Syria 2013 gas attack was fabricated; US media refused to publish
Seymour Hersh expose
Newsletter published on 7 April 2017
If you're winning the war against the rebels, why use gas & cross
Obama's "red line", inviting airstrikes? - Peter M. Also see item 9, by
Eamonn Fingleton
I sent out this newsletter on October 18, 2015. Below, I just include a
few lines of most articles (enough for you to pursue further); but some
are covered in detail.
(1) US says Assad used chemical weapons, but was winning the war against
the rebels (NYT June 2013)
(2) UK Home Secretary Theresa May cites Chemical Weapons attack by Assad
(Oct 2015)
(3) Obama asserts Assad launched Chemical Weapons attack on Aug 21, 2013
(Oct 2015)
(4) Intercepted phone calls prove Syrian Army used Nerve Gas, U.S. Spies
say (Foreign Policy, Aug 27, 2013)
(5) Intelligence report on Aug 21, 2013 Chemical Weapons attack came
from Israel - Gareth Porter
(6) Phone call was intercepted by Mossad, not CIA
(7) WSJ touts "Israeli intelligence indicating movement of Syrian
chemical weapons"
(8) US claims about Syria Chemical Weapons are based on intelligence
supplied by Mossad
(9) Eamonn Fingleton: Aug 21 gas attack was False Flag, because Assad
was winning the Civil War (Sept 1, 2013)
(10) UN debate stalls US attack on Syria (Aug 29, 2013)
(11) UK parliament votes against Syria war plan, mindful of Iraq WMD
deception (Aug 29, 2013)
(12) Geoffrey Robertson, a former UN judge, calls for the Bombing of
Syria (Aug 30, 2013)
(13) G20 leaders speak out against US-led strike on Syria (Sept 6, 2013)
(14) G20 leaders reject attack on Syria over Chemical Weapons; Assad was
framed (Sept 8, 2013)
(15) AIPAC to lobby Congress for Syria strike (Israel News, Sept 6, 2013)
(16) Obama "red line" would use Chemical Weapons as a Causus Belli; but
Congress defied AIPAC (Sept 14, 2013)
(17) US Media refused to publish Seymour Hersh expose of US lies on Aug.
21 Syrian gas attack
(18) British Lab showed Aug. 21 Sarin was not Assad's but Al Nusra's -
Seymour Hersh, LRB
(19) Sarin nerve gas was used by Syrian rebels, not Assad - U.N.
official (Washington Times, May 6, 2013)
(20) UN commissioner says evidence indicates Syria rebels 'used sarin'
(BBC, May 6, 2013)
(21) Obama authorizes CIA to arm Syrian rebels, citing Assad use of
Chemical weapons (WSJ, June 14, 2013)
(22) Daily Mail publishes leaked emails from defense contractor on False
Flag chemical weapons attack in Syria (Jan 2013)
(23) Hacked emails reveal ‘Washington-approved' plan to stage chemical
weapons attack in Syria
(24) A Look into the Britam Defence Data Leak Files - cyberwarnews.info
(25) Britam Defence is British private military company, operates mainly
in the Middle East
(1) US says Assad used chemical weapons, but was winning the war against
the rebels (NYT June 2013)
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/world/middleeast/syria-chemical-weapons.html
MIDDLE EAST
U.S. Is Said to Plan to Send Weapons to Syrian Rebels
By MARK MAZZETTI, MICHAEL R. GORDON and MARK LANDLERJUNE 13, 2013
(2) UK Home Secretary Theresa May cites Chemical Weapons attack by Assad
(Oct 2015)
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-s-speech-to-the-conservative-party-conference-in-full-a6681901.html
Theresa May's speech to the Conservative Party Conference – in full
May was speaking on the third day of the Conservative Party Conference
in Manchester
Tuesday 6 October 2015 12:21 BST
(3) Obama asserts Assad launched Chemical Weapons attack on Aug 21, 2013
(Oct 2015)
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2015/10/showdown-at-the-un-corral-raimondo/
Showdown at the UN Corral
Were these US-funded Good Guys (in Syria) always Bad Guys in an
ill-fitting disguise?
by Justin Raimondo
My Catbird Seat
Oct 2, 2015
(4) Intercepted phone calls prove Syrian Army used Nerve Gas, U.S. Spies
say (Foreign Policy, Aug 27, 2013)
http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/08/27/exclusive-intercepted-calls-prove-syrian-army-used-nerve-gas-u-s-spies-say/
Exclusive: Intercepted Calls Prove Syrian Army Used Nerve Gas, U.S.
Spies Say
By Noah Shachtman
August 27, 2013 - 8:54 pm
(5) Intelligence report on Aug 21, 2013 Chemical Weapons attack came
from Israel - Gareth Porter
From: Paul de Burgh-Day <pdeburgh@harboursat.com.au>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2013 14:47:28 +1000
Subject: Gareth Porter: How Intelligence Was Twisted to Support an
Attack on Syria
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36096.htm
How Intelligence Was Twisted to Support an Attack on Syria
By Gareth Porter
September 04, 2013 "Information Clearing House - "Truthout"
(6) Phone call was intercepted by Mossad, not CIA
From: "Sadanand, Nanjundiah (Physics Earth Sciences)"
<sadanand@mail.ccsu.edu> Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 10:10:26 -0400
The Israeli intimate involvement in instigating aggression against Syria
the pretext for attack on Syria provided by Israeli intelligence services.
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013
FM: John Whitbeck <From: jvwhitbeck@gmail.com>
Further to my message of Monday (below), the official American
assessment of who was responsible for the apparent use of chemical
weapons in Syria has now escalated from "very little doubt" to, in a
text read by Vice President Joe Biden, "no doubt" that it was the Syrian
government.
What evidence could have been gathered prior to the forensic
examinations by the UN inspectors on the ground to provoke this change
to absolute certainty?
The answer may be found in an article published yesterday in the
prominent Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronoth ("American Operation,
Israeli Intelligence"), which reports that "the IDF’s 8200 intelligence
unit was listening to the Syrian leadership during the lethal chemical
weapons attack last week in which hundreds were killed, and it was
Israel that relayed the incriminating information to the West", that
three Israeli generals arrived in Washington on Monday "to show their
counterparts the most updated intelligence" and that "the source of most
of the information that the US has about Syria is Israeli, as is the
information about the targets for a possible attack."
As is almost always the case with the United States and its European
acolytes, what Israel wants, Israel gets.
Those who do not rely exclusively on Israeli intelligence as a source of
evidence may be interested in a brief paragraph buried in a lengthy New
York Times report published yesterday in the International Herald
Tribune ("Like ‘watching a horror movie’"): "Near the attack sites,
activists found spent rockets that appeared to have been homemade and
suspected that they had delivered the gas. Mr. Salahideen [previously
identified as "a reporter for the opposition’s Alaan television
network"] said he did not think the small rockets could carry the amount
of gas needed to kill so many people and guessed that government forces
had fired the rockets to make it easier to blame the rebels, who often
fire improvised rockets at government targets."
(7) WSJ touts "Israeli intelligence indicating movement of Syrian
chemical weapons"
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324906304579039342815115978.html
August 27, 2013, 8:27 p.m. ET
U.S., Allies Prepare to Act as Syria Intelligence Mounts
Evidence Includes Satellite Images, Intercepted Communications
By ADAM ENTOUS, SAM DAGHER and SIOBHAN GORMAN CONNECT
(8) US claims about Syria Chemical Weapons are based on intelligence
supplied by Mossad
From: Paul de Burgh-Day <pdeburgh@harboursat.com.au> Date: Thu, 29 Aug
2013 09:48:54 +1000
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/cofirmed-us-claims-against-syria-there.html
CONFIRMED: US Claims Against Syria - There is no Evidence
By Tony Cartalucci
August 28, 2013
(9) Eamonn Fingleton: Aug 21 gas attack was False Flag, because Assad
was winning the Civil War (Sept 1, 2013)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/eamonnfingleton/2013/09/01/obamas-syria-fiasco-who-clipped-his-wings/
Obama's Syria Blink: Who Clipped His Wings?
Eamonn Fingleton
9/01/2013 @ 12:18PM
[...] The irony in all this is that whoever used chemical weapons at
Ghouta, it almost certainly was not Assad. As Vladimir Putin has pointed
out, all the evidence is that the Ghouta atrocity was a false-flag.
Assad has had everything to lose and nothing to gain from using chemical
weapons. He is close to winning the war, so the last thing he wants is
to provide the United States with a pretext for regime change. [...]
(10) UN debate stalls US attack on Syria (Aug 29, 2013)
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MID-03-290813.html
By Kaveh L Afrasiabi
Aug 29, '13
(11) UK parliament votes against Syria war plan, mindful of Iraq WMD
deception (Aug 29, 2013)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/30/us-syria-crisis-britain-idUSBRE97R1BD20130830
Iraq war ghosts end UK plans to take part in Syria action
By Andrew Osborn and Guy Faulconbridge
LONDON | Thu Aug 29, 2013 9:07pm EDT
(12) Geoffrey Robertson, a former UN judge, calls for the Bombing of
Syria (Aug 30, 2013)
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/30/three-key-questions-on-syria-from-geoffrey-robertson.html
Three Key Questions on Syria
by Geoffrey Robertson Aug 30, 2013 3:15 PM EDT
(13) G20 leaders speak out against US-led strike on Syria (Sept 6, 2013)
http://rt.com/news/g20-against-syria-strike-527
G20 Syria divide: World's largest nations speak out against US-led strike
Published time: September 06, 2013 22:47
Edited time: September 07, 2013 13:34
(14) G20 leaders reject attack on Syria over Chemical Weapons; Assad was
framed (Sept 8, 2013)
From: Paul de Burgh-Day <pdeburgh@harboursat.com.au>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 10:46:45 +1000
The West Dethroned
By Paul Craig Roberts
"The European race’s last three hundred years of evolutionary progress
have all come down to nothing but four words: selfishness, slaughter,
shamelessness and corruption."
Yan Fu
September 08, 2013 Information Clearing House
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36164.htm
[...] The "New American Century" proclaimed by the neoconservatives came
to an abrupt end on September 6 at the G20 meeting in Russia. The
leaders of most of the world’s peoples told Obama that they do not
believe him and that it is a violation of international law if the US
government attacks Syria without UN authorization.
Putin told the assembled world leaders that the chemical weapons attack
was "a provocation on behalf of the armed insurgents in hope of the help
from the outside, from the countries which supported them from day one."
In other words, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Washington--the axis of evil.
China, India, South Africa, Brazil, Indonesia, and Argentina joined
Putin in affirming that a leader who commits military aggression without
the approval of the UN Security Council puts himself "outside of law." [...]
Washington represents Israel and a handful of powerful organized private
interests. Washington represents no one else. Washington is a plague
upon the American people and a plague upon the world.
(15) AIPAC to lobby Congress for Syria strike (Israel News, Sept 6, 2013)
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4426658,00.html
AIPAC to lobby Congress for Syria strike
American Israeli Political Activity Committee to attempt to persuade
Congress to vote in favor of attack, as constituents urge Congress to
vote against intervention
Yitzhak Benhorin
Israel News
Published: 09.06.13, 21:16
WASHINGTON – Though US Congress is pressured by the American public to
vote against a US military intervention in Syria, Israel’s most ardent
supporters in AIPAC urge Congress representatives to vote in favor of an
intervention. [...]
(16) Obama "red line" would use Chemical Weapons as a Causus Belli; but
Congress defied AIPAC (Sept 14, 2013)
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2013/09/a-short-history-of-the-war-on-syria-2006-2014.html
September 14, 2013
A Short History Of The War On Syria - 2006-2014
[...] In late 2006 the United States started to finance an external
opposition to Syria's ruling Baath party. Those exiles were largely
members of the Muslim Brotherhood which had been evicted from Syria
after their bloody uprising against the Syrian state between 1976 and
1982 had failed. In 2007 a plan for regime change in Syria was agreed
upon between the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia. The aim was to
destroy the "resistance" alliance of Hizbullah, Syria and Iran:
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 cooperated 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.
By 2011 three years of drought, caused by global warming and Turkey's
upstream dams and irrigation projects, had weakened the Syrian economy.
Large parts of the poor rural population lost their means of living and
moved into the cities. They provided the fertile ground needed to launch
an uprising against the Syrian state.
The U.S. part in the plan was to provide the media and "global opinion"
cover for the insurgency. To that purpose it used the tool from its
"color revolution" tool box. "Citizen journalists" were recruited,
trained and provided with the video and communication equipment needed
for media propagandizing. Others were trained in organizing "peaceful
civil demonstrations". The Saudis took care of the darker part of the
plan. They financed and armed rebel groups, often related to the exiled
Muslim Brotherhood, which had the task to instigate a wider insurgency
by taking on government forces as well as the peaceful demonstrators.A
main part of the scheme was the introduction of a sectarian view that
would split the largely secular Syria into several constituencies.
A local disturbance in Deraa near the Jordanian border was used to
launch the uprising. Peaceful demonstration were held but soon shots
were fired towards the police as well as towards the demonstrators.
Inevitably both sides escalated. Groups armed by the Saudis target the
government forces. Having colleagues killed and wounded the government
forces retaliated against the demonstrators. Some of those took up arms
themselves and fought the government. [...]Posted by b on September 14,
2013 at 01:15 PM |
(17) US Media refused to publish Seymour Hersh expose of US lies on Aug.
21 Syrian gas attack
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/04/08/hrsh-a08.html
Media blacks out Seymour Hersh expose of US lies on Syrian gas attack
By Patrick Martin
8 April 2014
Nearly two days after the London Review of Books published a lengthy
exposé by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh detailing
efforts by the Turkish government to stage a provocation to bring the US
military directly into the civil war in Syria, the US media has blacked
out the report. [...]
The Syrian government denied responsibility for the Ghouta attack and
blamed the "rebels," who had every reason to carry out the action, which
coincided with the arrival of United Nations weapons inspectors in
Damascus to investigate previous gas attacks. At the time of the attack,
Syrian government forces were retaking areas previously held by the
US-backed opposition, which was in disarray and on the point of
collapse. It desperately needed a supposed government atrocity to
provide a pretext for direct US military intervention against the Assad
regime.
Hersh’s report substantiates the Syrian government’s claims, using
documents and accounts from US intelligence and military sources. It
also provides evidence that President Obama, Secretary of State John
Kerry and other US officials knowingly lied to the American people when
they insisted that only the Assad regime could have carried out the
Ghouta attack and that US intelligence agencies had proof that Syrian
government forces were responsible. (See: New exposé by Seymour Hersh:
Turkey staged gas attack to provoke US war on Syria)
Last December, Hersh published an initial account of the Ghouta attack,
which noted the discrepancies and contradictions in the official US
accounts and exposed media propaganda such as the now-retracted claim by
the New York Times that its own technical analysis of the attack proved
that only the Syrian military could have fired the gas shells. Hersh’s
conclusion at that time, reflected in the headline "Whose Sarin?" was
that it was still unclear who was responsible for the gas attack.
The latest account provides an important new finding—that the Turkish
government worked with the al-Nusra Front to engineer the gas attack and
blame it on Assad in order to provide a means for the Obama
administration to override popular opposition to another US war in the
Middle East and launch military action in Syria.
A former intelligence official told Hersh, "We now know it was a covert
action planned by Erdogan’s people to push Obama over the red line …
They had to escalate to a gas attack in or near Damascus … The deal was
to do something spectacular."
Hersh has been unable to get his reports published by major American
media outlets. Both of his Syrian exposés appeared in the online edition
of the London Review of Books, not in the New Yorker, where he was
published for many years, or any daily newspaper.
Since the new article was posted early Sunday morning, there has been
total silence in the mainstream US press. The New York Times and
Washington Post, the two leading dailies, said nothing. The Times
published a long account Monday of fighting in Syria with no mention of
Hersh’s report.
The main British dailies have also been silent. The Guardian, in
addition to censoring Hersh, published a long account of a
self-justifying interview on BBC Radio 4 by the notorious liar and war
criminal Tony Blair, the former prime minister, defending the Iraq war
and advocating military action in Syria.
The article, written by the newspaper’s chief political correspondent
Nicholas Watt, goes so far as to note Blair’s argument that the use of
sarin gas at Ghouta was sufficient reason to attack Syria, without
referencing Hersh’s exposure of this attack as a provocation, published
just 24 hours earlier. The cover-up is conscious and deliberate. [...]
(18) British Lab showed Aug. 21 Sarin was not Assad's but Al Nusra's -
Seymour Hersh, LRB
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line
Vol. 36 No. 8 · 17 April 2014
pages 21-24 | 5870 words
The Red Line and the Rat Line
Seymour M. Hersh on Obama, Erdogan and the Syrian rebels
In 2011 Barack Obama led an allied military intervention in Libya
without consulting the US Congress. Last August, after the sarin attack
on the Damascus suburb of Ghouta, he was ready to launch an allied air
strike, this time to punish the Syrian government for allegedly crossing
the 'red line' he had set in 2012 on the use of chemical weapons.[*]
Then with less than two days to go before the planned strike, he
announced that he would seek congressional approval for the
intervention. The strike was postponed as Congress prepared for
hearings, and subsequently cancelled when Obama accepted Assad's offer
to relinquish his chemical arsenal in a deal brokered by Russia. Why did
Obama delay and then relent on Syria when he was not shy about rushing
into Libya? The answer lies in a clash between those in the
administration who were committed to enforcing the red line, and
military leaders who thought that going to war was both unjustified and
potentially disastrous.
Obama's change of mind had its origins at Porton Down, the defence
laboratory in Wiltshire. British intelligence had obtained a sample of
the sarin used in the 21 August attack and analysis demonstrated that
the gas used didn't match the batches known to exist in the Syrian
army's chemical weapons arsenal. The message that the case against Syria
wouldn't hold up was quickly relayed to the US joint chiefs of staff.
The British report heightened doubts inside the Pentagon; the joint
chiefs were already preparing to warn Obama that his plans for a
far-reaching bomb and missile attack on Syria's infrastructure could
lead to a wider war in the Middle East. As a consequence the American
officers delivered a last-minute caution to the president, which, in
their view, eventually led to his cancelling the attack.
For months there had been acute concern among senior military leaders
and the intelligence community about the role in the war of Syria's
neighbours, especially Turkey. Prime Minister Recep Erdogan was known to
be supporting the al-Nusra Front, a jihadist faction among the rebel
opposition, as well as other Islamist rebel groups. 'We knew there were
some in the Turkish government,' a former senior US intelligence
official, who has access to current intelligence, told me, 'who believed
they could get Assad's nuts in a vice by dabbling with a sarin attack
inside Syria – and forcing Obama to make good on his red line threat.'
The joint chiefs also knew that the Obama administration's public claims
that only the Syrian army had access to sarin were wrong. The American
and British intelligence communities had been aware since the spring of
2013 that some rebel units in Syria were developing chemical weapons. On
20 June analysts for the US Defense Intelligence Agency issued a highly
classified five-page 'talking points' briefing for the DIA's deputy
director, David Shedd, which stated that al-Nusra maintained a sarin
production cell: its programme, the paper said, was 'the most advanced
sarin plot since al-Qaida's pre-9/11 effort'. (According to a Defense
Department consultant, US intelligence has long known that al-Qaida
experimented with chemical weapons, and has a video of one of its gas
experiments with dogs.) The DIA paper went on: 'Previous IC
[intelligence community] focus had been almost entirely on Syrian CW
[chemical weapons] stockpiles; now we see ANF attempting to make its own
CW … Al-Nusrah Front's relative freedom of operation within Syria leads
us to assess the group's CW aspirations will be difficult to disrupt in
the future.' The paper drew on classified intelligence from numerous
agencies: 'Turkey and Saudi-based chemical facilitators,' it said, 'were
attempting to obtain sarin precursors in bulk, tens of kilograms, likely
for the anticipated large scale production effort in Syria.' (Asked
about the DIA paper, a spokesperson for the director of national
intelligence said: 'No such paper was ever requested or produced by
intelligence community analysts.')
Last May, more than ten members of the al-Nusra Front were arrested in
southern Turkey with what local police told the press were two kilograms
of sarin. In a 130-page indictment the group was accused of attempting
to purchase fuses, piping for the construction of mortars, and chemical
precursors for sarin. Five of those arrested were freed after a brief
detention. The others, including the ringleader, Haytham Qassab, for
whom the prosecutor requested a prison sentence of 25 years, were
released pending trial. In the meantime the Turkish press has been rife
with speculation that the Erdogan administration has been covering up
the extent of its involvement with the rebels. In a news conference last
summer, Aydin Sezgin, Turkey's ambassador to Moscow, dismissed the
arrests and claimed to reporters that the recovered 'sarin' was merely
'anti-freeze'.
The DIA paper took the arrests as evidence that al-Nusra was expanding
its access to chemical weapons. It said Qassab had 'self-identified' as
a member of al-Nusra, and that he was directly connected to
Abd-al-Ghani, the 'ANF emir for military manufacturing'. Qassab and his
associate Khalid Ousta worked with Halit Unalkaya, an employee of a
Turkish firm called Zirve Export, who provided 'price quotes for bulk
quantities of sarin precursors'. Abd-al-Ghani's plan was for two
associates to 'perfect a process for making sarin, then go to Syria to
train others to begin large scale production at an unidentified lab in
Syria'. The DIA paper said that one of his operatives had purchased a
precursor on the 'Baghdad chemical market', which 'has supported at
least seven CW efforts since 2004'.
A series of chemical weapon attacks in March and April 2013 was
investigated over the next few months by a special UN mission to Syria.
A person with close knowledge of the UN's activity in Syria told me that
there was evidence linking the Syrian opposition to the first gas
attack, on 19 March in Khan Al-Assal, a village near Aleppo. In its
final report in December, the mission said that at least 19 civilians
and one Syrian soldier were among the fatalities, along with scores of
injured. It had no mandate to assign responsibility for the attack, but
the person with knowledge of the UN's activities said: 'Investigators
interviewed the people who were there, including the doctors who treated
the victims. It was clear that the rebels used the gas. It did not come
out in public because no one wanted to know.'
In the months before the attacks began, a former senior Defense
Department official told me, the DIA was circulating a daily classified
report known as SYRUP on all intelligence related to the Syrian
conflict, including material on chemical weapons. But in the spring,
distribution of the part of the report concerning chemical weapons was
severely curtailed on the orders of Denis McDonough, the White House
chief of staff. 'Something was in there that triggered a shit fit by
McDonough,' the former Defense Department official said. 'One day it was
a huge deal, and then, after the March and April sarin attacks' – he
snapped his fingers – 'it's no longer there.' The decision to restrict
distribution was made as the joint chiefs ordered intensive contingency
planning for a possible ground invasion of Syria whose primary objective
would be the elimination of chemical weapons.
The former intelligence official said that many in the US national
security establishment had long been troubled by the president's red
line: 'The joint chiefs asked the White House, "What does red line mean?
How does that translate into military orders? Troops on the ground?
Massive strike? Limited strike?" They tasked military intelligence to
study how we could carry out the threat. They learned nothing more about
the president's reasoning.'
In the aftermath of the 21 August attack Obama ordered the Pentagon to
draw up targets for bombing. Early in the process, the former
intelligence official said, 'the White House rejected 35 target sets
provided by the joint chiefs of staff as being insufficiently "painful"
to the Assad regime.' The original targets included only military sites
and nothing by way of civilian infrastructure. Under White House
pressure, the US attack plan evolved into 'a monster strike': two wings
of B-52 bombers were shifted to airbases close to Syria, and navy
submarines and ships equipped with Tomahawk missiles were deployed.
'Every day the target list was getting longer,' the former intelligence
official told me. 'The Pentagon planners said we can't use only
Tomahawks to strike at Syria's missile sites because their warheads are
buried too far below ground, so the two B-52 air wings with two-thousand
pound bombs were assigned to the mission. Then we'll need standby
search-and-rescue teams to recover downed pilots and drones for target
selection. It became huge.' The new target list was meant to 'completely
eradicate any military capabilities Assad had', the former intelligence
official said. The core targets included electric power grids, oil and
gas depots, all known logistic and weapons depots, all known command and
control facilities, and all known military and intelligence buildings.
Britain and France were both to play a part. On 29 August, the day
Parliament voted against Cameron's bid to join the intervention, the
Guardian reported that he had already ordered six RAF Typhoon fighter
jets to be deployed to Cyprus, and had volunteered a submarine capable
of launching Tomahawk missiles. The French air force – a crucial player
in the 2011 strikes on Libya – was deeply committed, according to an
account in Le Nouvel Observateur; François Hollande had ordered several
Rafale fighter-bombers to join the American assault. Their targets were
reported to be in western Syria.
By the last days of August the president had given the Joint Chiefs a
fixed deadline for the launch. 'H hour was to begin no later than Monday
morning [2 September], a massive assault to neutralise Assad,' the
former intelligence official said. So it was a surprise to many when
during a speech in the White House Rose Garden on 31 August Obama said
that the attack would be put on hold, and he would turn to Congress and
put it to a vote.
At this stage, Obama's premise – that only the Syrian army was capable
of deploying sarin – was unravelling. Within a few days of the 21 August
attack, the former intelligence official told me, Russian military
intelligence operatives had recovered samples of the chemical agent from
Ghouta. They analysed it and passed it on to British military
intelligence; this was the material sent to Porton Down. (A spokesperson
for Porton Down said: 'Many of the samples analysed in the UK tested
positive for the nerve agent sarin.' MI6 said that it doesn't comment on
intelligence matters.)
The former intelligence official said the Russian who delivered the
sample to the UK was 'a good source – someone with access, knowledge and
a record of being trustworthy'. After the first reported uses of
chemical weapons in Syria last year, American and allied intelligence
agencies 'made an effort to find the answer as to what if anything, was
used – and its source', the former intelligence official said. 'We use
data exchanged as part of the Chemical Weapons Convention. The DIA's
baseline consisted of knowing the composition of each batch of
Soviet-manufactured chemical weapons. But we didn't know which batches
the Assad government currently had in its arsenal. Within days of the
Damascus incident we asked a source in the Syrian government to give us
a list of the batches the government currently had. This is why we could
confirm the difference so quickly.'
The process hadn't worked as smoothly in the spring, the former
intelligence official said, because the studies done by Western
intelligence 'were inconclusive as to the type of gas it was. The word
"sarin" didn't come up. There was a great deal of discussion about this,
but since no one could conclude what gas it was, you could not say that
Assad had crossed the president's red line.' By 21 August, the former
intelligence official went on, 'the Syrian opposition clearly had
learned from this and announced that "sarin" from the Syrian army had
been used, before any analysis could be made, and the press and White
House jumped at it. Since it now was sarin, "It had to be Assad."'
The UK defence staff who relayed the Porton Down findings to the joint
chiefs were sending the Americans a message, the former intelligence
official said: 'We're being set up here.' (This account made sense of a
terse message a senior official in the CIA sent in late August: 'It was
not the result of the current regime. UK & US know this.') By then the
attack was a few days away and American, British and French planes,
ships and submarines were at the ready. [...]
Obama's move for congressional approval quickly became a dead end.
'Congress was not going to let this go by,' the former intelligence
official said. 'Congress made it known that, unlike the authorisation
for the Iraq war, there would be substantive hearings.' At this point,
there was a sense of desperation in the White House, the former
intelligence official said. 'And so out comes Plan B. Call off the
bombing strike and Assad would agree to unilaterally sign the chemical
warfare treaty and agree to the destruction of all of chemical weapons
under UN supervision.' [...] *
The full extent of US co-operation with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar
in assisting the rebel opposition in Syria has yet to come to light. The
Obama administration has never publicly admitted to its role in creating
what the CIA calls a 'rat line', a back channel highway into Syria. The
rat line, authorised in early 2012, was used to funnel weapons and
ammunition from Libya via southern Turkey and across the Syrian border
to the opposition. Many of those in Syria who ultimately received the
weapons were jihadists, some of them affiliated with al-Qaida. (The DNI
spokesperson said: 'The idea that the United States was providing
weapons from Libya to anyone is false.')
In January, the Senate Intelligence Committee released a report on the
assault by a local militia in September 2012 on the American consulate
and a nearby undercover CIA facility in Benghazi, which resulted in the
death of the US ambassador, Christopher Stevens, and three others. [...]
Washington abruptly ended the CIA's role in the transfer of arms from
Libya after the attack on the consulate, but the rat line kept going.
'The United States was no longer in control of what the Turks were
relaying to the jihadists,' the former intelligence official said.
Within weeks, as many as forty portable surface-to-air missile
launchers, commonly known as manpads, were in the hands of Syrian
rebels. On 28 November 2012, Joby Warrick of the Washington Post
reported that the previous day rebels near Aleppo had used what was
almost certainly a manpad to shoot down a Syrian transport helicopter.
'The Obama administration,' Warrick wrote, 'has steadfastly opposed
arming Syrian opposition forces with such missiles, warning that the
weapons could fall into the hands of terrorists and be used to shoot
down commercial aircraft.' Two Middle Eastern intelligence officials
fingered Qatar as the source, and a former US intelligence analyst
speculated that the manpads could have been obtained from Syrian
military outposts overrun by the rebels. There was no indication that
the rebels' possession of manpads was likely the unintended consequence
of a covert US programme that was no longer under US control. [...]
4 April
[*] Seymour M. Hersh first wrote about the sarin attack in the LRB of 19
December 2013.
(19) Sarin nerve gas was used by Syrian rebels, not Assad - U.N.
official (Washington Times, May 6, 2013)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi/
Syrian rebels used Sarin nerve gas, not Assad’s regime: U.N. official
By Shaun Waterman - The Washington Times - Monday, May 6, 2013
Testimony from victims strongly suggests it was the rebels, not the
Syrian government, that used Sarin nerve gas during a recent incident in
the revolution-wracked nation, a senior U.N. diplomat said Monday.
Carla del Ponte, a member of the U.N. Independent International
Commission of Inquiry on Syria, told Swiss TV there were "strong,
concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof," that rebels
seeking to oust Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad had used the nerve agent.
But she said her panel had not yet seen any evidence of Syrian
government forces using chemical weapons, according to the BBC, but she
added that more investigation was needed.
(20) UN commissioner says evidence indicates Syria rebels 'used sarin'
(BBC, May 6, 2013)
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-22424188
UN's Del Ponte says evidence Syria rebels 'used sarin'
BBC, 6 May 2013
Testimony from victims of the conflict in Syria suggests rebels have
used the nerve agent, sarin, a leading member of a UN commission of
inquiry has said.
Carla Del Ponte told Swiss TV that there were "strong, concrete
suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof".
(21) Obama authorizes CIA to arm Syrian rebels, citing Assad use of
Chemical weapons (WSJ, June 14, 2013)
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324188604578543820387158806?mobile=y
US to arm Syrian rebels
The Wall Street Journal, June 14, 2013
WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama authorized his administration to
provide arms to rebels fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad,
officials said Thursday, a major policy shift after the White House said
it had confirmed that Damascus used chemical weapons in the country's
civil war.
The classified order directing the Central Intelligence Agency to
coordinate arming the rebels in concert with its allies reverses a
long-standing policy that limited the U.S. to providing nonlethal support.
The White House declined to comment on the authorization, saying only
that Mr. Obama had decided to ramp up "military support" to moderate
rebels both in "scope and scale."
U.S. officials also told The Wall Street Journal on Thursday that the
U.S. military proposal for arming the rebels also calls for a limited
no-fly zone inside Syria that would be enforced by U.S. and allied
planes on Jordanian territory to protect Syrian refugees and rebels who
would train there.
Such a move, if the White House goes ahead, would represent a
significantly bigger U.S. engagement in Syria's civil war. [...]
(22) Daily Mail publishes leaked emails from defense contractor on False
Flag chemical weapons attack in Syria (Jan 2013)
http://web.archive.org/web/20130129213824/http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2270219/U-S-planned-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-Syria-blame-Assad.html
U.S. 'backed plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria and blame it
on Assad's regime'
Leaked emails from defense contractor refers to chemical weapons saying
'the idea is approved by Washington'
Obama issued warning to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad last month that
use of chemical warfare was 'totally unacceptable'
By LOUISE BOYLE
Daily Mail
PUBLISHED: 14:16 EST, 29 January 2013 | UPDATED: 14:16 EST, 29 January 2013
Leaked emails have allegedly proved that the White House gave the green
light to a chemical weapons attack in Syria that could be blamed on
Assad's regime and in turn, spur international military action in the
devastated country.
A report released on Monday contains an email exchange between two
senior officials at British-based contractor Britam Defence where a
scheme 'approved by Washington' is outlined explaining that Qatar would
fund rebel forces in Syria to use chemical weapons.
Barack Obama made it clear to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad last
month that the U.S. would not tolerate Syria using chemical weapons
against its own people.
According to Infowars.com, the December 25 email was sent from Britam's
Business Development Director David Goulding to company founder Philip
Doughty.
It reads: 'Phil... We've got a new offer. It's about Syria again.
Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved
by Washington.
'We'll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from Libya
similar to those that Assad should have.
'They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak
Russian and make a video record.
'Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are
enormous. Your opinion?
'Kind regards, David.'
Britam Defence had not yet returned a request for comment to MailOnline.
The emails were released by a Malaysian hacker who also obtained senior
executives resumés and copies of passports via an unprotected company
server, according to Cyber War News.
Dave Goulding's Linkedin profile lists him as Business Development
Director at Britam Defence Ltd in Security and Investigations. A
business networking profile for Phil Doughty lists him as Chief
Operationg Officer for Britam, United Arab Emirates, Security and
Investigations.
The U.S. State Department had not returned a request for comment on the
alleged emails to MailOnline today at time of publication. [...] ==
Here is a copy of the leaked document - SAVE it and PRINT it:
http://web.archive.org/web/20130224162322/http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/01/29/article-2270219-173CAE5E000005DC-457_634x269_popup.jpg
In case the above link does not work, I have uploaded a copy to
http://mailstar.net/bulletins/Syria-Chemical-frame-Assad.jpg
(23) Hacked emails reveal ‘Washington-approved' plan to stage chemical
weapons attack in Syria
http://www.hangthebankers.com/hacked-emails-reveal-washington-approved-plan-to-stage-chemical-weapons-attack-in-syria/
Hacked emails reveal ‘Washington-approved' plan to stage chemical
weapons attack in Syria
January 29, 2013
Alleged hacked emails from defense contractor Britam reveal a plan
"approved by Washington" and funded by Qatar to stage a chemical weapons
attack in Syria and blame it on the Assad regime, fulfilling what the
Obama administration has made clear is a "red line" that would mandate
US military intervention.
The leaked emails, obtained by a hacker in Malaysia, feature an exchange
(click here for screenshot) between Britam Defence's Business
Development Director David Goulding and the company's founder Philip
Doughty;
Phil
We've got a new offer. It's about Syria again. Qataris propose an
attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington.
We'll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from
Libya similar to those that Assad should have. They want us to deploy
our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record.
Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are
enormous. Your opinion?
Kind regards David
The fact that the plan involves delivering a CW (chemical weapon) that
is "similar to those Assad should have," clearly suggests that the idea
is to stage a false flag chemical weapons attack that could be blamed on
Assad by Gulf states like Qatar and NATO powers.
If the claim that such as plot was "approved by Washington" can be
verified, then the Obama administration is complicit in a war crime.
According to Cyber War News, which details the process of how the emails
were hacked and includes screenshots of the leaked documents, the hack
also uncovered, "extremely personal information," including copies of
passports of Britam employees, some of whom appeared to be mercenaries.
A full list of all the hacked documents can be found here. One software
systems administrator who analyzed the ‘header' details from the email
in question concluded, "I have to admit that the email does indeed look
genuine….all these facts check out. So with Mythbusters objectivity I
have to call this one plausible."
Online business profiles confirm that both David Goulding and Philip
Doughty work for Britam Defence.
Last year, reports began to circulate that that US-backed rebel fighters
in Syria had been given gas masks and were willing to stage a chemical
weapons attack which would then be blamed on the Assad regime to grease
the skids for NATO military intervention.
Soon after in August, President Barack Obama warned that the use or even
transportation of chemical weapons by the Assad regime would represent a
"red line" that would precipitate military intervention. French
President Francois Hollande followed suit, stating that the use of such
weapons "Would be a legitimate reason for direct intervention."
At around the same time, a source told Syrian news channel Addounia that
a Saudi company had fitted 1400 ambulance vehicles with anti-gas &
anti-chemical filtering systems at a cost of $97,000 dollars each, in
preparation for a chemical weapons attack carried out by FSA rebels
using mortar rounds. A further 400 vehicles were prepared as troop carriers.
The attack would be blamed on the Syrian Army and exploited as an excuse
for a military assault. A March 2012 Brookings Institution report
entitled Saving Syria: Assessing Options For Regime Change outlined this
very scenario – where a manufactured humanitarian crisis would be cited
as justification for an attack. [...]
(24) A Look into the Britam Defence Data Leak Files - cyberwarnews.info
http://www.cyberwarnews.info/reports/a-look-into-the-britam-defence-data-leak-files/
A Look into the Britam Defence Data Leak Files
Published January 26th, 2013
By Lee J
A few days ago we did a report that a British based defence company,
Britam Defence had been leaked and confidential files had been published
online. [...]
After spending some time going over this stuff i have found the only
folder really needed was arch33 which contains all leaked data and gives
better insight in to the operations and company's Britam is working with.
The emails in this leak and files and information mainly trace back to
two Britam defence administration, one of which is the founder and
dynamic director, Philip doughty and his Business Development Director
David Goulding.
Extremely personal information such as a self complied C.V, copy's of
passports and more have been leaked from David and Philip as well as
emails and other plans.
From a lot of the documents its very clear that britam is working
closely and even offering types of training programs to the National
Saudi Gaurd and some of its internal departments and specialist groups.
[...]
(25) Britam Defence is British private military company, operates mainly
in the Middle East
http://www.cyberwarnews.info/2013/01/24/britam-defence-hacked-confidential-documents-leaked-site-offline/
Britam defence hacked, confidential documents leaked, site offline
Published January 24th, 2013 By Lee J
A British defence company has been breached and as a result a heap of
documents have been published online and now the site has gone offline.
The attack is on britam defence (http://www.britamdefence.com/) and has
been claimed by a hacker using the handle JAsIrX who uploaded the leaked
information to various file sharing websites and released it via a
single pastebin post with the a message about the release (see bottom).
The documents come in 6 parts and total over 423MB compress zip files
and inside the compress files appears to be a common layout of three
main folders named !!Syria, Iran and Iraq.
Inside these appear to be documents like passports, incident reports
about drunk employees which are labelled private and confidential as well.
A quick look into the files shows shocking plans for chemical warfare
attacks where they have planned to lure victims to kill zones. The file
can be found in the Iran folder under OPLAN (Ruhayyat) 1433H-1.doc. [...]
Britam Defence is British private military company, operates mainly
in the Middle East. It killed Arabs in Iraq and plans to invade in Iran
and Syria.
Look through leaked documents carefully. CW means chemical weapon,
g-shell is short for a gas shell I guess.
Help to distribute this info and let other people know about the
threats.
Thank all
Source: Pastebin.com [...]
Seymour Hersh expose
Newsletter published on 7 April 2017
If you're winning the war against the rebels, why use gas & cross
Obama's "red line", inviting airstrikes? - Peter M. Also see item 9, by
Eamonn Fingleton
I sent out this newsletter on October 18, 2015. Below, I just include a
few lines of most articles (enough for you to pursue further); but some
are covered in detail.
(1) US says Assad used chemical weapons, but was winning the war against
the rebels (NYT June 2013)
(2) UK Home Secretary Theresa May cites Chemical Weapons attack by Assad
(Oct 2015)
(3) Obama asserts Assad launched Chemical Weapons attack on Aug 21, 2013
(Oct 2015)
(4) Intercepted phone calls prove Syrian Army used Nerve Gas, U.S. Spies
say (Foreign Policy, Aug 27, 2013)
(5) Intelligence report on Aug 21, 2013 Chemical Weapons attack came
from Israel - Gareth Porter
(6) Phone call was intercepted by Mossad, not CIA
(7) WSJ touts "Israeli intelligence indicating movement of Syrian
chemical weapons"
(8) US claims about Syria Chemical Weapons are based on intelligence
supplied by Mossad
(9) Eamonn Fingleton: Aug 21 gas attack was False Flag, because Assad
was winning the Civil War (Sept 1, 2013)
(10) UN debate stalls US attack on Syria (Aug 29, 2013)
(11) UK parliament votes against Syria war plan, mindful of Iraq WMD
deception (Aug 29, 2013)
(12) Geoffrey Robertson, a former UN judge, calls for the Bombing of
Syria (Aug 30, 2013)
(13) G20 leaders speak out against US-led strike on Syria (Sept 6, 2013)
(14) G20 leaders reject attack on Syria over Chemical Weapons; Assad was
framed (Sept 8, 2013)
(15) AIPAC to lobby Congress for Syria strike (Israel News, Sept 6, 2013)
(16) Obama "red line" would use Chemical Weapons as a Causus Belli; but
Congress defied AIPAC (Sept 14, 2013)
(17) US Media refused to publish Seymour Hersh expose of US lies on Aug.
21 Syrian gas attack
(18) British Lab showed Aug. 21 Sarin was not Assad's but Al Nusra's -
Seymour Hersh, LRB
(19) Sarin nerve gas was used by Syrian rebels, not Assad - U.N.
official (Washington Times, May 6, 2013)
(20) UN commissioner says evidence indicates Syria rebels 'used sarin'
(BBC, May 6, 2013)
(21) Obama authorizes CIA to arm Syrian rebels, citing Assad use of
Chemical weapons (WSJ, June 14, 2013)
(22) Daily Mail publishes leaked emails from defense contractor on False
Flag chemical weapons attack in Syria (Jan 2013)
(23) Hacked emails reveal ‘Washington-approved' plan to stage chemical
weapons attack in Syria
(24) A Look into the Britam Defence Data Leak Files - cyberwarnews.info
(25) Britam Defence is British private military company, operates mainly
in the Middle East
(1) US says Assad used chemical weapons, but was winning the war against
the rebels (NYT June 2013)
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/world/middleeast/syria-chemical-weapons.html
MIDDLE EAST
U.S. Is Said to Plan to Send Weapons to Syrian Rebels
By MARK MAZZETTI, MICHAEL R. GORDON and MARK LANDLERJUNE 13, 2013
(2) UK Home Secretary Theresa May cites Chemical Weapons attack by Assad
(Oct 2015)
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-s-speech-to-the-conservative-party-conference-in-full-a6681901.html
Theresa May's speech to the Conservative Party Conference – in full
May was speaking on the third day of the Conservative Party Conference
in Manchester
Tuesday 6 October 2015 12:21 BST
(3) Obama asserts Assad launched Chemical Weapons attack on Aug 21, 2013
(Oct 2015)
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2015/10/showdown-at-the-un-corral-raimondo/
Showdown at the UN Corral
Were these US-funded Good Guys (in Syria) always Bad Guys in an
ill-fitting disguise?
by Justin Raimondo
My Catbird Seat
Oct 2, 2015
(4) Intercepted phone calls prove Syrian Army used Nerve Gas, U.S. Spies
say (Foreign Policy, Aug 27, 2013)
http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/08/27/exclusive-intercepted-calls-prove-syrian-army-used-nerve-gas-u-s-spies-say/
Exclusive: Intercepted Calls Prove Syrian Army Used Nerve Gas, U.S.
Spies Say
By Noah Shachtman
August 27, 2013 - 8:54 pm
(5) Intelligence report on Aug 21, 2013 Chemical Weapons attack came
from Israel - Gareth Porter
From: Paul de Burgh-Day <pdeburgh@harboursat.com.au>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2013 14:47:28 +1000
Subject: Gareth Porter: How Intelligence Was Twisted to Support an
Attack on Syria
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36096.htm
How Intelligence Was Twisted to Support an Attack on Syria
By Gareth Porter
September 04, 2013 "Information Clearing House - "Truthout"
(6) Phone call was intercepted by Mossad, not CIA
From: "Sadanand, Nanjundiah (Physics Earth Sciences)"
<sadanand@mail.ccsu.edu> Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 10:10:26 -0400
The Israeli intimate involvement in instigating aggression against Syria
the pretext for attack on Syria provided by Israeli intelligence services.
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013
FM: John Whitbeck <From: jvwhitbeck@gmail.com>
Further to my message of Monday (below), the official American
assessment of who was responsible for the apparent use of chemical
weapons in Syria has now escalated from "very little doubt" to, in a
text read by Vice President Joe Biden, "no doubt" that it was the Syrian
government.
What evidence could have been gathered prior to the forensic
examinations by the UN inspectors on the ground to provoke this change
to absolute certainty?
The answer may be found in an article published yesterday in the
prominent Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronoth ("American Operation,
Israeli Intelligence"), which reports that "the IDF’s 8200 intelligence
unit was listening to the Syrian leadership during the lethal chemical
weapons attack last week in which hundreds were killed, and it was
Israel that relayed the incriminating information to the West", that
three Israeli generals arrived in Washington on Monday "to show their
counterparts the most updated intelligence" and that "the source of most
of the information that the US has about Syria is Israeli, as is the
information about the targets for a possible attack."
As is almost always the case with the United States and its European
acolytes, what Israel wants, Israel gets.
Those who do not rely exclusively on Israeli intelligence as a source of
evidence may be interested in a brief paragraph buried in a lengthy New
York Times report published yesterday in the International Herald
Tribune ("Like ‘watching a horror movie’"): "Near the attack sites,
activists found spent rockets that appeared to have been homemade and
suspected that they had delivered the gas. Mr. Salahideen [previously
identified as "a reporter for the opposition’s Alaan television
network"] said he did not think the small rockets could carry the amount
of gas needed to kill so many people and guessed that government forces
had fired the rockets to make it easier to blame the rebels, who often
fire improvised rockets at government targets."
(7) WSJ touts "Israeli intelligence indicating movement of Syrian
chemical weapons"
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324906304579039342815115978.html
August 27, 2013, 8:27 p.m. ET
U.S., Allies Prepare to Act as Syria Intelligence Mounts
Evidence Includes Satellite Images, Intercepted Communications
By ADAM ENTOUS, SAM DAGHER and SIOBHAN GORMAN CONNECT
(8) US claims about Syria Chemical Weapons are based on intelligence
supplied by Mossad
From: Paul de Burgh-Day <pdeburgh@harboursat.com.au> Date: Thu, 29 Aug
2013 09:48:54 +1000
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/cofirmed-us-claims-against-syria-there.html
CONFIRMED: US Claims Against Syria - There is no Evidence
By Tony Cartalucci
August 28, 2013
(9) Eamonn Fingleton: Aug 21 gas attack was False Flag, because Assad
was winning the Civil War (Sept 1, 2013)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/eamonnfingleton/2013/09/01/obamas-syria-fiasco-who-clipped-his-wings/
Obama's Syria Blink: Who Clipped His Wings?
Eamonn Fingleton
9/01/2013 @ 12:18PM
[...] The irony in all this is that whoever used chemical weapons at
Ghouta, it almost certainly was not Assad. As Vladimir Putin has pointed
out, all the evidence is that the Ghouta atrocity was a false-flag.
Assad has had everything to lose and nothing to gain from using chemical
weapons. He is close to winning the war, so the last thing he wants is
to provide the United States with a pretext for regime change. [...]
(10) UN debate stalls US attack on Syria (Aug 29, 2013)
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MID-03-290813.html
By Kaveh L Afrasiabi
Aug 29, '13
(11) UK parliament votes against Syria war plan, mindful of Iraq WMD
deception (Aug 29, 2013)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/30/us-syria-crisis-britain-idUSBRE97R1BD20130830
Iraq war ghosts end UK plans to take part in Syria action
By Andrew Osborn and Guy Faulconbridge
LONDON | Thu Aug 29, 2013 9:07pm EDT
(12) Geoffrey Robertson, a former UN judge, calls for the Bombing of
Syria (Aug 30, 2013)
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/30/three-key-questions-on-syria-from-geoffrey-robertson.html
Three Key Questions on Syria
by Geoffrey Robertson Aug 30, 2013 3:15 PM EDT
(13) G20 leaders speak out against US-led strike on Syria (Sept 6, 2013)
http://rt.com/news/g20-against-syria-strike-527
G20 Syria divide: World's largest nations speak out against US-led strike
Published time: September 06, 2013 22:47
Edited time: September 07, 2013 13:34
(14) G20 leaders reject attack on Syria over Chemical Weapons; Assad was
framed (Sept 8, 2013)
From: Paul de Burgh-Day <pdeburgh@harboursat.com.au>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 10:46:45 +1000
The West Dethroned
By Paul Craig Roberts
"The European race’s last three hundred years of evolutionary progress
have all come down to nothing but four words: selfishness, slaughter,
shamelessness and corruption."
Yan Fu
September 08, 2013 Information Clearing House
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36164.htm
[...] The "New American Century" proclaimed by the neoconservatives came
to an abrupt end on September 6 at the G20 meeting in Russia. The
leaders of most of the world’s peoples told Obama that they do not
believe him and that it is a violation of international law if the US
government attacks Syria without UN authorization.
Putin told the assembled world leaders that the chemical weapons attack
was "a provocation on behalf of the armed insurgents in hope of the help
from the outside, from the countries which supported them from day one."
In other words, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Washington--the axis of evil.
China, India, South Africa, Brazil, Indonesia, and Argentina joined
Putin in affirming that a leader who commits military aggression without
the approval of the UN Security Council puts himself "outside of law." [...]
Washington represents Israel and a handful of powerful organized private
interests. Washington represents no one else. Washington is a plague
upon the American people and a plague upon the world.
(15) AIPAC to lobby Congress for Syria strike (Israel News, Sept 6, 2013)
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4426658,00.html
AIPAC to lobby Congress for Syria strike
American Israeli Political Activity Committee to attempt to persuade
Congress to vote in favor of attack, as constituents urge Congress to
vote against intervention
Yitzhak Benhorin
Israel News
Published: 09.06.13, 21:16
WASHINGTON – Though US Congress is pressured by the American public to
vote against a US military intervention in Syria, Israel’s most ardent
supporters in AIPAC urge Congress representatives to vote in favor of an
intervention. [...]
(16) Obama "red line" would use Chemical Weapons as a Causus Belli; but
Congress defied AIPAC (Sept 14, 2013)
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2013/09/a-short-history-of-the-war-on-syria-2006-2014.html
September 14, 2013
A Short History Of The War On Syria - 2006-2014
[...] In late 2006 the United States started to finance an external
opposition to Syria's ruling Baath party. Those exiles were largely
members of the Muslim Brotherhood which had been evicted from Syria
after their bloody uprising against the Syrian state between 1976 and
1982 had failed. In 2007 a plan for regime change in Syria was agreed
upon between the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia. The aim was to
destroy the "resistance" alliance of Hizbullah, Syria and Iran:
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 cooperated 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.
By 2011 three years of drought, caused by global warming and Turkey's
upstream dams and irrigation projects, had weakened the Syrian economy.
Large parts of the poor rural population lost their means of living and
moved into the cities. They provided the fertile ground needed to launch
an uprising against the Syrian state.
The U.S. part in the plan was to provide the media and "global opinion"
cover for the insurgency. To that purpose it used the tool from its
"color revolution" tool box. "Citizen journalists" were recruited,
trained and provided with the video and communication equipment needed
for media propagandizing. Others were trained in organizing "peaceful
civil demonstrations". The Saudis took care of the darker part of the
plan. They financed and armed rebel groups, often related to the exiled
Muslim Brotherhood, which had the task to instigate a wider insurgency
by taking on government forces as well as the peaceful demonstrators.A
main part of the scheme was the introduction of a sectarian view that
would split the largely secular Syria into several constituencies.
A local disturbance in Deraa near the Jordanian border was used to
launch the uprising. Peaceful demonstration were held but soon shots
were fired towards the police as well as towards the demonstrators.
Inevitably both sides escalated. Groups armed by the Saudis target the
government forces. Having colleagues killed and wounded the government
forces retaliated against the demonstrators. Some of those took up arms
themselves and fought the government. [...]Posted by b on September 14,
2013 at 01:15 PM |
(17) US Media refused to publish Seymour Hersh expose of US lies on Aug.
21 Syrian gas attack
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/04/08/hrsh-a08.html
Media blacks out Seymour Hersh expose of US lies on Syrian gas attack
By Patrick Martin
8 April 2014
Nearly two days after the London Review of Books published a lengthy
exposé by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh detailing
efforts by the Turkish government to stage a provocation to bring the US
military directly into the civil war in Syria, the US media has blacked
out the report. [...]
The Syrian government denied responsibility for the Ghouta attack and
blamed the "rebels," who had every reason to carry out the action, which
coincided with the arrival of United Nations weapons inspectors in
Damascus to investigate previous gas attacks. At the time of the attack,
Syrian government forces were retaking areas previously held by the
US-backed opposition, which was in disarray and on the point of
collapse. It desperately needed a supposed government atrocity to
provide a pretext for direct US military intervention against the Assad
regime.
Hersh’s report substantiates the Syrian government’s claims, using
documents and accounts from US intelligence and military sources. It
also provides evidence that President Obama, Secretary of State John
Kerry and other US officials knowingly lied to the American people when
they insisted that only the Assad regime could have carried out the
Ghouta attack and that US intelligence agencies had proof that Syrian
government forces were responsible. (See: New exposé by Seymour Hersh:
Turkey staged gas attack to provoke US war on Syria)
Last December, Hersh published an initial account of the Ghouta attack,
which noted the discrepancies and contradictions in the official US
accounts and exposed media propaganda such as the now-retracted claim by
the New York Times that its own technical analysis of the attack proved
that only the Syrian military could have fired the gas shells. Hersh’s
conclusion at that time, reflected in the headline "Whose Sarin?" was
that it was still unclear who was responsible for the gas attack.
The latest account provides an important new finding—that the Turkish
government worked with the al-Nusra Front to engineer the gas attack and
blame it on Assad in order to provide a means for the Obama
administration to override popular opposition to another US war in the
Middle East and launch military action in Syria.
A former intelligence official told Hersh, "We now know it was a covert
action planned by Erdogan’s people to push Obama over the red line …
They had to escalate to a gas attack in or near Damascus … The deal was
to do something spectacular."
Hersh has been unable to get his reports published by major American
media outlets. Both of his Syrian exposés appeared in the online edition
of the London Review of Books, not in the New Yorker, where he was
published for many years, or any daily newspaper.
Since the new article was posted early Sunday morning, there has been
total silence in the mainstream US press. The New York Times and
Washington Post, the two leading dailies, said nothing. The Times
published a long account Monday of fighting in Syria with no mention of
Hersh’s report.
The main British dailies have also been silent. The Guardian, in
addition to censoring Hersh, published a long account of a
self-justifying interview on BBC Radio 4 by the notorious liar and war
criminal Tony Blair, the former prime minister, defending the Iraq war
and advocating military action in Syria.
The article, written by the newspaper’s chief political correspondent
Nicholas Watt, goes so far as to note Blair’s argument that the use of
sarin gas at Ghouta was sufficient reason to attack Syria, without
referencing Hersh’s exposure of this attack as a provocation, published
just 24 hours earlier. The cover-up is conscious and deliberate. [...]
(18) British Lab showed Aug. 21 Sarin was not Assad's but Al Nusra's -
Seymour Hersh, LRB
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line
Vol. 36 No. 8 · 17 April 2014
pages 21-24 | 5870 words
The Red Line and the Rat Line
Seymour M. Hersh on Obama, Erdogan and the Syrian rebels
In 2011 Barack Obama led an allied military intervention in Libya
without consulting the US Congress. Last August, after the sarin attack
on the Damascus suburb of Ghouta, he was ready to launch an allied air
strike, this time to punish the Syrian government for allegedly crossing
the 'red line' he had set in 2012 on the use of chemical weapons.[*]
Then with less than two days to go before the planned strike, he
announced that he would seek congressional approval for the
intervention. The strike was postponed as Congress prepared for
hearings, and subsequently cancelled when Obama accepted Assad's offer
to relinquish his chemical arsenal in a deal brokered by Russia. Why did
Obama delay and then relent on Syria when he was not shy about rushing
into Libya? The answer lies in a clash between those in the
administration who were committed to enforcing the red line, and
military leaders who thought that going to war was both unjustified and
potentially disastrous.
Obama's change of mind had its origins at Porton Down, the defence
laboratory in Wiltshire. British intelligence had obtained a sample of
the sarin used in the 21 August attack and analysis demonstrated that
the gas used didn't match the batches known to exist in the Syrian
army's chemical weapons arsenal. The message that the case against Syria
wouldn't hold up was quickly relayed to the US joint chiefs of staff.
The British report heightened doubts inside the Pentagon; the joint
chiefs were already preparing to warn Obama that his plans for a
far-reaching bomb and missile attack on Syria's infrastructure could
lead to a wider war in the Middle East. As a consequence the American
officers delivered a last-minute caution to the president, which, in
their view, eventually led to his cancelling the attack.
For months there had been acute concern among senior military leaders
and the intelligence community about the role in the war of Syria's
neighbours, especially Turkey. Prime Minister Recep Erdogan was known to
be supporting the al-Nusra Front, a jihadist faction among the rebel
opposition, as well as other Islamist rebel groups. 'We knew there were
some in the Turkish government,' a former senior US intelligence
official, who has access to current intelligence, told me, 'who believed
they could get Assad's nuts in a vice by dabbling with a sarin attack
inside Syria – and forcing Obama to make good on his red line threat.'
The joint chiefs also knew that the Obama administration's public claims
that only the Syrian army had access to sarin were wrong. The American
and British intelligence communities had been aware since the spring of
2013 that some rebel units in Syria were developing chemical weapons. On
20 June analysts for the US Defense Intelligence Agency issued a highly
classified five-page 'talking points' briefing for the DIA's deputy
director, David Shedd, which stated that al-Nusra maintained a sarin
production cell: its programme, the paper said, was 'the most advanced
sarin plot since al-Qaida's pre-9/11 effort'. (According to a Defense
Department consultant, US intelligence has long known that al-Qaida
experimented with chemical weapons, and has a video of one of its gas
experiments with dogs.) The DIA paper went on: 'Previous IC
[intelligence community] focus had been almost entirely on Syrian CW
[chemical weapons] stockpiles; now we see ANF attempting to make its own
CW … Al-Nusrah Front's relative freedom of operation within Syria leads
us to assess the group's CW aspirations will be difficult to disrupt in
the future.' The paper drew on classified intelligence from numerous
agencies: 'Turkey and Saudi-based chemical facilitators,' it said, 'were
attempting to obtain sarin precursors in bulk, tens of kilograms, likely
for the anticipated large scale production effort in Syria.' (Asked
about the DIA paper, a spokesperson for the director of national
intelligence said: 'No such paper was ever requested or produced by
intelligence community analysts.')
Last May, more than ten members of the al-Nusra Front were arrested in
southern Turkey with what local police told the press were two kilograms
of sarin. In a 130-page indictment the group was accused of attempting
to purchase fuses, piping for the construction of mortars, and chemical
precursors for sarin. Five of those arrested were freed after a brief
detention. The others, including the ringleader, Haytham Qassab, for
whom the prosecutor requested a prison sentence of 25 years, were
released pending trial. In the meantime the Turkish press has been rife
with speculation that the Erdogan administration has been covering up
the extent of its involvement with the rebels. In a news conference last
summer, Aydin Sezgin, Turkey's ambassador to Moscow, dismissed the
arrests and claimed to reporters that the recovered 'sarin' was merely
'anti-freeze'.
The DIA paper took the arrests as evidence that al-Nusra was expanding
its access to chemical weapons. It said Qassab had 'self-identified' as
a member of al-Nusra, and that he was directly connected to
Abd-al-Ghani, the 'ANF emir for military manufacturing'. Qassab and his
associate Khalid Ousta worked with Halit Unalkaya, an employee of a
Turkish firm called Zirve Export, who provided 'price quotes for bulk
quantities of sarin precursors'. Abd-al-Ghani's plan was for two
associates to 'perfect a process for making sarin, then go to Syria to
train others to begin large scale production at an unidentified lab in
Syria'. The DIA paper said that one of his operatives had purchased a
precursor on the 'Baghdad chemical market', which 'has supported at
least seven CW efforts since 2004'.
A series of chemical weapon attacks in March and April 2013 was
investigated over the next few months by a special UN mission to Syria.
A person with close knowledge of the UN's activity in Syria told me that
there was evidence linking the Syrian opposition to the first gas
attack, on 19 March in Khan Al-Assal, a village near Aleppo. In its
final report in December, the mission said that at least 19 civilians
and one Syrian soldier were among the fatalities, along with scores of
injured. It had no mandate to assign responsibility for the attack, but
the person with knowledge of the UN's activities said: 'Investigators
interviewed the people who were there, including the doctors who treated
the victims. It was clear that the rebels used the gas. It did not come
out in public because no one wanted to know.'
In the months before the attacks began, a former senior Defense
Department official told me, the DIA was circulating a daily classified
report known as SYRUP on all intelligence related to the Syrian
conflict, including material on chemical weapons. But in the spring,
distribution of the part of the report concerning chemical weapons was
severely curtailed on the orders of Denis McDonough, the White House
chief of staff. 'Something was in there that triggered a shit fit by
McDonough,' the former Defense Department official said. 'One day it was
a huge deal, and then, after the March and April sarin attacks' – he
snapped his fingers – 'it's no longer there.' The decision to restrict
distribution was made as the joint chiefs ordered intensive contingency
planning for a possible ground invasion of Syria whose primary objective
would be the elimination of chemical weapons.
The former intelligence official said that many in the US national
security establishment had long been troubled by the president's red
line: 'The joint chiefs asked the White House, "What does red line mean?
How does that translate into military orders? Troops on the ground?
Massive strike? Limited strike?" They tasked military intelligence to
study how we could carry out the threat. They learned nothing more about
the president's reasoning.'
In the aftermath of the 21 August attack Obama ordered the Pentagon to
draw up targets for bombing. Early in the process, the former
intelligence official said, 'the White House rejected 35 target sets
provided by the joint chiefs of staff as being insufficiently "painful"
to the Assad regime.' The original targets included only military sites
and nothing by way of civilian infrastructure. Under White House
pressure, the US attack plan evolved into 'a monster strike': two wings
of B-52 bombers were shifted to airbases close to Syria, and navy
submarines and ships equipped with Tomahawk missiles were deployed.
'Every day the target list was getting longer,' the former intelligence
official told me. 'The Pentagon planners said we can't use only
Tomahawks to strike at Syria's missile sites because their warheads are
buried too far below ground, so the two B-52 air wings with two-thousand
pound bombs were assigned to the mission. Then we'll need standby
search-and-rescue teams to recover downed pilots and drones for target
selection. It became huge.' The new target list was meant to 'completely
eradicate any military capabilities Assad had', the former intelligence
official said. The core targets included electric power grids, oil and
gas depots, all known logistic and weapons depots, all known command and
control facilities, and all known military and intelligence buildings.
Britain and France were both to play a part. On 29 August, the day
Parliament voted against Cameron's bid to join the intervention, the
Guardian reported that he had already ordered six RAF Typhoon fighter
jets to be deployed to Cyprus, and had volunteered a submarine capable
of launching Tomahawk missiles. The French air force – a crucial player
in the 2011 strikes on Libya – was deeply committed, according to an
account in Le Nouvel Observateur; François Hollande had ordered several
Rafale fighter-bombers to join the American assault. Their targets were
reported to be in western Syria.
By the last days of August the president had given the Joint Chiefs a
fixed deadline for the launch. 'H hour was to begin no later than Monday
morning [2 September], a massive assault to neutralise Assad,' the
former intelligence official said. So it was a surprise to many when
during a speech in the White House Rose Garden on 31 August Obama said
that the attack would be put on hold, and he would turn to Congress and
put it to a vote.
At this stage, Obama's premise – that only the Syrian army was capable
of deploying sarin – was unravelling. Within a few days of the 21 August
attack, the former intelligence official told me, Russian military
intelligence operatives had recovered samples of the chemical agent from
Ghouta. They analysed it and passed it on to British military
intelligence; this was the material sent to Porton Down. (A spokesperson
for Porton Down said: 'Many of the samples analysed in the UK tested
positive for the nerve agent sarin.' MI6 said that it doesn't comment on
intelligence matters.)
The former intelligence official said the Russian who delivered the
sample to the UK was 'a good source – someone with access, knowledge and
a record of being trustworthy'. After the first reported uses of
chemical weapons in Syria last year, American and allied intelligence
agencies 'made an effort to find the answer as to what if anything, was
used – and its source', the former intelligence official said. 'We use
data exchanged as part of the Chemical Weapons Convention. The DIA's
baseline consisted of knowing the composition of each batch of
Soviet-manufactured chemical weapons. But we didn't know which batches
the Assad government currently had in its arsenal. Within days of the
Damascus incident we asked a source in the Syrian government to give us
a list of the batches the government currently had. This is why we could
confirm the difference so quickly.'
The process hadn't worked as smoothly in the spring, the former
intelligence official said, because the studies done by Western
intelligence 'were inconclusive as to the type of gas it was. The word
"sarin" didn't come up. There was a great deal of discussion about this,
but since no one could conclude what gas it was, you could not say that
Assad had crossed the president's red line.' By 21 August, the former
intelligence official went on, 'the Syrian opposition clearly had
learned from this and announced that "sarin" from the Syrian army had
been used, before any analysis could be made, and the press and White
House jumped at it. Since it now was sarin, "It had to be Assad."'
The UK defence staff who relayed the Porton Down findings to the joint
chiefs were sending the Americans a message, the former intelligence
official said: 'We're being set up here.' (This account made sense of a
terse message a senior official in the CIA sent in late August: 'It was
not the result of the current regime. UK & US know this.') By then the
attack was a few days away and American, British and French planes,
ships and submarines were at the ready. [...]
Obama's move for congressional approval quickly became a dead end.
'Congress was not going to let this go by,' the former intelligence
official said. 'Congress made it known that, unlike the authorisation
for the Iraq war, there would be substantive hearings.' At this point,
there was a sense of desperation in the White House, the former
intelligence official said. 'And so out comes Plan B. Call off the
bombing strike and Assad would agree to unilaterally sign the chemical
warfare treaty and agree to the destruction of all of chemical weapons
under UN supervision.' [...] *
The full extent of US co-operation with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar
in assisting the rebel opposition in Syria has yet to come to light. The
Obama administration has never publicly admitted to its role in creating
what the CIA calls a 'rat line', a back channel highway into Syria. The
rat line, authorised in early 2012, was used to funnel weapons and
ammunition from Libya via southern Turkey and across the Syrian border
to the opposition. Many of those in Syria who ultimately received the
weapons were jihadists, some of them affiliated with al-Qaida. (The DNI
spokesperson said: 'The idea that the United States was providing
weapons from Libya to anyone is false.')
In January, the Senate Intelligence Committee released a report on the
assault by a local militia in September 2012 on the American consulate
and a nearby undercover CIA facility in Benghazi, which resulted in the
death of the US ambassador, Christopher Stevens, and three others. [...]
Washington abruptly ended the CIA's role in the transfer of arms from
Libya after the attack on the consulate, but the rat line kept going.
'The United States was no longer in control of what the Turks were
relaying to the jihadists,' the former intelligence official said.
Within weeks, as many as forty portable surface-to-air missile
launchers, commonly known as manpads, were in the hands of Syrian
rebels. On 28 November 2012, Joby Warrick of the Washington Post
reported that the previous day rebels near Aleppo had used what was
almost certainly a manpad to shoot down a Syrian transport helicopter.
'The Obama administration,' Warrick wrote, 'has steadfastly opposed
arming Syrian opposition forces with such missiles, warning that the
weapons could fall into the hands of terrorists and be used to shoot
down commercial aircraft.' Two Middle Eastern intelligence officials
fingered Qatar as the source, and a former US intelligence analyst
speculated that the manpads could have been obtained from Syrian
military outposts overrun by the rebels. There was no indication that
the rebels' possession of manpads was likely the unintended consequence
of a covert US programme that was no longer under US control. [...]
4 April
[*] Seymour M. Hersh first wrote about the sarin attack in the LRB of 19
December 2013.
(19) Sarin nerve gas was used by Syrian rebels, not Assad - U.N.
official (Washington Times, May 6, 2013)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi/
Syrian rebels used Sarin nerve gas, not Assad’s regime: U.N. official
By Shaun Waterman - The Washington Times - Monday, May 6, 2013
Testimony from victims strongly suggests it was the rebels, not the
Syrian government, that used Sarin nerve gas during a recent incident in
the revolution-wracked nation, a senior U.N. diplomat said Monday.
Carla del Ponte, a member of the U.N. Independent International
Commission of Inquiry on Syria, told Swiss TV there were "strong,
concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof," that rebels
seeking to oust Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad had used the nerve agent.
But she said her panel had not yet seen any evidence of Syrian
government forces using chemical weapons, according to the BBC, but she
added that more investigation was needed.
(20) UN commissioner says evidence indicates Syria rebels 'used sarin'
(BBC, May 6, 2013)
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-22424188
UN's Del Ponte says evidence Syria rebels 'used sarin'
BBC, 6 May 2013
Testimony from victims of the conflict in Syria suggests rebels have
used the nerve agent, sarin, a leading member of a UN commission of
inquiry has said.
Carla Del Ponte told Swiss TV that there were "strong, concrete
suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof".
(21) Obama authorizes CIA to arm Syrian rebels, citing Assad use of
Chemical weapons (WSJ, June 14, 2013)
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324188604578543820387158806?mobile=y
US to arm Syrian rebels
The Wall Street Journal, June 14, 2013
WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama authorized his administration to
provide arms to rebels fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad,
officials said Thursday, a major policy shift after the White House said
it had confirmed that Damascus used chemical weapons in the country's
civil war.
The classified order directing the Central Intelligence Agency to
coordinate arming the rebels in concert with its allies reverses a
long-standing policy that limited the U.S. to providing nonlethal support.
The White House declined to comment on the authorization, saying only
that Mr. Obama had decided to ramp up "military support" to moderate
rebels both in "scope and scale."
U.S. officials also told The Wall Street Journal on Thursday that the
U.S. military proposal for arming the rebels also calls for a limited
no-fly zone inside Syria that would be enforced by U.S. and allied
planes on Jordanian territory to protect Syrian refugees and rebels who
would train there.
Such a move, if the White House goes ahead, would represent a
significantly bigger U.S. engagement in Syria's civil war. [...]
(22) Daily Mail publishes leaked emails from defense contractor on False
Flag chemical weapons attack in Syria (Jan 2013)
http://web.archive.org/web/20130129213824/http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2270219/U-S-planned-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-Syria-blame-Assad.html
U.S. 'backed plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria and blame it
on Assad's regime'
Leaked emails from defense contractor refers to chemical weapons saying
'the idea is approved by Washington'
Obama issued warning to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad last month that
use of chemical warfare was 'totally unacceptable'
By LOUISE BOYLE
Daily Mail
PUBLISHED: 14:16 EST, 29 January 2013 | UPDATED: 14:16 EST, 29 January 2013
Leaked emails have allegedly proved that the White House gave the green
light to a chemical weapons attack in Syria that could be blamed on
Assad's regime and in turn, spur international military action in the
devastated country.
A report released on Monday contains an email exchange between two
senior officials at British-based contractor Britam Defence where a
scheme 'approved by Washington' is outlined explaining that Qatar would
fund rebel forces in Syria to use chemical weapons.
Barack Obama made it clear to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad last
month that the U.S. would not tolerate Syria using chemical weapons
against its own people.
According to Infowars.com, the December 25 email was sent from Britam's
Business Development Director David Goulding to company founder Philip
Doughty.
It reads: 'Phil... We've got a new offer. It's about Syria again.
Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved
by Washington.
'We'll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from Libya
similar to those that Assad should have.
'They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak
Russian and make a video record.
'Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are
enormous. Your opinion?
'Kind regards, David.'
Britam Defence had not yet returned a request for comment to MailOnline.
The emails were released by a Malaysian hacker who also obtained senior
executives resumés and copies of passports via an unprotected company
server, according to Cyber War News.
Dave Goulding's Linkedin profile lists him as Business Development
Director at Britam Defence Ltd in Security and Investigations. A
business networking profile for Phil Doughty lists him as Chief
Operationg Officer for Britam, United Arab Emirates, Security and
Investigations.
The U.S. State Department had not returned a request for comment on the
alleged emails to MailOnline today at time of publication. [...] ==
Here is a copy of the leaked document - SAVE it and PRINT it:
http://web.archive.org/web/20130224162322/http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/01/29/article-2270219-173CAE5E000005DC-457_634x269_popup.jpg
In case the above link does not work, I have uploaded a copy to
http://mailstar.net/bulletins/Syria-Chemical-frame-Assad.jpg
(23) Hacked emails reveal ‘Washington-approved' plan to stage chemical
weapons attack in Syria
http://www.hangthebankers.com/hacked-emails-reveal-washington-approved-plan-to-stage-chemical-weapons-attack-in-syria/
Hacked emails reveal ‘Washington-approved' plan to stage chemical
weapons attack in Syria
January 29, 2013
Alleged hacked emails from defense contractor Britam reveal a plan
"approved by Washington" and funded by Qatar to stage a chemical weapons
attack in Syria and blame it on the Assad regime, fulfilling what the
Obama administration has made clear is a "red line" that would mandate
US military intervention.
The leaked emails, obtained by a hacker in Malaysia, feature an exchange
(click here for screenshot) between Britam Defence's Business
Development Director David Goulding and the company's founder Philip
Doughty;
Phil
We've got a new offer. It's about Syria again. Qataris propose an
attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington.
We'll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from
Libya similar to those that Assad should have. They want us to deploy
our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record.
Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are
enormous. Your opinion?
Kind regards David
The fact that the plan involves delivering a CW (chemical weapon) that
is "similar to those Assad should have," clearly suggests that the idea
is to stage a false flag chemical weapons attack that could be blamed on
Assad by Gulf states like Qatar and NATO powers.
If the claim that such as plot was "approved by Washington" can be
verified, then the Obama administration is complicit in a war crime.
According to Cyber War News, which details the process of how the emails
were hacked and includes screenshots of the leaked documents, the hack
also uncovered, "extremely personal information," including copies of
passports of Britam employees, some of whom appeared to be mercenaries.
A full list of all the hacked documents can be found here. One software
systems administrator who analyzed the ‘header' details from the email
in question concluded, "I have to admit that the email does indeed look
genuine….all these facts check out. So with Mythbusters objectivity I
have to call this one plausible."
Online business profiles confirm that both David Goulding and Philip
Doughty work for Britam Defence.
Last year, reports began to circulate that that US-backed rebel fighters
in Syria had been given gas masks and were willing to stage a chemical
weapons attack which would then be blamed on the Assad regime to grease
the skids for NATO military intervention.
Soon after in August, President Barack Obama warned that the use or even
transportation of chemical weapons by the Assad regime would represent a
"red line" that would precipitate military intervention. French
President Francois Hollande followed suit, stating that the use of such
weapons "Would be a legitimate reason for direct intervention."
At around the same time, a source told Syrian news channel Addounia that
a Saudi company had fitted 1400 ambulance vehicles with anti-gas &
anti-chemical filtering systems at a cost of $97,000 dollars each, in
preparation for a chemical weapons attack carried out by FSA rebels
using mortar rounds. A further 400 vehicles were prepared as troop carriers.
The attack would be blamed on the Syrian Army and exploited as an excuse
for a military assault. A March 2012 Brookings Institution report
entitled Saving Syria: Assessing Options For Regime Change outlined this
very scenario – where a manufactured humanitarian crisis would be cited
as justification for an attack. [...]
(24) A Look into the Britam Defence Data Leak Files - cyberwarnews.info
http://www.cyberwarnews.info/reports/a-look-into-the-britam-defence-data-leak-files/
A Look into the Britam Defence Data Leak Files
Published January 26th, 2013
By Lee J
A few days ago we did a report that a British based defence company,
Britam Defence had been leaked and confidential files had been published
online. [...]
After spending some time going over this stuff i have found the only
folder really needed was arch33 which contains all leaked data and gives
better insight in to the operations and company's Britam is working with.
The emails in this leak and files and information mainly trace back to
two Britam defence administration, one of which is the founder and
dynamic director, Philip doughty and his Business Development Director
David Goulding.
Extremely personal information such as a self complied C.V, copy's of
passports and more have been leaked from David and Philip as well as
emails and other plans.
From a lot of the documents its very clear that britam is working
closely and even offering types of training programs to the National
Saudi Gaurd and some of its internal departments and specialist groups.
[...]
(25) Britam Defence is British private military company, operates mainly
in the Middle East
http://www.cyberwarnews.info/2013/01/24/britam-defence-hacked-confidential-documents-leaked-site-offline/
Britam defence hacked, confidential documents leaked, site offline
Published January 24th, 2013 By Lee J
A British defence company has been breached and as a result a heap of
documents have been published online and now the site has gone offline.
The attack is on britam defence (http://www.britamdefence.com/) and has
been claimed by a hacker using the handle JAsIrX who uploaded the leaked
information to various file sharing websites and released it via a
single pastebin post with the a message about the release (see bottom).
The documents come in 6 parts and total over 423MB compress zip files
and inside the compress files appears to be a common layout of three
main folders named !!Syria, Iran and Iraq.
Inside these appear to be documents like passports, incident reports
about drunk employees which are labelled private and confidential as well.
A quick look into the files shows shocking plans for chemical warfare
attacks where they have planned to lure victims to kill zones. The file
can be found in the Iran folder under OPLAN (Ruhayyat) 1433H-1.doc. [...]
Britam Defence is British private military company, operates mainly
in the Middle East. It killed Arabs in Iraq and plans to invade in Iran
and Syria.
Look through leaked documents carefully. CW means chemical weapon,
g-shell is short for a gas shell I guess.
Help to distribute this info and let other people know about the
threats.
Thank all
Source: Pastebin.com [...]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)