Related: Syrian Strikes Could Happen Any Second
I'm so happy I was wrong, for however brief an interval. Gives me a chance to preemptively condemn Obomber again and let the WORLD KNOW the U.S. GOVERNMENT DOES NOT SPEAK for ME, and that I STRENUOUSLY OBJECT to its actions!!
"President Obama seeks Congressional OK on Syria; Says strikes warranted, but will take case to lawmakers; apparent change of heart regarded as political gamble" by Bryan Bender and Matt Viser | Globe Staff, September 01, 2013
WASHINGTON — President Obama, acknowledging the country’s weariness with war, said Saturday that the United States should use military force to punish Syria for using chemical weapons but said he will first seek congressional approval.
The surprise announcement, following a series of consultations with senior congressional leaders, effectively delayed any US military operation in Syria until after the summer recess, which ends on Sept. 9.
It marked a reversal from what appeared to be Obama’s willingness to assert his presidential authority without a green light from the legislative branch.
Obama’s decision upped the political stakes for a leader who has had little success this year winning over a recalcitrant Congress, particularly the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. Coming on the heels of the defeat of a similar measure in the British House of Commons last week, it was also seen as a gamble that raises the possibility the president may have to cancel his plans for a strike if Congress balks.
Related: British Back Off Syrian Strike
“Having made my decision as commander-in-chief based on what I am convinced is our national security interests, I’m also mindful that I’m the president of the world’s oldest constitutional democracy,” Obama said. “I’ve long believed that our power is rooted not just in our military might, but in our example as a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. And that’s why I’ve made a second decision: I will seek authorization for the use of force from the American people’s representatives in Congress.”
It's a constitutional REPUBLIC, Mr. constitutional law professor.
**********************************
Many members of Congress issued equivocal statements, praising the decision to hold a vote but leaving it unclear whether they would approve a strike. Some lawmakers made plans to return to Washington for high-level briefings that will take place in person, but the votes aren’t likely to happen for at least a week.
Some of the president’s closest political allies may need the most persuading. Key members of the Massachusetts delegation sounded wary about US military strikes on Syria....
Bay State lawmakers were among the most vociferous opponents of the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003....
Speaking in the Rose Garden, with Vice President Joe Biden at his side, Obama on Saturday voiced his strongest condemnation yet of the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad for allegedly using poison gas to kill more than 1,400 civilians, asserting that “in a world with many dangers this menace must be confronted.”
If the United States fails to act, he added, “it could lead to escalating use of chemical weapons, or their proliferation to terrorist groups who would do our people harm.” Obama said he has been assured by military leaders that a strike would be effective even if it is not launched for a month.
On Saturday evening the White House sent to Congress draft legislation seeking authorization to use the armed forces to “prevent or deter the use or proliferation” of “any weapons of mass destruction’’ including chemical weapons by Syria. It would also authorize use of force to “protect the United States and its allies and partners against the threat posed by such weapons.’’
Some analysts criticized the president for his apparent change of heart about seeking a congressional vote, even as it is clear he is prepared to act regardless.
Then I'm not going to waste a whole lot of time with this print.
“It is sort of clunky national security strategy,” said retired Major General Robert Scales, a former commandant of the Army War College. “The Syrian Army now has an additional nine or 10 days to disperse their strategic assets, perhaps to transport them to Iran.”
Scales, who said he believes any military intervention in Syria “is not in America’s strategic interest,” worried that the Syrian leadership would interpret Obama’s decision to seek a congressional vote “as something of a victory.”
But it is WHAT ISRAEL WANTS, so...
Obama will now take his case to a divided Congress that has antagonized him on most every other issue, even routine matters such as federal budgets, judicial nominees, and a farm bill.
They never seem divided when it comes to Israel, as we see from the 800-Pound Gorilla in the room.
That process began Saturday during conference calls conducted for all senators by top administration officials, including Secretary of State John Kerry and National Security Adviser Susan Rice. Kerry is slated to make the administration’s case during a round of appearances on Sunday morning talk shows.
I'm so glad I never watch those anymore.
The decision to seek congressional support drew praise from members of both parties....
Just as Obama will take his case to Congress and the public, opponents of his proposal plan to do the same.
Protesters demonstrated loudly outside the White House gates as Obama made his remarks in the Rose Garden. In Boston, several hundred people marched from the Park Street MBTA station to Faneuil Hall.
“Neither bombing Syria, nor any other overt act of war, will help the people of Syria,” said Garrett Kirkland, one of the Boston rally’s organizers.
Members of Congress from Massachusetts, like those around the country, said they plan to study the intelligence and listen to constituents.
Representative Michael Capuano, who opposed the Iraq War, said he is more inclined to support military action in this case because chemical weapons were used. But he wants to hear more about what the potential consequences might be.
Asshole.
“The question is, what happens the day after?” asked the Somerville Democrat. “And that question has not been answered yet. Are we empowering Al Qaeda? Are we empowering Hezbollah?”
We are empowering and arming these guys.
Representative Stephen Lynch, a South Boston Democrat, said he is concerned about the lack of an international coalition and that US military action could potentially strengthen groups linked to Al Qaeda involved in the two-year civil war to topple the Assad regime.
Representative James McGovern, a Worcester Democrat, also expressed reservations about the president’s stance, saying, “ I just don’t know, in the long-term, if trying to go after certain military targets makes it more likely or less likely that this terrible violence can come to an end.”
Senator Edward J. Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, who earlier in the week said he would support a surgical strike to limit Assad’s ability to use his large supply of poison gas, sounded noncommittal on Saturday....
Wrong answer, Ed.
Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, also was skeptical, saying “it is critical that we recognize the complexity of the conflict on the ground and that we consider the potential for unintended consequences of US intervention, no matter how good our intentions.”
Related:
"In brief remarks on Syria, Warren said she supported President Obama’s decision to seek the support of Congress on a possible military strike against Syria, but worried about the “unintended consequences” of US involvement. “Our first job is to watch out for the best interests of America,” she said."
Israel does not like seeing that.
Obama sought to address a major question he is certain to be asked as he tries to win over members of Congress, saying, “This would not be an open-ended intervention. We would not put boots on the ground. Instead, our action would be designed to be limited in duration and scope.”
Uh-huh.
--more--"
Keep reading.
"Syrian-Americans gather in Boston to oppose a US attack" by Dan Adams | Globe Correspondent, August 31, 2013
As President Obama appeared on national television Saturday afternoon seeking to make his case for a military strike on Syria, Syrian-Americans and antiwar activists gathered on Boston Common to protest any proposed attack.
Standing in front of Syrian flags emblazoned with portraits of Syrian president Bashar Assad, speakers decried US plans to launch a limited strike against the country in retaliation for an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians on Aug. 21.
The ideologically diverse crowd of about 100 included members of the Green-Rainbow Party and other antiwar protesters.
What does that tell you, huh? Obomber is alone.
The only ones with him are the paid prostitutes of Congress and the empire-builders within the U.S. government.
Protesters also marched to Secretary of State John Kerry’s home on Beacon Hill, knocking on his door, before continuing on to Faneuil Hall, where they dispersed.
Too bad he was at his second home in Israel.
“We don’t want intervention,” said Ramy Al-Taweel, 20, of Methuen. “Allies of Syria will go in to help and I think it will escalate into World War III.”
That's what Obomber and those he serves want.
Al-Taweel, who was born in the United States to Syrian parents, admits the prospect of armed conflict between the two countries is “strange” for him. “I was brought up by two cultures,” he said. “My heart is Syrian, but I love America. . . . I pray every night for Syria to be united once again.”
Like most Syrian-Americans at the protest, Al-Taweel expressed strong support for Assad, whom he praised as a secular leader capable of holding together Syria’s many ethnic and religious factions.
FBI will be paying him a visit.
But while those at the protest were strongly pro-Assad, many Syrians in the United States oppose the president, who took power after his father’s death in 2000. Some have long called for US intervention in Syria, but Al-Taweel and others reject the civil war label, arguing that the vast majority of rebel forces are not Syrians, but are rather opportunistic foreign fighters and terrorists aligned with Al Qaeda.
Yes, the WORLD KNOWS SUCH THINGS! The only ones who do not are those that exclusively follow AmeriKa's jewsmedia.
“Obama promised there would be no unjust war under his administration,” said Dr. Elias Zavaro, 52 of Wellesley, a Syrian-American. “Sending our boys, our missiles, our fighter planes to protect Al Qaeda — is that just?”
Zavaro, who moved to the United States from Syria in 1986 and studied dentistry at Boston University, said a US strike against his home country would harm civilians while doing little to end the conflict.
And like many others at the rally, Zavaro suspects that the chemical weapons attack was perpetrated by Saudi Arabia, not Assad’s forces, as a way to provoke Western intervention.
Yes, the JIG is UP!
“Obama said using chemical weapons was a red line, and the Saudis took advantage of that to give an excuse for a missile strike,” Zavaro said.
Salim Alasmar, a 58-year-old Syrian-American from Methuen who attended the protest, said he felt the tug of competing loyalties.
“They are both my countries,” he said. “I love the US the same way I love Syria. But when the US government does something stupid like this, it makes me feel like I have no home.”
Alasmar said news reports of Syrian casualties disturb him. “For every death, I get a dark feeling in my heart,” he said. “All of my family is there. I worry every day. They have a bad feeling about the future. They say, ‘How did Syria get to this point?’ It’s a jungle.”
Like Al-Taweel and others, Alasmar said he empathized with some of the concerns that initially drove protesters onto the streets in Syria, but he also denounced the rebels for escalating the conflict.
The rally on the Common also attracted antiwar protesters whose reasons for opposing a strike were grounded in a general opposition to war and US intervention overseas.
“It would be unconstitutional, illegal, immoral, and a potential catastrophe to attack Syria,” said Jill Stein, a former Green Party candidate for governor and president. “If democracy or justice had anything to do with it, we wouldn’t act. It would just be pouring gas on the fire.”
The Jewish War Media always has to work in a Jew somewhere, don't they?
Where would be without all the good Jews looking out after us?
--more--"
Someone will be looking out for you Syrians that attended the protest:
"FBI heightens its surveillance of individuals inside US" by Michael S. Schmidt | New York Times, September 01, 2013
NEW YORK — The FBI has increased its surveillance of Syrians inside the United States in response to concerns that a military strike against the government of President Bashar Assad could lead to terrorist attacks here or against US allies and interests abroad, according to current and former senior US officials.
Related: NYPD Now a National Police Force
Also see: Sunday Globe Special: Northern Command
If there is any kind of big bang remember that there is an 800-Pound Gorilla in the room.
The government has also taken the unusual step of warning federal agencies and private companies that US military action in Syria could spur cyberattacks, the officials said. There were no such alerts before previous military operations, like the one against Libya in 2011.
Related: Syrian Terrorists Attacked the New York Times
Why would they want to attack a pos no one listens to or reads?
Also see: Sunday Globe Special: Hacking is Good Bu$ine$$
See who the hackers are? It's going to be ANOTHER FALSE FLAG!
The authorities are particularly concerned because Iran — one of Assad’s closest allies — has said there will be reprisals against Israel if the United States attacks Syria. The Iranians have also shown a willingness to sponsor terrorist attacks on American targets, according to the officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss a continuing operation.
Oh, yeah, when?
“They’re not starting from scratch — the field offices know what they have in terms of sources and investigations, but this is a directive for them to redouble their efforts and check their traps,” one senior US official said.
Senior national security officials at FBI headquarters in Washington have told the bureau’s field offices in recent days to follow up with sources who have ties to Syrians in an attempt to find talk or evidence of a retaliatory strike, the officials said. And Syrians implicated in continuing investigations will be put under even closer scrutiny, the officials said.
As if Syrians, knowing the U.S. government is monitoring all communications, would be stupid enough to mention it over the phone or web the same way they mentioned using chemical weapons.
But that's what happens with shit. It gets in places and on things you never expected.
The Department of Homeland Security and the FBI have sent out a classified bulletin alerting federal, state, and local law enforcement officials of potential threats created by the Syria conflict, the officials said.
Then NOTHING BETTER HAPPEN! NOTHING AT ALL!
FBI agents are expected to interview hundreds of Syrians in the coming days. During the international campaign against Moammar Khadafy of Libya two years ago, the agency interviewed nearly 1,000 Libyans.
They are going to start with those at the protest.
--more--"
Related:
"Kerry said in appearances on several television news shows Sunday that Obama has the right to take action against Syria, with or without Congress’ approval. But he stopped short of saying Obama was committed to such a course even if lawmakers refuse to authorize force. Kerry told CNN’s ‘‘State of the Union’’ that hair and blood samples from victims in eastern Damascus have ‘‘tested positive for signatures of sarin.’’ Kerry said the samples were provided to the U.S., and did not come from U.N. chemical weapons experts."
Meaning they got the garbage from Israel.
And now, for something completely different:
"Kerry’s case for Syria attack fictitious" by Gordon Duff
In May, this year, Turkish police arrested “Syrian rebels” caught in the act of carrying weaponized Sarin gas to Syria. However, the source of the Sarin was never revealed, those arrested disappeared and nothing was mentioned again."
Today we heard American Secretary of State John Kerry give his compelling case for war on Syria. His story was compelling, perhaps even theatrical. It also rang of fiction.
It was a convenient narrative about the Assad government, which is popular among the Syrian people, a government clearly winning against a brutal and unpopular foreign-dominated insurgency.
Real intelligence is a mosaic, each source graded as to historical reliability and import. When enough pieces don’t come together or an unwanted outcome results, intelligence “fusion centers” cut out “bad facts” and amplify or invent “good ones.”
Kerry’s intelligence on Syria’s alleged use of chemical weapons goes further, down the slippery slope of a detailed narrative, a “cooked” story, perfectly timed, containing the right anecdotal details, a classic “deception and cover” tale right out of the Mossad book of deception.
I can’t imagine how Kerry could keep a straight face; perhaps it is embalmed with Botox....
--MORE--"
Now back to your regular programing:
"Kerry urges congress to OK strike; Defends timing, cites newproof of poison gas" by Noah Bierman | Globe Staff, September 01, 2013
WASHINGTON — Secretary of State John F. Kerry on Sunday urged lawmakers to approve strikes on Syria to preserve the “core to American credibility in foreign policy,” underlining the gamble President Obama took in putting the question to a wary Congress.
Upping the stakes, Kerry pointed to what he characterized as new evidence that President Bashar Assad of Syria had used chemical weapons in an attack that allegedly killed 1,400 people last month: signatures of sarin gas on hair and blood samples taken from first responders in East Damascus.
Where did they get those? Not from the U.N.!
As Kerry campaigned for the military action on five morning talk shows, he insisted that Obama’s sudden decision to seek legislative approval, and to allow for more than a week to begin debate, would help the administration build the case and make the military response to Syria “much more powerful.” He predicted Congress would approve a resolution authorizing force against the Assad regime.
“This is a matter of national security. It’s a matter of the credibility of the United States of America,” Kerry said on CNN’s “State of the Union.’’ “It’s a matter of upholding the interests of our allies and friends in the region.”
Going to war over something irretrievably lost?
Many in Congress had been pressuring Obama to seek legal authority before launching strikes. But several lawmakers argued on Sunday that Obama’s shift in position, after declaring a “red line” against chemical weapons and preparing for imminent strikes throughout the week, has already damaged the United States’ credibility, emboldening Assad and other rogue leaders who might use or employ chemical and nuclear weapons.
“I’m afraid what is shown is weakness there,” said Senator Saxby Chambliss, a Georgia Republican, on CBS’s “Face the Nation.’’ “The world is watching. Our allies are watching as well as our adversaries.”
The clash of views on the television talk shows provided a preview of the difficult road ahead that Obama faces in trying to persuade Congress to approve his resolution to use force.
“After 12 years of war, post-9/11, folks do have fatigue and even a sense of skepticism about assertions with regard to, you know, presence of weapons of mass destruction,” said Senator Timothy M. Kaine, a Virginia Democrat who said he is likely to support Obama’s resolution, on CBS.
There was debate among leading lawmakers over what Congress will do when the full House and Senate return to session Sept. 9, following a long recess. Several lawmakers said that if a vote were taken immediately, it might fail in the Republican-controlled House, making it crucial that Obama build popular support in the coming days.
Thus we will be fed FAKE and RIGGED POLLS saying SUPPORT for WAR is GROWING!
Congress has large factions of conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats who are leery of military intervention abroad as well as hawks who have argued Obama’s response is inadequate. And public opinion is tepid, according to polls.
They won't be enough to stop it, never are, and we are FAR from TEPID! We are FROZEN SOLID AGAINST MILITARY ACTION, period!!
“If we get involved, you know, people say, ‘Well, 100,000 people have died, we must act,’” said Senator Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican generally opposed to military involvement overseas, on NBC’s “Meet the Press.’’ “Well, if our weapons get involved, and we get involved, do you think more people will die or less people? I think the war may escalate out of control. And then we have to ask ourselves who is on America’s side over there? If the rebels win, will they be American allies?”
Not if they are eating the organs of their enemies.
But even as Kerry argued for support, he was on the defensive Sunday, advocating delay only three days after making the administration’s most impassioned, and seemingly urgent, case for military intervention.
“I made a powerful call for action,” Kerry said on “Fox News Sunday.’’ “I never mentioned the word quick.”
Kerry argued that the delay would not hamper the military effort, which he and Obama have described as limited and intended to send a message to Syria, Iran, North Korea, and other countries that chemical weapons cannot be used with impunity. The US military, Kerry said, has assured the president that the effect of the strikes will not be dulled by waiting.
Thus the bankrupt American taxpayers must fork over more billions so more innocent people can be murdered by their mass-murdering government -- to send a message.
Fuck that!
He said Assad is already “on the defensive. He’s moving assets around. He’s hunkering down.”
John (Kohn) Kerry is holding true to his heritage.
What he accuses others of are the things of which he himself is guilty.
Kerry even insisted that reports of Assad’s triumphant declarations that the United States had cowered from a confrontation would backfire against the regime as Congress takes a closer look.
“The more he stands up and crows, the more he will help this decision be made correctly,” Kerry said on ABC’s “This Week.’’
Why would he do that? Is it possible this is just one more Jewish mistranslation or lie?
That argument may ultimately win the day with some of Obama’s skeptics. Senator John McCain, an Arizona Republican who has been urging more aggressive action against Assad for more than a year, did not commit to supporting Obama’s resolution Sunday.
He criticized limited cruise missile attacks as “pinpricks” in the face of a civil war that has left 100,000 dead, and he said that Obama had no real plan or strategy. But McCain signaled that he would eventually sign on....
Especially with the 800-Pound Gorilla in the room.
Likewise, Representative Mike Rogers, a Michigan Republican who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, predicted the House would approve the military strikes. Like many in Congress, he supports letting lawmakers weigh in before any strikes are launched, and said Obama had made the right decision to wait for debate.
“This is a national security issue,” he said on CNN. “This isn’t about, you know, Barack Obama versus the Congress. This isn’t about Republicans versus Democrats. This has a very important worldwide reach in this decision.”
Amazing how the partisanship di$$olves when it comes to what Israel wants.
--more--"
"Lawmakers deeply divided on plan for military strikes" by Bradley Klapper | Associated Press, September 02, 2013
WASHINGTON — Members of Congress, deadlocked on just about everything these days and still on summer break, expressed sharply divergent opinions Sunday about whether to give President Obama the go-ahead he requested to retaliate with military force against the Assad regime.
Senior administration officials briefed lawmakers in private to explain why the United States is compelled to act against President Bashar Assad’s government in response to the Aug. 21 chemical attacks. Further classified meetings were planned over the next three days.
Dozens of members attended the two-hour classified briefing Sunday in the Capitol, though many emerged saying they needed to see more details of Obama’s plan and obtain more facts about the alleged chemical weapons attack. Many feared giving Obama overly broad authority for military action.
On the administration’s efforts to sell its strategy to Congress, Representative Bennie G. Thompson, the senior Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee, said, ‘‘They have a ways to go.’’
‘‘They also have work to do with respect to shoring up the facts of what happened,’’ Thompson said.
Senator John McCain of Arizona, a leading Senate hawk and the candidate Obama defeated for the presidency in 2008, said he will discuss Syria with the president at the White House on Monday.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee plans a meeting Tuesday, according to its chairman, Senator Bob Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey. The Senate Armed Service Committee will gather a day later, said Senator Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, the top Republican on the panel.
Congress will consider the matter when it gets back from its summer break Sept. 9.
An unusual congressional coalition of foreign policy isolationists, fiscal conservatives, and anti-interventionists in both parties opposes even limited action for fear that might draw the United States into another costly and even bloody confrontation.
‘‘Does a US attack make the situation better for the Syrian people or worse?’’ asked Senator Chris Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut.
In an interview on “Fox News Sunday,’’ Inhofe predicted defeat for the president when the vote is held.
Not me. This Congress li$tens to AIPAC, not us.
But despite the intense gridlock in Congress over debt reduction, health care, immigration, and other issues, some lawmakers were more optimistic about the chances of consensus when it came to a question of national security.
Representative Peter King, Republican of New York, said he would vote ‘‘yes’’ and believed the president should be able to build a House majority over the next several days.
Polls show significant opposition among Americans to involvement, and several lawmakers have cited the faulty intelligence about weapons of mass destruction that led up to President George W. Bush’s 2003 Iraq invasion as justification of the need for lengthy debate before US military action.
--more--"
How do the Syrians feel?
"Anger, mockery abroad after Obama’s decision on Syria" by Anne Barnard | New York Times, September 02, 2013
BEIRUT — President Obama’s decision to seek congressional approval for a military strike in response to a chemical weapons attack in Syria drew a range of reactions from Syrians on Sunday, with rebel leaders expressing disappointment and government leaders questioning Obama’s leadership.
Syria’s government on Sunday mocked Obama’s decision, saying it was a sign of weakness. A state-run newspaper, Al Thawra, called it “the start of the historic American retreat,” and said Obama hesitated because of a “sense of implicit defeat and the disappearance of his allies,” along with fears that an intervention could become “an open war.”
Syria’s deputy foreign minister, Faisal Mekdad, told reporters in Damascus that “it is clear there was a sense of hesitation and disappointment in what was said by President Barack Obama yesterday. And it is also clear there was a sense of confusion, as well.”
Many Syrian opposition leaders expressed disappointment about the move, and called on Congress to approve a military strike. The leaders said any intervention should be accompanied by more arms for the rebels.
Don't worry, you are getting them. It's the 800-Pound Gorilla in the room.
“Dictatorships like Iran and North Korea are watching closely to see how the free world responds to the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons against the Syrian people,” the opposition coalition said in a statement issued in Istanbul.
Yeah, they have SEEN how we do NOT RESPOND in CERTAIN CASES!
Still, some rebel leaders were angry. A member of Syria’s opposition National Coalition, Samir Nachar, called Obama a “weak president who cannot make the right decision when it comes to such an urgent crisis.”
“We were expecting things to be quicker,” Nachar told reporters, “that a strike would be imminent.”
What are they going to do, fire off more chemical weapons? Answer: yes.
In the wider Arab world, still deeply divided over President Bashar Assad of Syria and the uprising against him, the concern over his government’s indiscriminate use of force coincided with antipathy about American intervention.
The Al-Azhar University in Cairo, considered Sunni Islam’s highest authority, said Sunday that it opposed a US strike on Syria, calling such intervention “an aggression against the Arab and Islamic nation” that would endanger peace and security in the region.
Oh, EGYPT is AGAINST THIS, huh?
But the institution said it supported “the right of the Syrian people to decide their destiny and their government for themselves in all freedom and transparency,” and condemned “recourse to chemical weapons, whoever it was that used them.”
Yeah, whoever.
The Arab League was scheduled to meet and was expected to condemn Assad; Washington is hoping for at least one Arab ally to join a coalition to strike him and for a stronger statement of support from the body, which expelled Syria earlier in the uprising but has stopped short of backing US action or blaming Assad for any chemical weapons use.
Didn't get it, not even from the head-chopping Saudis.
For others, Obama’s decision raised questions about whether the United States diminished its leadership role in foreign affairs, with commentators in Israel fearing a weakening of US resolve in confronting hostile powers.
That is why the 800-Pound Gorilla is needed.
--more--"
"Arab League endorses international action" by David D. Kirkpatrick | New York Times, September 02, 2013
CAIRO — The Arab League on Sunday urged international action against the Syrian government to deter what it called the “ugly crime” of using chemical weapons. It was a major step toward supporting Western military strikes but short of the explicit endorsement that the United States and some Persian Gulf allies had hoped for.
Because THEY COULD BE BOMBED NEXT!
The league moved beyond the more cautious stance it took just a few days ago, when it asked the UN Security Council to overcome its internal differences on the Syrian conflict — an outcome that was extremely unlikely given Russia’s strong support for Syria’s president, Bashar Assad.
This time, the Arab League called for the United Nations and “the international community” at large to exercise their responsibilities under international law “to take the necessary measures” against the Syrian government.
If Obomber acts he will be violating international law.
But aside from calling for trials of the perpetrators of chemical weapons attacks, the resolution — adopted at a meeting in Cairo late Sunday — did not specify what kind of international measures might be needed or justified.
Obama administration officials considered the statement a step forward because it opened the door to action outside the Security Council. But many in the region said the ambiguity was the latest manifestation of Washington’s diminishing influence.
President Obama’s last-minute pullback to seek a vote in Congress on military intervention put some of his Arab allies in a bind, analysts meeting with Arab diplomats said. Hoping to produce a strong Arab League statement to provide cover for Washington, Arab leaders also had new cause to wonder if Obama would follow through, leaving them politically exposed at home if they risked overt support for Western intervention in the region.
Now Obomber has gone to Congress to get cover.
“He is seen as feckless and weak, and this will only give further rise to conspiracy theories that Obama doesn’t really want Assad out and it is all a big game,” said Salman Shaikh, director of the Brookings Doha Center and a former UN envoy in the region. “Many Arab leaders already think that Obama’s word cannot be trusted — I am talking about his friends and allies — and I am afraid this will reinforce that belief.”
Conspiracy theories are the 800-Pound Gorilla in the room.
On Sunday afternoon, some Arab diplomats sought to portray themselves as stepping forward to take the lead in the Syrian crisis after Obama abruptly pulled back from any immediate military action the day before, surprising many Arab leaders just hours before they had expected airstrikes might begin.
I was surprised, too, but are you Arab diplomats sure you want Syrian blood on your hands?
But by the end of the night, the outcome at the Arab League failed to deliver the call to arms that Saudi Arabia and some others had sought as a way of encouraging the United States to press on with a strike.
As if they needed "encouragement."
Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf monarchies have privately urged the United States to take decisive military action to topple the government of Assad, whom they view as the main regional ally of their foe, Iran. Some, including Jordan and other Gulf states, are already collaborating with the United States to try to train and equip the Syrian rebels.
They have been DOING THAT for THREE YEARS, and yet the Jewish War Media is implying they are just starting and haven't done anything yet.
What a bunch of LIARS!!!
--more--"
Now back to your regular programing:
"Kerry urges congress to OK strike; Defends timing, cites newproof of poison gas" by Noah Bierman | Globe Staff, September 01, 2013
WASHINGTON — Secretary of State John F. Kerry on Sunday urged lawmakers to approve strikes on Syria to preserve the “core to American credibility in foreign policy,” underlining the gamble President Obama took in putting the question to a wary Congress.
Upping the stakes, Kerry pointed to what he characterized as new evidence that President Bashar Assad of Syria had used chemical weapons in an attack that allegedly killed 1,400 people last month: signatures of sarin gas on hair and blood samples taken from first responders in East Damascus.
Where did they get those? Not from the U.N.!
As Kerry campaigned for the military action on five morning talk shows, he insisted that Obama’s sudden decision to seek legislative approval, and to allow for more than a week to begin debate, would help the administration build the case and make the military response to Syria “much more powerful.” He predicted Congress would approve a resolution authorizing force against the Assad regime.
“This is a matter of national security. It’s a matter of the credibility of the United States of America,” Kerry said on CNN’s “State of the Union.’’ “It’s a matter of upholding the interests of our allies and friends in the region.”
Going to war over something irretrievably lost?
Many in Congress had been pressuring Obama to seek legal authority before launching strikes. But several lawmakers argued on Sunday that Obama’s shift in position, after declaring a “red line” against chemical weapons and preparing for imminent strikes throughout the week, has already damaged the United States’ credibility, emboldening Assad and other rogue leaders who might use or employ chemical and nuclear weapons.
“I’m afraid what is shown is weakness there,” said Senator Saxby Chambliss, a Georgia Republican, on CBS’s “Face the Nation.’’ “The world is watching. Our allies are watching as well as our adversaries.”
The clash of views on the television talk shows provided a preview of the difficult road ahead that Obama faces in trying to persuade Congress to approve his resolution to use force.
“After 12 years of war, post-9/11, folks do have fatigue and even a sense of skepticism about assertions with regard to, you know, presence of weapons of mass destruction,” said Senator Timothy M. Kaine, a Virginia Democrat who said he is likely to support Obama’s resolution, on CBS.
There was debate among leading lawmakers over what Congress will do when the full House and Senate return to session Sept. 9, following a long recess. Several lawmakers said that if a vote were taken immediately, it might fail in the Republican-controlled House, making it crucial that Obama build popular support in the coming days.
Thus we will be fed FAKE and RIGGED POLLS saying SUPPORT for WAR is GROWING!
Congress has large factions of conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats who are leery of military intervention abroad as well as hawks who have argued Obama’s response is inadequate. And public opinion is tepid, according to polls.
They won't be enough to stop it, never are, and we are FAR from TEPID! We are FROZEN SOLID AGAINST MILITARY ACTION, period!!
“If we get involved, you know, people say, ‘Well, 100,000 people have died, we must act,’” said Senator Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican generally opposed to military involvement overseas, on NBC’s “Meet the Press.’’ “Well, if our weapons get involved, and we get involved, do you think more people will die or less people? I think the war may escalate out of control. And then we have to ask ourselves who is on America’s side over there? If the rebels win, will they be American allies?”
Not if they are eating the organs of their enemies.
But even as Kerry argued for support, he was on the defensive Sunday, advocating delay only three days after making the administration’s most impassioned, and seemingly urgent, case for military intervention.
“I made a powerful call for action,” Kerry said on “Fox News Sunday.’’ “I never mentioned the word quick.”
Kerry argued that the delay would not hamper the military effort, which he and Obama have described as limited and intended to send a message to Syria, Iran, North Korea, and other countries that chemical weapons cannot be used with impunity. The US military, Kerry said, has assured the president that the effect of the strikes will not be dulled by waiting.
Thus the bankrupt American taxpayers must fork over more billions so more innocent people can be murdered by their mass-murdering government -- to send a message.
Fuck that!
He said Assad is already “on the defensive. He’s moving assets around. He’s hunkering down.”
John (Kohn) Kerry is holding true to his heritage.
What he accuses others of are the things of which he himself is guilty.
Kerry even insisted that reports of Assad’s triumphant declarations that the United States had cowered from a confrontation would backfire against the regime as Congress takes a closer look.
“The more he stands up and crows, the more he will help this decision be made correctly,” Kerry said on ABC’s “This Week.’’
Why would he do that? Is it possible this is just one more Jewish mistranslation or lie?
That argument may ultimately win the day with some of Obama’s skeptics. Senator John McCain, an Arizona Republican who has been urging more aggressive action against Assad for more than a year, did not commit to supporting Obama’s resolution Sunday.
He criticized limited cruise missile attacks as “pinpricks” in the face of a civil war that has left 100,000 dead, and he said that Obama had no real plan or strategy. But McCain signaled that he would eventually sign on....
Especially with the 800-Pound Gorilla in the room.
Likewise, Representative Mike Rogers, a Michigan Republican who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, predicted the House would approve the military strikes. Like many in Congress, he supports letting lawmakers weigh in before any strikes are launched, and said Obama had made the right decision to wait for debate.
“This is a national security issue,” he said on CNN. “This isn’t about, you know, Barack Obama versus the Congress. This isn’t about Republicans versus Democrats. This has a very important worldwide reach in this decision.”
Amazing how the partisanship di$$olves when it comes to what Israel wants.
--more--"
"Lawmakers deeply divided on plan for military strikes" by Bradley Klapper | Associated Press, September 02, 2013
WASHINGTON — Members of Congress, deadlocked on just about everything these days and still on summer break, expressed sharply divergent opinions Sunday about whether to give President Obama the go-ahead he requested to retaliate with military force against the Assad regime.
Senior administration officials briefed lawmakers in private to explain why the United States is compelled to act against President Bashar Assad’s government in response to the Aug. 21 chemical attacks. Further classified meetings were planned over the next three days.
Dozens of members attended the two-hour classified briefing Sunday in the Capitol, though many emerged saying they needed to see more details of Obama’s plan and obtain more facts about the alleged chemical weapons attack. Many feared giving Obama overly broad authority for military action.
On the administration’s efforts to sell its strategy to Congress, Representative Bennie G. Thompson, the senior Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee, said, ‘‘They have a ways to go.’’
‘‘They also have work to do with respect to shoring up the facts of what happened,’’ Thompson said.
Senator John McCain of Arizona, a leading Senate hawk and the candidate Obama defeated for the presidency in 2008, said he will discuss Syria with the president at the White House on Monday.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee plans a meeting Tuesday, according to its chairman, Senator Bob Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey. The Senate Armed Service Committee will gather a day later, said Senator Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, the top Republican on the panel.
Congress will consider the matter when it gets back from its summer break Sept. 9.
An unusual congressional coalition of foreign policy isolationists, fiscal conservatives, and anti-interventionists in both parties opposes even limited action for fear that might draw the United States into another costly and even bloody confrontation.
‘‘Does a US attack make the situation better for the Syrian people or worse?’’ asked Senator Chris Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut.
In an interview on “Fox News Sunday,’’ Inhofe predicted defeat for the president when the vote is held.
Not me. This Congress li$tens to AIPAC, not us.
But despite the intense gridlock in Congress over debt reduction, health care, immigration, and other issues, some lawmakers were more optimistic about the chances of consensus when it came to a question of national security.
Representative Peter King, Republican of New York, said he would vote ‘‘yes’’ and believed the president should be able to build a House majority over the next several days.
Polls show significant opposition among Americans to involvement, and several lawmakers have cited the faulty intelligence about weapons of mass destruction that led up to President George W. Bush’s 2003 Iraq invasion as justification of the need for lengthy debate before US military action.
--more--"
How do the Syrians feel?
"Anger, mockery abroad after Obama’s decision on Syria" by Anne Barnard | New York Times, September 02, 2013
BEIRUT — President Obama’s decision to seek congressional approval for a military strike in response to a chemical weapons attack in Syria drew a range of reactions from Syrians on Sunday, with rebel leaders expressing disappointment and government leaders questioning Obama’s leadership.
Syria’s government on Sunday mocked Obama’s decision, saying it was a sign of weakness. A state-run newspaper, Al Thawra, called it “the start of the historic American retreat,” and said Obama hesitated because of a “sense of implicit defeat and the disappearance of his allies,” along with fears that an intervention could become “an open war.”
Syria’s deputy foreign minister, Faisal Mekdad, told reporters in Damascus that “it is clear there was a sense of hesitation and disappointment in what was said by President Barack Obama yesterday. And it is also clear there was a sense of confusion, as well.”
Many Syrian opposition leaders expressed disappointment about the move, and called on Congress to approve a military strike. The leaders said any intervention should be accompanied by more arms for the rebels.
Don't worry, you are getting them. It's the 800-Pound Gorilla in the room.
“Dictatorships like Iran and North Korea are watching closely to see how the free world responds to the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons against the Syrian people,” the opposition coalition said in a statement issued in Istanbul.
Yeah, they have SEEN how we do NOT RESPOND in CERTAIN CASES!
Still, some rebel leaders were angry. A member of Syria’s opposition National Coalition, Samir Nachar, called Obama a “weak president who cannot make the right decision when it comes to such an urgent crisis.”
“We were expecting things to be quicker,” Nachar told reporters, “that a strike would be imminent.”
What are they going to do, fire off more chemical weapons? Answer: yes.
In the wider Arab world, still deeply divided over President Bashar Assad of Syria and the uprising against him, the concern over his government’s indiscriminate use of force coincided with antipathy about American intervention.
The Al-Azhar University in Cairo, considered Sunni Islam’s highest authority, said Sunday that it opposed a US strike on Syria, calling such intervention “an aggression against the Arab and Islamic nation” that would endanger peace and security in the region.
Oh, EGYPT is AGAINST THIS, huh?
But the institution said it supported “the right of the Syrian people to decide their destiny and their government for themselves in all freedom and transparency,” and condemned “recourse to chemical weapons, whoever it was that used them.”
Yeah, whoever.
The Arab League was scheduled to meet and was expected to condemn Assad; Washington is hoping for at least one Arab ally to join a coalition to strike him and for a stronger statement of support from the body, which expelled Syria earlier in the uprising but has stopped short of backing US action or blaming Assad for any chemical weapons use.
Didn't get it, not even from the head-chopping Saudis.
For others, Obama’s decision raised questions about whether the United States diminished its leadership role in foreign affairs, with commentators in Israel fearing a weakening of US resolve in confronting hostile powers.
That is why the 800-Pound Gorilla is needed.
--more--"
"Arab League endorses international action" by David D. Kirkpatrick | New York Times, September 02, 2013
CAIRO — The Arab League on Sunday urged international action against the Syrian government to deter what it called the “ugly crime” of using chemical weapons. It was a major step toward supporting Western military strikes but short of the explicit endorsement that the United States and some Persian Gulf allies had hoped for.
Because THEY COULD BE BOMBED NEXT!
The league moved beyond the more cautious stance it took just a few days ago, when it asked the UN Security Council to overcome its internal differences on the Syrian conflict — an outcome that was extremely unlikely given Russia’s strong support for Syria’s president, Bashar Assad.
This time, the Arab League called for the United Nations and “the international community” at large to exercise their responsibilities under international law “to take the necessary measures” against the Syrian government.
If Obomber acts he will be violating international law.
But aside from calling for trials of the perpetrators of chemical weapons attacks, the resolution — adopted at a meeting in Cairo late Sunday — did not specify what kind of international measures might be needed or justified.
Obama administration officials considered the statement a step forward because it opened the door to action outside the Security Council. But many in the region said the ambiguity was the latest manifestation of Washington’s diminishing influence.
President Obama’s last-minute pullback to seek a vote in Congress on military intervention put some of his Arab allies in a bind, analysts meeting with Arab diplomats said. Hoping to produce a strong Arab League statement to provide cover for Washington, Arab leaders also had new cause to wonder if Obama would follow through, leaving them politically exposed at home if they risked overt support for Western intervention in the region.
Now Obomber has gone to Congress to get cover.
“He is seen as feckless and weak, and this will only give further rise to conspiracy theories that Obama doesn’t really want Assad out and it is all a big game,” said Salman Shaikh, director of the Brookings Doha Center and a former UN envoy in the region. “Many Arab leaders already think that Obama’s word cannot be trusted — I am talking about his friends and allies — and I am afraid this will reinforce that belief.”
Conspiracy theories are the 800-Pound Gorilla in the room.
On Sunday afternoon, some Arab diplomats sought to portray themselves as stepping forward to take the lead in the Syrian crisis after Obama abruptly pulled back from any immediate military action the day before, surprising many Arab leaders just hours before they had expected airstrikes might begin.
I was surprised, too, but are you Arab diplomats sure you want Syrian blood on your hands?
But by the end of the night, the outcome at the Arab League failed to deliver the call to arms that Saudi Arabia and some others had sought as a way of encouraging the United States to press on with a strike.
As if they needed "encouragement."
Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf monarchies have privately urged the United States to take decisive military action to topple the government of Assad, whom they view as the main regional ally of their foe, Iran. Some, including Jordan and other Gulf states, are already collaborating with the United States to try to train and equip the Syrian rebels.
They have been DOING THAT for THREE YEARS, and yet the Jewish War Media is implying they are just starting and haven't done anything yet.
What a bunch of LIARS!!!
--more--"
"Syria debate is about ‘world’s red line,’ Kerry says" by Associated Press | September 03, 2013
WASHINGTON (AP) — Secretary of State John Kerry says the debate about military strikes against Syria is not about President Barack Obama’s ‘‘red line’’ that weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated.
Instead, Kerry told Congress Tuesday that ‘‘this debate is about the world’s red line.’’ He says it is ‘‘a red line that anyone with a conscience ought to draw.’’
Which means Kerry can not since he lacks a conscience. The lying is what gives it away.
Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey were dispatched to the Senate to help persuade lawmakers to support a resolution authorizing limited military strikes against Syria following a chemical weapons attack last month outside Damascus that left hundreds dead, including many children. The three are testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which Kerry once chaired as a senator.
Yup, they are "FLOODING the ZONE!"
Which means Kerry can not since he lacks a conscience. The lying is what gives it away.
Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey were dispatched to the Senate to help persuade lawmakers to support a resolution authorizing limited military strikes against Syria following a chemical weapons attack last month outside Damascus that left hundreds dead, including many children. The three are testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which Kerry once chaired as a senator.
Yup, they are "FLOODING the ZONE!"
Kerry said ‘‘This is not the time for armchair isolationism. This is not the time to be spectators to slaughter.’’
Yeah, the TIME for THAT is when ISRAEL DOES IT!
Yeah, the TIME for THAT is when ISRAEL DOES IT!
Kerry also stressed there would be no American boots on the ground in any strike on Syria. He said there was no problem in having language in legislation that, in his words, ‘‘has zero capacity for American troops on the ground.’’
Keep that thought in mind.
Keep that thought in mind.
Some lawmakers have expressed reluctance about being drawn into a larger conflict. But Kerry stressed that what President Barack Obama is seeking would be military action limited in scope and duration that would send a message to the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad that it can’t get away with using chemical weapons.
The message to Israel: you can
The message to Israel: you can
‘‘You’re probably going to win’’ Congress’ backing, Rand Paul of Kentucky, a conservative senator and likely opponent of the measure, conceded in a late-afternoon exchange with Secretary of State John Kerry.
Obama gained ground Tuesday in his drive for congressional backing of a military strike against Syria, winning critical support from House Speaker John Boehner while administration officials agreed to explicitly rule out the use of US combat troops in retaliation for a suspected chemical weapons attack.
The leader of House Republicans, Boehner emerged from a meeting at the White House and said the United States has ‘‘enemies around the world that need to understand that we’re not going to tolerate this type of behavior. We also have allies around the world and allies in the region who also need to know that America will be there and stand up when it’s necessary.’’
Go get a tan, you blubbering fuck!!!!!!!
Go get a tan, you blubbering fuck!!!!!!!
Obama said earlier in the day he was open to revisions in the relatively broad request the White House made over the weekend. He expressed confidence Congress would respond to his call for support and said Assad’s action ‘‘poses a serious national security threat to the United States and to the region.’’
Yeah, it was an OPEN-ENDED DOCUMENT, you know, the kind BUSH would have sent over.
Yeah, it was an OPEN-ENDED DOCUMENT, you know, the kind BUSH would have sent over.
The administration says 1,429 died from the attack on Aug. 21 in a Damascus suburb.
Yeah, all of a sudden that death toll more than tripled!
Casualty estimates by other groups are far lower, and Assad’s government blames the episode on rebels who have been seeking to overthrow his government in a civil war that began over two years ago. A United Nations inspection team is awaiting lab results on tissue and soil samples it collected while in the country before completing a closely watched report.
Kerry already got some crap from Israel.
Yeah, all of a sudden that death toll more than tripled!
Casualty estimates by other groups are far lower, and Assad’s government blames the episode on rebels who have been seeking to overthrow his government in a civil war that began over two years ago. A United Nations inspection team is awaiting lab results on tissue and soil samples it collected while in the country before completing a closely watched report.
Kerry already got some crap from Israel.
--more--"
Why would he think that?
"There has not been one bit of evidence given proving that Assad committed the chemical attack. In fact there is evidence that it may have not actually have happened. If the article from Zerohedge about hacked emails is correct. Then the chemical attack was a staged event where people were not killed.
I looked at the videos of the people laying dead and there is something that bothered me about them. The day it happened I viewed the videos and felt the people were just laying there still. They did not look dead. Since viewing them again, I have noticed there are people kneeling next to some, appearing to give them shots. Why would dead people be getting shots? Were they shots to relax them so they breathed shallowly? Also the camera sweeps over the people and does not stay on one group for long. Why did some people have their pants down or unzipped? There was another video someone pointed out all the indescrepencies of the bodies and how children were duplicated from one video to another. They would be in one location in one video and then another in another video. Funny... that video has been taken down by youtube "due to shocking and disgusting content now. How come they can keep these type one up (below), but they take down the ones showing it was fake, when they are of the same scenes?
--MORE w/VIDEOS--"
I also noticed the alleged medical workers were not affected -- and did you see that Drudge poll?
Also see:
Video Sen Obama saying Congress Duped into War. He says ...Should stand Up against President and Say NO!
Deserves a salute.
"Obama faces support, skepticism in Congress; Boehner, Pelosi aboard on Syria; Kerry pressed" by Matt Viser and Noah Bierman | Globe Staff, September 03, 2013
WASHINGTON — President Obama won bipartisan backing Tuesday for strikes on Syria but final approval for the effort was far from certain, with Secretary of State John F. Kerry facing tough questions during his Senate testimony about whether US ground troops could eventually be deployed.
The good news for Obama came early in the day when House Speaker John Boehner and House minority leader Nancy Pelosi emerged from a White House meeting to announce they would support limited strikes against Syria. The House’s second-ranking Republican, Eric Cantor of Virginia, also released a statement supporting the president.
“This is something that the United States as a country needs to do,” Boehner said....
But later in the day, Kerry, acting in his role as the administration’s point person, ran into a stream of skeptical questions when asked whether there was any condition under which Obama’s pledge against putting “boots on the ground” might be broken.
Kerry initially said that there might be circumstances under which US troops could enter Syria, such as if Syria “imploded” or if chemical weapons were transferred to other dangerous parties. “I don’t want to take off the table an option that might or might not be on the table,” Kerry said.
I thought that was kind of important.
Once again, you are BEING LIED TO by THIS WHITE HOUSE!
Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, the top Republican on the committee, objected.
“I hope we work through something that’s much clearer,” Corker said. “I don’t think there are any of us here that are willing to support the possibility of having combat boots on the ground.”
Kerry quickly backtracked, insisting those were merely hypotheticals and would not be allowed under any bill Congress would consider in the coming days to make limited strikes.
Related: The Kerry Chronicles: No Excuse For Egyptian Comment
What a JERK!
“Let’s shut that door now as tight as we can,” Kerry said. “There will not be American troops on the ground with respect to the civil war.”
OMG! Just because HE SAYS IT he thinks WE BELIEVE HIM!
We have a DELUSIONAL Secretary of State!
On Tuesday night, senators circulated a new compromise resolution that would authorize force, but only for up to 60 days, with one 30-day extension. The resolution prohibits the use of ground forces and is far more limited than the one that Obama had submitted to Congress on Saturday. The White House has said it would be willing to compromise.
As the decision for Congress drew closer, most lawmakers were openly grappling with what is emerging as one of the most important foreign policy debates of the past decade. Every senator on the Committee on Foreign Relations returned early from recess to attend Tuesday’s hearing, and most said they would also be back on Wednesday for a classified briefing.
That's not hyperbole. If Obomber gets his way this country is finished. It's on life-support now.
“This debate is about the world’s red line — it’s about humanity’s red line,” Kerry said to open the hearing. “And it’s a line that anyone with a conscience ought to draw.”
Unreal.
There was a sense of historic symmetry to the day. In 1971, after Kerry had returned from the Vietnam War and became a leading protester, he appeared before the same panel, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, to urge an end to that conflict. On Tuesday, Kerry was the one being protested by some vocal members of the public, some of whom were ushered out of the proceeding.
And that is all the representatives of 90% of the American people get from my Jewish war paper: one f***ing sentence.
In his role as secretary of state, the former senator sought to explain to his one-time colleagues the fine line that the administration is walking: while the White House would like to see Bashar al-Assad removed from power in Syria, Kerry stressed that the military strikes are not intended to change the balance of the civil war there or draw the US military into a ground campaign.
Senators asked why the United States had not acted sooner in Syria, what the administration was doing to ensure Assad would not use a US attack to brag that he had faced down the powerful nation, and how much international support the administration had.
Kerry said the level of international support would depend on the specifics of the military action, which Obama has yet to define. In any case, he said the military has the support it needs.
At another point, Kerry conceded that Assad would survive the attacks, and probably brag about doing so, but he insisted that the Syrian leader would be weakened militarily....
I thought this was just to punish.
In the lead-up to votes, expected next week, the White House has been engaged in an intense lobbying campaign, offering classified briefings and explaining Obama’s rationale for wanting to punish the Syrian regime for allegedly using chemical weapons on its own population.
Obama, who summoned top House and Senate lawmakers to the White House on Tuesday morning, opened the meeting by emphasizing that his plan would be limited and would involve air strikes — not ground troops.
Keep that in mind.
“This is not Iraq and this is not Afghanistan,” the president said. “This is a limited, proportional step that will send a clear message not only to the Assad regime, but also to other countries that may be interested in testing some of these international norms, that there are consequences.”
I'm sick of sending messages at $1.5 million a pop in this age of austerity.
While gaining support from Boehner and Pelosi provided momentum, it does not make the vote a certainty, particularly in a volatile House of Representatives, where even routine matters no longer pass. Boehner and Pelosi also plan to make the topic a so-called vote of conscience, meaning they will not push their members to vote one particular way.
You are VOTING FOR YOUR JOBS! You VOTE YES to WAR and you are OUT in 2014!
And then there is the 800-Pound Gorilla in the room.
Related: MUST SEE! Glenn Beck Shocking Video - THIS Is Who We Are Helping In Syria! SHARE WITH EVERYONE!
We are arming those guys? Can you, in good conscience, vote yes?
Among those who are unconvinced are some Tea Party-backed Republicans, who tend to have a more isolationist view of foreign policy and want to keep the United States out of foreign conflicts, and some liberal Democrats who are reluctant to use military force until all other options have failed.
Many in the all-Democratic Massachusetts delegation said they remain skeptical of the plan. Representative Niki Tsongas, a Lowell Democrat and a member of the Armed Services Committee, said her office has received many calls from constituents opposed to military action. She said she has yet to make up her mind as she prepares for a classified briefing on Thursday.
Senator Edward Markey, the Massachusetts Democrat who succeeded Kerry and now serves on the Foreign Relations Committee, provided few clues about which way he was leaning. During his time for questions, Markey asked Kerry to help declassify more information to help the public learn more about the situation. Kerry responded that the administration had already taken unprecedented steps to declassify information but did not want to release details that would reveal intelligence sources.
Translation: they don't have s***.
Also see:
"Among the five current elected officials running for the Democratic nomination to succeed Edward J. Markey in the House of Representatives, only one said Tuesday if he were a congressman, he would oppose authorizing President Obama to use military force in Syria. State Representative Carl M. Sciortino, who has worked to position himself to the left of his fellow candidates running for the Fifth Congressional District, did not rule out supporting US military action in Syria in the future, [but] said it would have to be “a last resort.”
He should win the special election, but he won't.
The White House organized conference calls and classified briefings over the holiday weekend, and that was followed by what has become an unusual sight in Washington: bipartisan endorsement from the Republican and Democratic leaders of the House, Boehner and Pelosi.
It is actually not that unusual despite the conventional myth of a narrative provided by the agenda-pu$hing media. There is only parti$anship when it is a service the American taxpayers have paid for.
“The United States for our entire history has stood up for democracy and freedom around the world,” Boehner said.
Yeah, just forget about the genocide of Native Americans and the institution of slavery, among other things.
This myth of AmeriKa that these self-serving politicians constantly spew makes me sick.
“These weapons have to be responded to. Only the United States has the capacity and the capability to stop Assad or warn others around the world that this type of behavior will not be tolerated. I appreciate the president reaching out to me and my colleagues in Congress over the past few weeks.”
Pelosi said that while she thinks the American people need to hear more about the intelligence that supports the action, she believes Congress will pass the authorization. “We must respond,” she said.
Those two totally bought off by AIPAC and Israel. That's why they are in those positions of power.
--more--"
UPDATE:
"The audience at the House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing included several people wearing signs opposing US action against Syria and who had colored the palms of their hands red. As anti-war demonstrators seated behind him silently raised their red-colored hands, Kerry told the Foreign Affairs committee that the world’s nations were watching Congress."
I agree, and they will hold you accountable if you authorize this.
Related: Obama may meet Russian LGBT group
I think Putin is going to want to talk about other things.
"Military would get a challenging mission in Syria" by Bryan Bender | Globe Staff, September 04, 2013
WASHINGTON — President Obama’s proposed authorization for the use of force appears to be straightforward: “deter, disrupt, prevent, and degrade” the future use of chemical weapons by Syria.
Yet at the same time, Obama — and a growing number of members of Congress, which is slated to vote on the proposal next week — insists that US officials would not design any strike that seeks to topple the regime or involve US ground troops in a civil war.
It is a paradoxical mission for the Pentagon, which is built for winning wars. Any strike against the Syrian regime, military specialists said, must be painful enough to force President Bashir Assad to rethink using poison gas but not so damaging that it could dislodge his grip on power or lead him to let loose on his own people or his neighbors.
“They are trying to thread the needle,” Jeffrey Martini, a Middle East analyst at the government-funded Rand Corporation, said of the administration. “They need to hit Assad hard enough so he will be deterred from the future use of chemical weapons but on the other hand they can’t push him into a corner.”
Yeah, they are funded by the Pentagon, and what are they doing driving America's highways?
Obama on Tuesday repeated his military aims, which he said would be “a limited, proportional step that will send a clear message not only to the Assad regime, but also to other countries that may be interested in testing some of these international norms, that there are consequences.”
Phoque you, Obomber.
The aim of the strike, he said, is to “degrade Assad’s capabilities when it comes to chemical weapons.”
Among the likeliest targets, according to top former military officers and Pentagon strategists, will be the means by which the Syrian military could use or order the use of chemical weapons. These would include communications facilities, military units that control such weapons, and storage and transportation facilities that support the wider chemical weapons program.
But a full-scale effort to destroy actual supplies of poison gas is not expected. Such an all-out strike could unintentionally kill more civilians or damage the regime’s ability to maintain control over its vast stockpiles in the midst of a grinding civil war.
“There is some reasonable intelligence that those materials could be targeted,” said Hank Brightman, director of applied research and analysis at the US Naval War College in Newport, R.I. “But it could have the unintended consequences. What they may be more likely to do is strike command-and-control nodes that would dissuade military officials.”
And then they could blame Assad for using chemical weapons again.
A report released by Rand on Tuesday outlined a central dilemma: “Air power could be used to reduce the Assad regime’s ability or desire to launch large-scale chemical attacks, [yet] eliminating its chemical weapon arsenal would require a large ground operation.”
John Pike, a military specialist at GlobalSecurity.org, a think tank in Alexandria, Va., predicted that American commanders could be considering other targets that are especially important to Assad, his inner circle, and top military leaders.
“Deterrence is about placing at risk what the enemy holds dear,” he said.
One such set of targets could be the Syrian network of air defense missiles purchased from Russia to protect the country from its neighbor and historic enemy Israel.
THERE IT IS: the REAL REASON for this AGGRESSION!
“He likes his air defenses. He puts great stock in those,” Pike said. “You might take those out.” And, Pike added, Assad “has a really nice palace in Damascus.”
Is he hiding chemical weapons there like Saddam was not?
Remember when Bush and the mouthpiece media made that claim before invading Iraq?
Other aspects of Syria’s large military complex could also be in peril, analysts said.
Meaning this is NOT LIMITED AT ALL!
This is going to be another REGIME CHANGE!
Are you TIRED of BEING LIED TO YET, Amurka?!!!!!
I know you are not because you only care about the start of football this weekend. I say that from personal experiences among my group of indifferent and ignorant assholes I call friends.
According to government assessments, Syria has one of the largest, best trained, and loyal militaries in the Middle East, including at least 600,000 troops, thousands of tanks and artillery pieces, missiles that could reach a number of its neighbors, and a Russian-supplied air force.
Aaaaaah, they said the same about Saddam before Bush I smashed him.
Besides, the 800-Pound Gorilla told me there were major defections.
On Tuesday, the nation’s top military officer told Congress he is confident that American forces have a plan that can achieve the president’s objective and minimize the chance of expanding the conflict or dangerously weakening the Assad regime.
“We can calibrate that,” General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, where senators from both parties expressed concerns about the ability to achieve the stated aims....
Related: When Your Heart Is Not In It
No chance of a (gulp) military coup here as in Egypt, huh? Can't rout out the Zionist traitors?
And therein lies an exceedingly difficult challenge of launching a limited military strike designed to have real impact — what some experts are now calling a “Goldilocks” challenge. Like the character in the children’s tale, they explain, the Obama administration is seeking to apply force that is not too hard, not too soft, but just right.
Translation: How many MURDERED SYRIANS is JUST RIGHT?
SICK!
It is further complicated by the difficulty predicting Assad’s motives, given that he allegedly used chemical weapons after being warned that would prompt American action.
Which raises the question: WHY would he be STUPID ENOUGH to DO THAT -- right in front of a weapons inspection team. The FACT IS he WOULD NOT! Thus, what we have here is an ABOMINABLE LIE and FALSE FLAG!
Richard Trager, a specialist on deterrence theory at the University of California, Los Angeles, said the United States has sent mixed messages to Assad.
And they are all lies!
“You are trying to go up to the line but you don’t want to cross it. In this case there is the worry that there will be some provocative reaction” by Assad, he said. “He could be pushed to use chemical weapons again.”
Again? There is no evidence he used them at all.
Pike said the US military will “be walking a very fine line between disrupting his command and control to the point he might have a hard time doing this again but also disrupting it to the point that the wheels might fall off.”
Any US military operation “has the potential to escalate or expand the conflict and could lead to unwelcome responses from Assad’s allies or to wider or deeper US military involvement,” said Karl Mueller, a senior political scientist at Rand and lead author of the new report.
Some have their fingers crossed. They reside in Washington D.C. and Tel Aviv.
On Tuesday evening Democrats and Republicans on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee agreed to a resolution that sought to address those concerns and frame Obama’s authority to strike Syria. The revised language, which the full committee has yet to vote on, assures that the authorization “is narrow and focused, limited in time, and assures that the Armed Forces of the United States will not be deployed for combat operations in Syria,” said committee chairman Senator Robert Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat.
They have ALREADY DEPLOYED, Bob, in the form of WARSHIPS -- and the 800-Pound Gorilla tells us the boots are ALREADY IN-COUNTRY!
You better go find some young girl and get your mind straight.
Some analysts worry that pressure on the United States to avoid another quagmire will undercut the effectiveness of any strike.
“Obama can keep it as small as it was supposed to be and then you will have a symbolic strike and nothing much happens and life goes on,” said military strategist Edward Luttwak, a senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.
Well, NOT FOR EVERYONE, you disgusting cretin!
Martini, too, has misgivings about the potential for success but sees little alternative.
“I don’t know if we are capable of threading the needle,” he said, “but I think we should try.”
And HOW MANY INNOCENT SYRIANS have to DIE?
--more--"
"Israel, US conduct missile defense test in Mediterranean" by Jodi Rudoren | New York Times, September 04, 2013
JERUSALEM — Israel and the United States tested a new air-defense system Tuesday, launching a missile over the Mediterranean Sea that caused consternation in Syria and Russia given the heightened tension in the region as the Obama administration weighs a military strike in Syria.
Israel’s Ministry of Defense said in a statement that the first test of the latest version of the Sparrow target missile had been successful, with the missile following its planned trajectory toward the Israeli coast and the Arrow radar system detecting and tracking its path. Myriam Nahon, a spokeswoman for the Defense Ministry, declined to answer questions about whether the test had been connected in any way to the situation in Syria, saying only that such tests are “conducted periodically,” and “it happens whenever it has to happen.”
And they usually warn the neighbors, which they did not do this time.
This was an attempted provocation or false flag, something we must all be aware of and watching right now.
In Washington, the Pentagon said in a statement that it had provided technical assistance and support to the Israelis for the Sparrow test launch. The statement said the test had nothing to do with US preparations for possible military action against Syria.
“The test was long planned to help the Arrow Ballistic Missile Defense system’s ability to detect, track and communicate information about a simulated threat to Israel,” the statement said.
Arieh Herzog, the former head of Israel’s missile-defense program, said the test was “a routine part of what is done in the development of the defense systems.”
“In regular days the Russians would not see it,” Herzog said. “But right now they have probably many sensors looking at the region, so each and every movement or flying object in the region is something that they look at and try to understand what happens. They may be thinking that it may be something that is connected to the Syrian situation, but it is not.”
Like I'm going to believe some lying Israeli.
On its Facebook page, the Defense Ministry posted a 33-second video of a jet releasing the missile and said in its statement that “all the elements of the system performed according to their operational configuration.”
Pfffffft!
Commenting on the missile test, Moshe Yaalon, Israeli defense minister, said the preparedness by the Israel Defense Forces in the past week was “founded on many technological capabilities, which need to be tested by the defense establishment and the army, and indeed a successful test was held.” He also said: “Our systems need to be examined and we will continue to develop, share and provide the IDF with the best systems in the world.”
Yaalon added that Israel had not been involved in the US policy process regarding Syria and noted that given the postponement of any possible military strike, the army had released some reservists called up last week.
They are not involved -- except for the 800-Pound Gorilla in the room.
--more--"
That is such a distortion if not outright lie I suggest you scroll here to find out what really happened.
Related:
Six Zionist Companies Own 96% of the World's Media
Declassified: Massive Israeli manipulation of US media exposed
Operation Mockingbird
Why Am I No Longer Reading the Newspaper?
Oh, now the cover story crap is perfectly understandable.
So is this:
"Allies agree on blame for gas attacks in Syria" by David E. Sanger and Eric Schmitt | New York Times, September 04, 2013
WASHINGTON — The British say that there have been 14 Syrian chemical attacks since 2012 and that the last, the most horrific, killed “at least 350” Syrian civilians. The Americans count fewer attacks, but put a stunningly higher, quite precise number on the casualties: 1,429.
The French argue that only President Bashar Assad of Syria and the closest members of his clan can order chemical attacks; the Americans say that, at least in the Aug. 21 attack that led President Barack Obama to call for military action, it is unclear where the orders came from. In classified briefings they are far more specific, saying that the commander of Syria’s infamous Unit 450, which controls its chemical weapons, gave the order.
In short, the differences in intelligence estimates among the United States and its closest allies are considerable but, in their view, not very significant. All come to the same bottom line....
They back-up the Israeli-fed bullshit.
--more--"
Related:
"In all, though, the French report provided little new concrete evidence beyond what US officials provided over the weekend in Washington."
The world knows it is BULL S***!!
"Russia steps up criticism of US over Syria; Putin calls ‘nonsense’ claims Assad’s regime used toxic gas" by Will Englund | Washington Post, September 01, 2013
MOSCOW — Russia dramatically escalated its denunciations of American threats to attack Syrian military targets on Saturday, with President Vladimir Putin saying it would have been ‘‘utter nonsense’’ for the Syrian government to use chemical weapons as the Obama administration alleges.
The Foreign Ministry, in a statement issued before President Obama said he would seek congressional authorization before ordering strikes on Syria, said a US attack would be a ‘‘gross violation’’ of international law.
Speaking out for the first time since an apparent chemical weapons attack near Damascus 10 days ago, Putin called on Obama to find a nonviolent way to resolve the crisis.
Rather than racing to action?
‘‘I would like to address Obama as a Nobel Peace Prize laureate: Before using force in Syria, it would be good to think about future casualties,’’ Putin told Russian news agencies in Vladivostok during a tour of the nation’s flood-stricken Far East.
He has got to give that worthless prize back.
‘‘Russia is urging you to think twice before making a decision on an operation in Syria,’’ he said.
In Paris, a presidential official said France will wait for discussions on Syria in the US Congress and French Parliament before making a decision on military intervention, the Associated Press reported.
Translation: Hollande is out.
The official said President Francois Hollande spoke with Obama on Saturday and the two agreed to act together on Syria.
The French Parliament was already planning to convene Wednesday about Syria, but Hollande does not need its permission to intervene militarily.
In London, more than 1,000 protesters carrying Syrian flags and placards marched to Downing Street and rallied in Trafalgar Square. Some hailed the Parliament’s vote Thursday against British participation as a victory. Prime Minister David Cameron said Saturday in a Twitter message that he supported Obama’s decision.
About 700 people turned out for an antiwar march in Frankfurt, Germany, police said.
Egypt’s Foreign Minister Nabil Fahmy said Cairo rejects military intervention in Syria except under Chapter 7 of the UN charter, which requires proof that the country has become a danger to international peace and security.....
Isn't that rich? The military coup government the U.S. signed off on is against this.
The White House argued Friday that intelligence shows the estimated 1,400 victims died from exposure to chemical weapons in an attack carried out by the Syrian military.
Do they really think ANYONE BELIEVES THEM ANYMORE!
The Syrian government had asked the UN team to extend its mission to investigate its claims of rebel attacks involving chemical weapons — a request widely seen as a stalling tactic.
Seen as a stall by who?
Syria rejects any ‘‘incomplete’’ report that does not include investigations of sites where Syrian soldiers were exposed to toxic gases, said Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem.
Many times.
Syria’s official news media said the government would counter any US assault, noting vows by Iran to retaliate against a strike and statements of support from Venezuelan, Nicaraguan, and Czech officials.
Oh, so, SYRIA has a COALITION, huh?
Putin said he was sure the attack was the work of rebels trying to provoke international — and especially American — involvement in the Syrian conflict. The government of Bashar Assad, he said, would have had no reason to use chemical weapons at a time when it had gained the upper hand in the fighting.
That Putin is a sharp and smart fella!
Doing so, he said, would have been ‘‘utter nonsense’’ — with the clear implication that that is how he would characterize the American allegations. On top of that, he said, the Obama administration’s ‘‘claims that proof exists, but is classified and cannot be presented to anybody, are below criticism. This is plain disrespect for their partners.’’
It means Obomber is a LIAR!!!!!!!!!!
Obama arrives in St. Petersburg for the G-20 meeting Thursday and leaves Friday. The purpose of the summit is to discuss economic growth, but the White House admits there will be plenty of talk about Syria on the side. There are currently no plans for a one-on-one meeting between Putin and Obama, who in early August decided not to attend a Moscow summit with the Russian president.
From what I saw, Obomber will be talking LGBT with him. There was no mention of Syria.
--more--"
