Thursday, August 29, 2013

British Back Off Syrian Strike

UK’s David Cameron loses Syria war vote

Thank you, British people! Thank you, thank you, thank you!

According to Al-Jazeera, Cameron is going to respect the will of the people and will not join in the attack. We shall see. 

Also see: Americans Are Against Attack on Syria 

Unlike Britain, our leaders are not listening; however, since this post is also being sent to the NSA via Blogger, I am BEGGING President Obama to stand up to the Israeli propagandists and blackmailers and not do this. We have your back, sir. I know the levers they will use against you,  from press pressure to outright assassination, but in this day and age they will never get away with it. The failure of this latest false flag should make that clear to you.

Btw, how come Al-Jazeera won't report that it is/was the U.S.-supported Syrian insurgents that carried out the chemical weapons attack? What's up with that? 

Anyhow, given the British back-out, world protest against any military action, and possible U.S. wavering on this, I think it is only prudent and proper to WARN that an AMERICAN CITY WILL BE DESTROYED by a NUCLEAR EXPLOSION by the end of NEXT MONTH! My pick is Chicago, what with Rahm Emanuel, the Israeli mole, as mayor of the city. That will show Obama that he better get with the program! 

Why do I say this? Because it turns out Muslims didn't do 9/11Israel and her helpers in various western governments and intelligence agencies did.  

You did know Israel did 9/11, right? 

Keep that in mind for the next big bang. We will never be fooled again. 


"Obama push to net support for Syria strike bogs down" by Mark Landler, David E. Sanger and Thom Shanker |  New York Times, August 30, 2013

How odd. The headline in my printed pos reads "In face of resistance, Obama prepared to act alone on Syria." Quite a differenr description, isn't it? 

Yup, President Asshole Obomber is going to go ahead anyway. 

We aren't going to survive three more years of this Anti-Christ!

WASHINGTON — President Obama is prepared to move ahead with a limited military strike on Syria, administration officials said Thursday, despite a stinging rejection of such action on Thursday by America’s stalwart ally Britain and mounting questions from Congress.

Translation: the attack will occur over the Labor Day weekend, hoping no one will notice.

The negative vote in Britain’s Parliament was a heavy blow to Prime Minister David Cameron, who had pledged his support to Obama and called on lawmakers to endorse Britain’s involvement in a brief operation to punish the government of President Bashar Assad for apparently launching a deadly chemical weapons attack last week that killed hundreds.

The vote was also a setback for Obama, who, having given up hope of getting UN Security Council authorization for the strike, is struggling to assemble a coalition of allies against Syria.

Looks like his "coalition" is US and France. 

That's not a coalition, that is a pair of WAR CRIMINALS!

But administration officials made clear that the eroding support would not deter Obama in deciding to go ahead with a strike. 

What an ASSHOLE!!! I don't ever want to hear him spew about democracy or human rights or any such thing. Just SHUT THE FUCK UP, Barry!

Pentagon officials said the Navy had moved a fifth destroyer into the eastern Mediterranean Sea. Each ship carries dozens of Tomahawk cruise missiles that would probably be the centerpiece of any attack on Syria.

Even before the parliamentary vote, White House officials said, Obama decided there was no way he could overcome objections by Russia, Syria’s longtime backer, to any resolution in the UN Security Council.

Although administration officials cautioned that Obama had not made a final decision, all indications suggest that a strike could occur soon after investigators charged with scrutinizing the Aug. 21 attack leave the country. They are scheduled to depart Damascus on Saturday.

If I were Syria I wouldn't let them leave. 

Of course, then my Jewish War Media will be hollering human shields.

The White House presented its case for military action to congressional leaders Thursday evening, trying to head off growing pressure from Democrats and Republicans to provide more information about the administration’s military planning and seek congressional approval for any action.

Translation: he must RUSH TO WAR before the LIES COMPLETELY FALL APART! 

This isn't going to limited, folks. This is it!

In a conference call with Republicans and Democrats, top officials from the State Department, the Pentagon, and US intelligence agencies asserted that the evidence was clear that Assad’s forces had carried out the attack, according to officials who were briefed.

Yeah, so? WHO BELIEVES in US intelligence anymore, especially when we KNOW IT WAS the U.S-SUPPORTED INSURGENTS that used the CHEMICAL WEAPONS!? 

While the intelligence does not tie Assad directly to the attack, these officials said, the administration said the United States had both the evidence and legal justification to carry out a strike aimed at deterring the Syrian leader from using such weapons again.


A critical piece of the intelligence, officials said, is an intercepted telephone call between Syrian military officials, one of whom seems to suggest that the chemical weapons attack was more devastating than was intended. “It sounds like he thinks this was a small operation that got out of control,” one intelligence official said.

Now before we move on here THINK a MINUTE! The SYRIANS WOULD KNOW from the SNOWDEN REVELATIONS (has that guy ever disappeared from my government mouthpiece!) that the NSA is SCOOPING UP ALL COMMUNICATIONS! 

Would they REALLY BE STUPID ENOUGH to DISCUSS SUCH a THING on the PHONE if they did do it? 

It makes about AS MUCH SENSE as Assad inviting in UN inspectors and then gassing civilians with chemical weapons!   

Meaning it's all.... 

I thought I smelled something coming from Obomber when he opened his mouth.

But Republican lawmakers said White House officials dismissed suggestions that the scale of the attack was a miscalculation, indicating that the officials believe Syria intended to inflict the widespread damage.

“I’m comfortable that the things the president told Assad not to do he did,” said Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who took part with seven other Republican senators in a separate briefing by the White House chief of staff, Denis R. McDonough.

Among the officials on the conference call were Secretary of State John Kerry; Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel; the director of national intelligence, James R. Clapper; and the national security adviser, Susan E. Rice. It was unclassified, which means the administration gave lawmakers only limited details about the intelligence they assert bolsters the case for a military strike. 

Obomber Bush!!

Before the call, however, some prominent lawmakers expressed anger that the White House was planning a strike without significant consultations with Congress. 

So what? He's a dictator of the world now, and he need not bother with you!

“When we take what is a very difficult decision, you have to have buy-in by members and buy-in by the public,” Representative Mike Rogers, Republican of Michigan and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said Thursday on MSNBC. “I think both of those are critically important and, right now, none of that has happened.”

Representative Eliot L. Engel of New York, the ranking Democrat on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, said after the telephone briefing that administration officials “had no doubt that chemical weapons were used by Assad and his people.” 

He's a Zionist Jew so his self-serving spew is immediately discounted.

Engel said that among the evidence described to members of Congress was an intercepted communication “from a high-level Syrian official” discussing the attack. “There is more than enough evidence if the president chooses to act,” Engel said.

And Democrats are the Peace Party of AmeriKa!

After the 90-minute conference call, some senior lawmakers were not persuaded that the Obama administration had made its case for military action in Syria. Representative Buck McKeon of California, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said Obama needed to make a forceful case to convince both Congress and a “war weary” country.

“If he doesn’t, I think he could have a real problem with the Congress and the American public,” he said.

Please tell me it is IMPEACHMENT!

Several officials said the intelligence dossier about the attack also includes evidence of Syrian military units moving chemical munitions into place before the attack.

Raising on a busted flush that we all can see. What arrogance.

Obama, officials said, is basing his case for action both on safeguarding international standards against chemical weapons use and on the threat to America’s national interest.

That threat, they said, is both to allies in the region, like Turkey, Jordan, and Israel, and to the United States itself, if Syria’s weapons were to fall into the wrong hands or if other leaders were to take US inaction as an invitation to use unconventional weapons.

You mean they might fall into the hands of Al-CIA-Duh like they already have?

As for the invitations, never mind the FUMIGATION of SOUTH AMERICA and AFGHANISTAN with CHEMICAL WARFARE in the name of a "DRUG WAR," -- and still doing it --  or the use of Willie Pete in Iraq! 

And how could senator Kerry ever forget what happened in VIETNAM
Also see:

Israel and the Bomblets

Israel and White Phosphorous

FLASHBACK - Israel Drops White Phosphorus Bombs, Littlest Victims Suffer

FLASHBACK - Israeli crimes against humanity: Gruesome images of charred and mutilated bodies following Israeli air strikes 
Israel used chemical weapons in Gaza 

Even that simple search is skewed by Joogle. 

So where was the worry about deterence then, asshole?

Obama’s rationale for a strike creates a parallel dilemma to the one that President George W. Bush confronted when he decided to enter into a far broader war with nearly 150,000 US troops in Iraq without seeking an authorizing resolution in the United Nations. The Obama administration says that case differs sharply from its objectives in Syria.

In Iraq, Bush was explicitly seeking regime change. In this case, White House officials say, Obama is trying to enforce an international ban on chemical weapons and seeking to prevent their use in Syria, or against US allies.

That last sentence is shit. The links I provided above prove it. 


“We have been trying to get the UN Security Council to be more assertive on Syria even before this incident,” said Benjamin J. Rhodes, the deputy national security adviser for strategic communications. “The problem is that the Russians won’t vote for any accountability.”

Who is Ben Rhodes again, and why am I not surprised he is a tribe member?

The decision to proceed without Britain is remarkable, however.

Not really. AmeriKa has "gone it alone" many times.

Even in the Iraq war, Bush relied on what he called a “coalition of the willing,” led by Britain. Obama has made clear that this initiative would come from the US, and that while he welcomed international participation, he was not depending on foreign forces.

Obama has referred, somewhat vaguely, to reinforcing “international norms,” or standards, against the use of chemical weapons, which are categorized as “weapons of mass destruction” even though they are far less powerful than nuclear or biological weapons.

Obama this week has also highlighted America’s inherent right to self-defense. But some scholars warn that may be a difficult case to make.

We are NOT UNDER IMMINENT THREAT by the Syrians, so that is just ONE MORE RATIONALIZATION in an attempt to justify this WAR CRIMINAL ACTION!

“Under this principle, Turkey, Jordan, Israel, Iraq, or Lebanon could respond directly to Syrian belligerent acts, as could their allies, such as NATO and the US,” said Phillip Carter, an analyst with the Center for a New American Security in Washington.

The United States has conducted unilateral bombing campaigns without seeking international endorsement before. But it made a direct case for self-defense.

In 1986, President Reagan ordered an airstrike on Tripoli after concluding that Libya was behind the bombing of a Berlin disco that killed two US military personnel. In 1998, after deadly bombings of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, President Clinton authorized cruise missile strikes on Afghanistan and Sudan.


You wanna act alone, Obomber? 

Then HERE IS YOUR GUN, here is your PARACHUTE, here is your ORANGE JUMPSUIT, and WATCH YOUR HEAD JUMPING OUT of the PLANE! Leave US out of it, asshole!

I'm a firm believer that ALL AMERICANS need to go to places where their leaders are and just start YELLING ASSHOLE, ASSHOLE, ASSHOLE, ASSHOLE, and NEVER STOP!